If Bush is going to brought up on war crimes for attacking Iraq which had no WMD's, shouldn't Clinton?

Question

If you think Bush lied about WMD's on purpose please read this and tell me what you think.


http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

Not saying that Bush is, but that is a talking point of the Anti-war left.

Thats your response? Get over Clinton!!! I LOVE IT!!! you proved my point. Thanks!!

Answer 1

You make a very good point....I am so sick of hearing everyone complain that there never was any WMD found.....personally, I can sleep allot better at night knowing that they never found any instead of always wondering "what if"

Answer 2

No one will be brought up on war crimes, there was creditable evidence to expect to find WMD. That is why both Clinton & Bush agreed that Iraq was dangerous. The Left is reaching to find for what they want to believe.

Answer 3

Long story short, Clinton had the backing of the U.N. and the law when we conducted the airstrikes. I know. I was there. He was also defending the pilots that were being shot at by Saddam's air defence crews who were in the Southern and Northern No-Fly Zones.

Bush said screw the U.N. and invaded anyway on faulty intel. Which has left tens of thousands dead and hundreds of thousands injured and maimed.

Clinton made it harder for terrorists to get their hands on WMD, Bush has made it easier.

Answer 4

Because at the time of the air strikes, Iraq DID have WMDs and was not cooperating with weapons inspectors.

At the time Bush invaded, Iraq DID NOT have WMDs, and was cooperating with weapons inspectors.

Answer 5

First off, your initial premise for the question is incorrect. Bush isn't going to be brought up on war crimes. Secondly yes, if he was then Clinton should be as well, along with several members of each of their cabinets, as well as their Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Answer 6

Will you get over Clinton?