Justice?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

And W twisting the truth about WMDS inorder to get his Iruaq qar a war he was planning back when he was govorner in Texas

Tell me Jen, was Bill Clinton lying in 1998 when he said this?

Originally Posted by Bill Clinton

The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.

Was Hillary Clinton lying in 2002 when she said this?

Originally Posted by Hillary Clinton

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

Was Clinton's secretary of defence lying in 2002 when he said this?

Originally Posted by William Cohen

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.

Was Ted Kennedy lying in 2002 when he said this?

Originally Posted by Ted Kennedy

There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.

There's many more quotes I could add, but we'll start with these for now.

Originally Posted by transjen

And lets not forget a lieing sack of crap govorner in FL in 2000 who riged an election

Evidence ?

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Tell me Jen, was Bill Clinton lying in 1998 when he said this?


Was Hillary Clinton lying in 2002 when she said this?


Was Clinton's secretary of defence lying in 2002 when he said this?


Was Ted Kennedy lying in 2002 when he said this?


There's many more quotes I could add, but we'll start with these for now.

Evidence ?

Throughout history, one could find example after example where politicians from different sides of the fence (so to speak) utter similar assessments about this or that. What matters is what they DO. Hence, Tracy Coxx's litany of statements gets us nowhere. We can argue until the cows come home whether Bush and Kennedy, Clinton, Cohen, et al. made similar statements. But only Bush, none of these others, went to war over this when inspectors were giving evidence to the contrary. Only Bush preemptively invaded a country that had not attacked the United and lied about the connections between that country and those who had attacked the United States. Only Bush stood up before Congress and knowingly lied about Iraq, uraniam, and Niger as justification to send American soldiers to lose their lives for a lie. Not Bill Clinton, not Hillary Clinton, not William Cohen, not Ted Kennedy, not any of the people in Tracy Coxx's litany of quotes taken out of the context of historical ACTION.

[smc]

^ Just to follow up:

What Tracy Coxx would have us believe by the manner of the post with quotes from others is the equivalent of saying that every politician who spoke out against the Contras in Nicaragua is complicit with the Reagan Administration in the Iran-Contra scandal.

Any reasonable person knows how ridiculous a notion that is.

[randolph]

Four questions
1- Did the Iraq war benefit the American people?
2- Did the Iraq war benefit the Iraqi people?
3- Did the war increase the influence of Iran?
4- Did the war diminish the influence of Al Quida?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Four questions
1- Did the Iraq war benefit the American people?
2- Did the Iraq war benefit the Iraqi people?
3- Did the war increase the influence of Iran?
4- Did the war diminish the influence of Al Quida?

I'm not saying a case couldn't be made that the Iraq war was unnecessary. I'm just sick of this bullshit that has been going around since the 2004 election that it was all Bush's fault and only Bush's fault. Bush followed what the intelligence from the CIA was showing, and has been showing since 1998 - that Saddam had WMDs and wasn't getting rid of them according to the UN resolution. The mistake has been the CIA's all along.

The country was pretty much one voice after 9/11. There were bipartisan intelligence committees in congress going over all the intelligence data. They were all on the same page about what it incorrectly showed. Bush did not start the Iraq war all by himself. The House of Representatives voted for it 297/133. The Senate voted for it 77/23. Based not only on the Bush administration's case but on the bipartisan intelligence committees findings.

Then comes the 2004 elections and the dems couldn't be seen agreeing with the president all the time. There would be no reason to vote for them if they were simply going along with Bush. So there was a sudden shift where all of Bush's bipartisan support evaporated and the presidential campaign was on. That's when WMD experts like Sean Penn, George palney and Michael Moore started the campaign against Bush. It was a circus full of lies and revisionist history and the opposition has been in this mode ever since the 2004 election.

1. - yes, but unfortunately was drug out far longer than it should have been because half the support for the war evaporated.

2. - I don't know any iraqis, but I'd imagine it's nice not to have to worry about being gassed and to be able to elect your own leaders.

