If you were honest, you would admit
that numerous folks in the Clinton
administration and plenty of Dem
senators, like Kerry himself, believed
Saddam was a threat and had WMD. So it was
not just the Bush administration.
Given everything said by everyone, over
a long period of time, it seemed the
right thing to do.
If you are honest, you will see that there is a big difference between the position of the Bushes vs the position of the Clintons. The Clintons saw Saddam as a threat but they did not propose that we go to war over it. Understandably.......Saddam was not all that dangerous to us nor an immediate threat to anyone else for that matter. And that's because the sanctions were working.
Here's an article with extensive quotes from Clinton
regarding the resolve of the U.S. to deal with
Saddam, by force, if necessary:
washingtonpost.com
For example:
Clinton also said he had asked Vice President Al Gore to delay a planned trip to South Africa next week so he can have his full national security team on hand if the United States decides to attack Iraq.
Despite angry protests at Wednesday's town hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio, about attacking Iraq, Clinton said, ``I believe strongly that most Americans support our policy. They support our resolve.''
____________________________
BTW, just for the record, I post articles that both support my views as well take a very different position from my views
If that's so, it's hardly been clear.
Further, the reason I engaged you at all
at this time was because of the implications
of the article you posted.
All you had to do was say that it did not
reflect your views. You didn't do that.
Instead, you quibbled with my interpretation.
As I said, it is plain that you agreed with the
article.
If I think you're a monster, its not because you challenge my "emotion based rants" as you refer to them.
I'm afraid that I can't see much in the way of
analsis in your posts as opposed to simple emotion
and the usual rhetoric. Taking a comment about
paying attention to what you link as a threat suggests
a high level of emotionality, at least to me. |
