http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
2006-07-20 04:21:34 · 8 answers · asked by Chapparo 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Are you guys serious? Do some research, he did attack IRAQ.
So had Bush simply limited the IRAQ war to airstrikes there would be no problem.
2006-07-20 04:43:02 · update #1
yes
2006-07-20 04:30:14 · answer #1 · answered by ssgtusmc3013 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Bill didn't lie. As I sort of remember, he bombed some sort of weapons cache. Bush only found useless leftovers and led Americans to believe that Sadaam had something to do with 911. I personally believe that he used 911 to further his father's original agenda in Iraq. Do rember an attempt or a plot to assinate George Sr.? Anyway, why couldn't all that money have been spent looking for Bin Laden. We would have had him by now . I would most certainly supported THAT.
2006-07-20 05:26:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he wasn't. And he didn't invade Iraq. He ordered airstrikes on select targets. These items were confirmed by independant weapons inspectors. And they were then destroyed by these attacks, which were sanctioned by the U.N. due to overwhelming evidence.
The story that Bush used, was patently false, and he knew it. He lied. He also outed a CIA covert operative to make sure that nobody found out that he was lying. So he also broke the law.
2006-07-20 04:38:28 · answer #3 · answered by poecile 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First off, your question involved the invasion of Iraq....and not that I liked Clinton...I didn't....but he did not invade Iraq.....if he had, we probably wouldn't be where we are now.....He did however, take a few missiles, and bomb an aspirin factory......that was nice of him.....no wonder the Iraqis were so irritable for a while...they all had headaches.
2006-07-20 05:02:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
according to the link that you provided, Clinton did not invade Iraq.
He threatened to bomb a few targets, but ultimately he did not do even that.
You are trying to warp the truth.
2006-07-20 04:37:18 · answer #5 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. The military has collected well over 500.
2006-07-20 04:25:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
wow all you libs are crazy Clinton bombed Iraq he even killed civilians but you cant fight a war by just dropping bombs here or there you need men on the ground and yes we have found wmds and yes they are still good and it can kill you
2006-07-20 05:05:51 · answer #7 · answered by MIKE B 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I remember that he bombed Baghdad, but that was in reprisal for a plot to kill the senior Bush. The weapons they "found" was there and the weapons inspectors knew about them and reported it. None of them was weapon grade any more and repuglicans are full of shi* as usual.
2006-07-20 04:40:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Attack or invade...HUGE difference.
2006-07-20 04:40:15 · answer #9 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