3. - No, was it supposed to? It could have if the support remained. With troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and control of the Persian Gulf, we could have mounted operations from east, south and west. From what was said after 9/11 this was probably the initial strategy. But, thank your congressmen & hollywood experts - support for this was over.

4. - Yes. Iraq acted like an Al Qaeda magnet. We didn't have to fight them in the US, we could do it in Iraq, and we did.

[smc]

Originally Posted by randolph

Four questions
1- Did the Iraq war benefit the American people?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

1. - yes, but unfortunately was drug out far longer than it should have been because half the support for the war evaporated.

What is the benefit? The billions of dollars spent? The thousands of lives lost? The bitter acrimony against the United States throughout the Muslim world? The lower oil prices from occupying an oil-producing country? The permanent military presence the United States will be able to establish in Iraq? Name the benefit. "Yes" is not sufficient.

Originally Posted by randolph

2- Did the Iraq war benefit the Iraqi people?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

2. - I don't know any iraqis, but I'd imagine it's nice not to have to worry about being gassed and to be able to elect your own leaders.

I do know some Iraqis. While you're busy imagining what they think might be nice, they remind me that there was no sectarian violence in Iraq before the United States invaded, that despite living under a despot there was general peace in the country, that other than the criminal blockade that kept medicine (primarily) from children foodstuffs were generally available ... etc., etc., etc. At least one of my Iraqi acquaintances has told me that he would take the entire Hussein family in power for his entire life over the death of his 76-year-old mother in a bombing by the United States military.

Originally Posted by randolph

3- Did the war increase the influence of Iran?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

3. - No, was it supposed to? It could have if the support remained. With troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and control of the Persian Gulf, we could have mounted operations from east, south and west. From what was said after 9/11 this was probably the initial strategy. But, thank your congressmen & hollywood experts - support for this was over.

The answer to this question is yes, even if Tracy Coxx reveals a profound lack of understanding of the region. The current Iraqi regime supported by the United States is closely aligned with Iran. Prior to the invasion and occupation, Iran had little influence in Iraq. Now, as the CIA itself acknowledges, Iran wields enormous political influence within the sitting Iraqi government. And who made that happen? The United States.

Originally Posted by randolph

4- Did the war diminish the influence of Al Quida?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

4. - Yes. Iraq acted like an Al Qaeda magnet. We didn't have to fight them in the US, we could do it in Iraq, and we did.

Iraq became "an Al Qaeda magnet" after the U.S. invasion, because there's nothing like an unwarranted invasion of a Muslim country to aid the recruitment of Muslim radicals and get them to go and fight the "infidel" in the invaded country.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

What is the benefit? The billions of dollars spent? The thousands of lives lost? The bitter acrimony ...

Randolf, I believe it's against forum rules to be using two accounts.

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Tell me Jen, was Bill Clinton lying in 1998 when he said this?


Was Hillary Clinton lying in 2002 when she said this?


Was Clinton's secretary of defence lying in 2002 when he said this?


Was Ted Kennedy lying in 2002 when he said this?


There's many more quotes I could add, but we'll start with these for now.

Evidence ?

AH yes the old blame Clinton stratagee, You would have a point if Clinton took the info and started the war which he didn't as unlike W Clinton didn't have a grugde agianst Sadam so he was smart enought to read the report raise an eyebrow and say we better keep an eye on this joker, W on the other hand took the report and twisted and fudged it and outright lied with his cabinet marching in step behind him


No matter how you try to spin it W lied and soliders died
And proof of FL sleaze of a governor he is W weasle little brother who put Kathrine Harris as head of elections even tho it was a pure conflict of interest as she was also the head of W's FL election camp and lets not forget the until 2000 FL never had ballot problems, Jed and Kathrine rigged the election and the unsupreme court on a straight partyline vote of 5-4 the USA and made the worst president ever the president and we have been surfering ever since
Jerseygirl Jen