Clinton bombed them b/c they invaded illegal air space over Kuwait.
Clinton did NOT go to war with Iraq over non-existant WMD's.
Clinton did NOT cause THOUSANDS of casualties.
You republicans cannot blame Clinton for Dubya's stupidity.
Get you facts straight. What are you trying to say? You are in the elite group of 28% right now.
2006-06-10 09:21:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You're looking at this backwards. Democrats (these days) don’t DO anything when we are attacked. Just a few examples- bombing of the Cole in Yemen, multiple Embassy bombings, the first Trade Center bombing to name a few. These all occurred during Clinton. Then you have the disaster in Mogadishu and the Iran hostage crisis (Clinton and Carter). Lyndon B Johnson, who was a Democrat got us into the Vietnam War, and Nixon, a Republican got us out. Franklin D Roosevelt was also a Democrat and there is some speculation that he knew Pearl Harbor was going to be bombed before the bombing occurred, and did nothing so that we would have an excuse to get into the war. Wanna count how many lives THAT cost? Remember the Bay of Pigs from the Kennedy camp? (don't get me started on Chappaquiddick, but that was just a Democratic Senator, or Marion Barry, also a Dem with a crack pipe in one hand and a hooker in the other). So before everyone jumps on the Bush is bad bandwagon, he’s doing a better job than the Dems have in the past. And if you ask a person if they would rather have a Democrat or a Republican in office during times of international conflict, they choose the Republican, which is why Bush won another term.
2006-06-10 17:23:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by yiqqahah 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You never took a logic course obviously.
The fallacy you are stating is that because people "hate" Bush they like Clinton. By every measure, every poll ever taken it is clear to see that most people disagree with Bush's murderous regime and also disagree with Clinton's murderous regime (bombing a phamacutical plant in the Sudan, passing NAFTA, militarizing the border etc.).
BILL CLINTON was elected in 1992 on a platform of "putting people first." His campaign promised health care reform, gay rights legislation and an end to Republican threats to abortion rights, among many other things. Yet over the next eight years, Clinton left behind a trail of broken promises on all these issues.
Clinton sent U.S. forces into combat situations nearly twice as many times as the four preceding presidents combined had over 17 years.
The outrage was just as present. It was YOU who were sleeping through it just as you are sleeping through what is going on right in front of your nose NOW.
Wake up my friend. People who want to fight for real change in society shouldn’t vote (or embrace like sheep) either of these two sectors of the business elite class, who care nothing for people like you and I.
2006-06-10 16:27:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I`m sure Clinton used the information that was given to him to make a decision. I am sure the majority of people that do not suport Bush believe that Iraq was a threat but so is North Korea,Iran,Yeman,Syria. etc. It would of been smarter to send spooks into those country and take out each group.
2006-06-10 16:31:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
you remember that bogus war where the White House misled us about the threat to our country, got in the middle of someone else's fight, bombed houses, and killed people, without even waiting for a UN resolution?
Thinking Iraq? Wrong! The war in Kosovo, courtesy of the Clinton White House.
2006-06-10 16:23:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by cirque de lune 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
bush is just plain stupid
'dont misunderestimate me' - bush
member when the 9/11 bombs hit? he was at a school reading reading with kindergarteners. when he found out the nation was under attack and that thousands of people were dying, that dumbass didnt do a thing. he just stayed at the school.
and for the record for the first person who posted, im a democrat.. and ive answered.
then he blamed iraq for 9/11 when it was really the saudi's. yep, not iraq, saudi arabia. bush is retarded.
if a democrat was in office, then maybe gas prices wouldnt be so high also. you do know that bush has his own oil company. and hes partners with people in the middle east? yep, he knows the bin ladens personally. bush is a traitor.
2006-06-10 16:22:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by girl 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it was a warning to Saddam Hussein when Hussein refused to allow the inspectors in to look for WMD. After this bombing, inspectors were allowed to search. No WMD was ever found. Once the inspectors were allowed in, the bombing ceased. We did not declare war. The bombing was a limited police action and it achieved its purpose.
Bush lied about WMD and refused to allow the inspectors to finish their search. Instead he said, "Bring it on" and plunged us into a war that has cost the lives of over 10,000 so far.
2006-06-10 16:25:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by notyou311 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
COZ bill dint have personel issues here....he had advisors and other trusted people who thought it was the best way to go....
and it dint cause so much damage then.
BUt bush on the other hand wanted to just avenge his equally dumb cruel father.
TRY WATCHIN FARENHIET 9/11 that would give u a better picture of the dog who is runnin as president of our nation.
2006-06-10 16:32:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by vicious_witch 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
he bombed iraq a few times to keep saddam huissein's military capabilities at a weak state of existance. it worked.
there is a HUGE difference between bombing iraq and invading/occupying iraq.
circe de lune statements about kosovo are completly ridiculous. we joined the bosnia/kosovo situation AT THE REQUEST OF NATO. nobody said it was a threat to the US. WE LOST ONE SOLDIER the entire war. we accomplished our mission.
2006-06-10 16:26:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only thing wrong in a democrat's eyes is what the Republicans do. Look at Delay they wanted him to step down for his so called crimes, but william jefferson they defend and there is a tape of him accepting a bribe.
2006-06-10 16:22:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by clarksidentity 2
·
0⤊
0⤋