Can you liberals explain this to me?

Question

Within 18 seconds of this video Hillary admits it was her husbands presidency (the last decade) that built the intelligence to go to war with Iraq. This after Bill downsized the CIA and military. Can you honestly consider Hillary as the Democratic nomination? Especially after all her flip-flopping.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_KEWUU33Lg&feature=related

Antiock .. if you can't handle a few facts please don't resort to the all too liberal tactic of name calling and changing the subject.

Answer 1

I wouldn't want that Communist Hillary running my housing association let alone my country. Sorry I had to weigh in even though I am an avid right winger.

http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hcvrillary.htm

Answer 2

Hard to answer a question built on a faulty premise, After the decline of the Soviet Union, Ronald Regan began the disastourus policy of down-sizing our military to dangerous levels, (My senator Jim Webb, at the time a Republican and Secretary of the Navy, quit in protest!!) this policy was continued by Bush's dad and unfortunatly Clinton.
But as wrong as it turned out to be to go to war in Iraq, my biggest problem is not the mistake itself, everyone makes mistakes, the problem is this irrational mentallity in this administration that even after it turns out we made a mistake we refuse to change coarse to try and correct or at least minimize the mistake, we continue on as if we were right all along!!! I ain't a shrink, but there has to be some type of psycological term (besides f.....ing crazy), to explain this type of irrational behavior.

Answer 3

Yes, I honestly can.

FYI, her husband was the first Pres. to take Bin Laden seriously (read "Against All Enemies" by Richard Clarke who served under several presidents). As a result Clinton bombed Afghanistan in the hopes of destroying Bin Laden's terrorist training camps. The bombing mission was not a complete success but because American sentiment was not strongly supportive of the bombings AND, more importantly, because NO ONE perceived what a serious threat Al Qada was, The Clinton admin. did not go in and try to bomb them all out again.

Now the Neocons here will read what I've just written, jump up and down and yell, "See! We're right to be in Iraq! We're right to kill 70,000 Iraqi civilians! Clinton wasn't tough enough!!!"

However, it's been proven time and time again that Al Quada NEVER was in Iraq during the Clinton years, nor were they in Iraq when we invaded.

Al Qada only slipped into Iraq in the past two years or so. We opened the door for them. We screwed up the balance of powers in the neighborhood and now, as Colin Powell predicted, we broke it and now we have to buy it.

Problem is, our elected representatives NEVER ASKED US if we wanted to buy a country.

And that's why I will support ANYONE who is in favor of cleaning up this Neocon Republican Pottery Barn mess and get us OUT of Iraq.

Answer 4

The alternative is to say that George built up the CIA and the intelligence community in ten months.
Its important to put this into historical context too. Our cold war enemy was on the ropes and broken up into small nations. To spend money like it was water didn't make sense.
When you look at it, numerical superiority of troops is no longer needed they can more safely be used to bomb rather than fight in neat little line of the nineteenth century.
For that matter, no one has complained about the amount of men we had and shipped over there, ten months later.
Clinton couldn't have stripped it too bare, they won at that point didn't they?

She did as Colin Powell did, as so many others did. They believed their president when he told them of WMDs and all the rest. In fact there were such things going on before the first gulf war. This is taken from the time frame where Congress was told of the traveling chemical weapons labs, which turned out to be nonexistant.
Bush played us. All of us.

Answer 5

I hate thinking of it every day! I dont have any links to back up, but the way I read it somewhere, Bill actually set into motion, the invasion of Iraq, i.e. the intelligence. I thought it sounded like a set up for the next president. If dem, play the beneficial card, if GOP play the villan card

Answer 6

nope.

i want obama as the nominee.

if not obama, then edwards.

we need someone in the white house not named bush or clinton for a while.

Answer 7

I'm a little confused. Why would you ask liberals to answer this. Hillary is NOT a liberal by a long shot. Please keep in mind that not all Democrats are liberals, and not all liberals are Democrats. Or are you so ignorant to assume that liberal is just a term for anyone who does not accept your views?

Answer 8

Like George, maybe Hillary likes dark, hairy men, too.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/images/20050425-8_hw9v0295jasjpg-1-515h.jpg

Edit: Facts????? Your slanted inference and spin is hardly fact - it's laughable! The point is that your argument is absolutely ridiculous and lacks any semblance of credibility. You're actually trying to blame Clinton for the Iraq War?!?!?!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

The fact of the matter is that, while Clinton perhaps did have the same military intelligence that Bush had, at least Clinton was smart enough to know how weak and nebulous it was. Only Bush was stupid enough or blood-thirsty (or both) to actually act on what turned out to be garbage.

Will you Bushies hold him accountable for ANYTHING???

(The answer, obviously, is no.)

Answer 9

I know that I don't want her to be my boss.

Semper Fi

Answer 10

Sure. Hillary will say whatever is popular at the moment.

I love being called a liberal especially since I am more conservative than Bush has ever dreamed of being. Liberals rock! Thanks for putting me in that category (not directed at this poster).