English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The president lied to people here about there being weapons of mass destruction and underestimated the enormous force behind the teliban. This is about as bad as drinking and driving with a car load of friends and they all die but you in an accident.

2006-11-20 09:32:37 · 20 answers · asked by dee 3 in Politics & Government Military

20 answers

OMG you are so uninformed it's almost scary. First of all, "This is about as bad as drinking and driving with a car load of friends and they all die but you in an accident." You mean like Ted Kennedy and Mary Jo?

WMDs - International intel ALL said Saddam had WMDs. The United Nations (HA!) thought he had WMDs. The fact that there weren't a lot of WMDs found could be due to the fact that Saddam was given months of notice before the allied forces swooped in.

Shouldn't Bill Clinton have to face charges for not taking Bin Laden from the Sudan when they offered him? Shouldn't Clinton have to answer to the country for slashing our military and intel budgets? How about the fact that he cut and run from Somalia, teaching terrorists that all they have to do is hit us really hard, and we'll run with our tails between our legs.

Who lied?!?!?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"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. 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."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

2006-11-20 09:43:38 · answer #1 · answered by Jadis 6 · 3 0

you could but you would have to go back to every president we have had and will ever have in the furture, but if you use some common since you would see that he really did the right thing, I'm assuming your 13 years old or still live with mom and dad if they are still married which i doubt, one day you'll grow up and be a tax paying working class person and you'll look back and laugh at your present views. I have to agree with Aldo "what a hideously distorted view of reality you have".

2006-11-20 09:48:28 · answer #2 · answered by spiveyracing 5 · 0 0

Get a life. Do you really think you know everything going on in IRAQ. Ask any soldier over there and they will tell you we belong there. How do you really know wether or not there were weapons there? They found the warehouses where they WERE making them...so perhaps they were moved...or maybe not. But regardless I would rather not be known as a nation that runs and hides. We are a wonderful country and we got this way by fighting for what we believe in. So you are entitled to your opinion....nice isn't it??? FREEDOM. Learn how to spell Taliban.

2006-11-20 09:41:23 · answer #3 · answered by E 3 · 3 1

You should really read up on the current geopolitical situation and what led up to our invasion of Iraq instead of listening to what is broadcast by the media. The United Nations tried for years to get inspectors into Iraq to look at his weapons programs. All he had to do was let them look around. Instead, he locked them up, kicked them out and basically shot the bird at the rest of the world. He gassed hundreds of thousands of his own people with poison gas bombs. The ENTIRE world thought Saddam had WMDs. Now they are back tracking, mainly because they don't like Bush. Get over it!
And please stop asking moronic questions until you have educated yourself about the subject you are asking about.

2006-11-20 09:44:16 · answer #4 · answered by Star G 4 · 3 0

If incompetence as a President have been a criminal offense then Franklin Roosevelt could have been in penitentiary for a protracted time! He had ensue under his watch: Pearl Harbor Fall of the Philippines (greatest mass-renounce in US historic previous) Fall of Wake Island allowing Soviet Spies to infiltrate US intelligence companies and the U. S. State branch. Participated in the overthrow of the legimate and undemanding ruler of (Persia) Iran. John F. Kennedy Allowed assasination of President Diem of Vietnam Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba began US militia construction up in South Vietnam. stable information is he have been given himself assasinated earlier he ought to do greater harm. Lyndon Baines Johnson persevered Vietnam fiasco ensuing in the deaths of fifty,000 men and milions of Vietnamese. did not have confidence the recommend of his Generals. Knew getting into that the U. S. ought to not win in Vietnam.

2016-10-22 10:51:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well for starters, you need to educate yourself enough to spell Taliban. Then learn that the Taliban is in Afghanistan. When you get that simple stuff done, you can have mountains of fun discovering that Bush didn't lie. After all of that, you can come back and admit you are just a stooge for the Democratic party.

2006-11-20 09:42:21 · answer #6 · answered by pedohunter1488 4 · 3 0

After Republicans spent millions of YOUR dollars, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying to Congress about an extra-marital indiscretion with another consenting adult.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, lied to Congress about weapons of mass destruction, torture, and secret CIA prisons. Apparently the lives of 655,000 Iraqis and 3,000 American soldiers mean less to Bush and Congress than an indiscreet b.j. -RKO-

2006-11-20 09:41:40 · answer #7 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0 3

I don't know if he lied about the WMDs in Iraq but he lied when he said that Saddam was buying uranium from Africa. He lied, saying there is a link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq. He exaggerated the Intelligence reports and ignored the last-minute Intelligence reports which said the previous Intelligence reports are in question. Now I'm sure he is regretting it. What a fool that man is.

2006-11-20 09:37:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

For the 19th time this week...


BIOLOGICAL & CHEMICAL AGENTS ARE WMD!!! They were there, they were found. No nukes? No, no nukes. Not like our buddy Hans Blix didn't give him time to have them moved into Syria.
And another thing, do you read any of the questions before you click on the Ask A Question tab? There were 2 on the question page just like this one. The search bar is your friend.


NO...we should not. *rolls eyes*

I stand corrected. And yes, it was a waste.

2006-11-20 09:42:32 · answer #9 · answered by Rich B 5 · 3 1

Your president should be charged with war crimes by the same people who tried Saddam for war crimes. Saddam, Bush they belong to the same evil clan.

2006-11-20 09:51:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Sure, let's, so long as we charge Clinton for the deaths of our soldiers in Bosnia. He lied to us saying first that he wouldn't send them there and then over and over again telling us when they were coming home. They're still over there.

2006-11-20 09:37:45 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers