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

Just curious to see your answer

2007-06-04 08:02:00 · 19 answers · asked by scottanthonydavis 4 in Politics & Government Politics

19 answers

At least Clinton attempted to kill Osama with a missile attack and not once but twice - way before 9/11! When he had the exact location of Osama and wanted to kill him Republican bureaucracy stopped him in his tracks and wouldn't allow it. So again, its the Republican's fault!

Oh, so Clinton's BJ killed more than 650,000 Iraqi's and over 3,000 American troops? Huh

So Bush didn't lie about WMD's huh. Didn't Rice say something about Mushroom Clouds?

Don't tell me about cheap flimsy aluminum tubes and deteriorated mustard gas.

Rice said, "Mushroom Clouds" specifically!

LIARS!

Bush used the BEST intellegence he had - barf -

If you call the Best intellegence he had "Downing Street Memo" manipulating intellegence and policies, then you are right - he did do something - he forced us into a war he wanted! And he wanted it before 9/11

2007-06-04 08:14:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 6

actuality is, Bush used intelligence amassed by using the human beings who have been in place under Clinton's watch. Clinton himself believed Saddam had WMD's. John Kerry (keep in mind him?) reported in public that if we did no longer have faith there have been weapons we would desire to continuously no longer vote for him. each and all of the Demos had the same intel. Now do i think Bush did the properly suited factor? no longer precisely. He might desire to've focused on the Afghan undertaking till it grow to be resolved first and then positioned rigidity on Iran to lean in the direction of a greater liberal gov't. Then persuade Turkey that an self reliant Kurdistan could resolve the Kurdish situation, supply Turkey a buffer zone from Iraq, and generate shared oil income from their new Kurdish allies. in basic terms because of the fact I help the President in some issues does not make me a fan. I prefer to be pragmatic quite than be swayed by using the BS spewed by using people who hate one guy lots they are able to't see quickly.

2016-11-04 22:36:48 · answer #2 · answered by vides 4 · 0 0

The lie tha Billy Bob told. He lied to Congress and Bush has yet to lie. The WMDs were found even after Saddam shipped most of them to Syria and Iran. See the links.

2007-06-04 08:50:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

A Clinton backed up President Bush's WMD's!!!!! And if that was Clinton's only problem no one would have made a big deal as it was out of it!

2007-06-04 08:13:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Bush based the assertion of WMD's off of intellegence he trusted, like any President would. Besides, several remnants of weapons were found and Sadaam himself is a WMD. The fact is, the war was going to happen, and a world without Hussein is a better world. BTW the same intellegence influenced several democratic voters in congress, without their support Bush could have done nothing, they made the same judgement he did... does that make them liars too?

2007-06-04 08:11:30 · answer #5 · answered by Scott B 7 · 7 2

What do you mean by "damage"?

The CIA informant that was set up during the Clinton administration, is the one who gave Bush the false evidence of WMD's.

2007-06-04 08:14:46 · answer #6 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 2 2

Bush did not "lie," he acted on intelligence information gathered by the CIA.
Clinton committed perjury -- a felony -- not his first by the way -- he was pardoned by Carter for desertion

William Jefferson Clinton -- the only man to ever serve as President who was a convicted felon -- nice legacy

2007-06-04 08:14:46 · answer #7 · answered by Bill in Kansas 6 · 3 2

Bush did not lie about the WMDs. Clinton had the same intel, and made such knowledge known, yet Bush is the "liar"?!?

"We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information and ideas.

And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.

There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us."

"Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government. "

"That is why, on the unanimous recommendation of my national security team -- including the vice president, the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state and the national security adviser -- I have ordered a strong, sustained series of air strikes against Iraq. They are designed to degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. "

If Bush lied about the WMDs, so did Clinton. Clinton also spat in the face of our Judicial System by lying under oath . . . you tell me which is worse.

2007-06-04 08:13:37 · answer #8 · answered by vinsa1981 3 · 5 3

Saying that Bush "lied" is a lie. If you call making a tough decision based on the BEST intelligence you have a lie, then you must be a bitter liberal.

Clinton did lie, and he was impeached.

Please word your questions in a less biased manner.

Have a nice day ;)

2007-06-04 08:14:38 · answer #9 · answered by Sleeck 3 · 3 3

Any lie Bush has ever told is the most damaging sense Watergate and Vietnam.

Nothing any other President has ever done or said before or sense has even come close.

2007-06-04 08:19:57 · answer #10 · answered by Mark F 5 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers