Rumsfeld quotes Clinton officials in justifying decision to invade Iraq

[sabra]

http://www.kait8.com/global/story.asp?s=4122741&ClientType=Printable

Rumsfeld quotes Clinton officials in justifying decision to invade Iraq


PENTAGON The Bush administration continues its attacks on critics of the decision to invade Iraq.

At a Pentagon briefing, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld joined the administration's attack on Iraq war critics. He quoted Clinton administration officials, including then-resident Clinton and Vice President Gore, who asserted that Saddam Hussein was a security threat to the U-S and its allies.

Rumsfeld says prewar claims of weapons of mass destruction were based on honest mistakes by intelligence analysts.

Hmm, where I have heard this before?

[cantstandbush]

1. Regardless to what Clinton SAID about Iraq, what he DID is all the diff!

This needs to be shoved down their throats everytime the Rethugs open their lying mouths. Clinton did NOT manipulate intel to invade a nation that even he MAT have thought was a threat to the US. Hell there has to be at least six nations out there that are a potential threat to the US, including Pakistan.

[crossroads]

31. Good post... thanks! n/t

[BOSSHOG]

2. rumsfeld relying on the word of a lying immoral whitetrash bastard

to justify his murder of 2,000 american kids?!? I get dizzy visiting bizarro world.

Caveat: BOSSHOG thinks Bill Clinton was a great President, is not a bastard, was not white trash and his sex life is not my business.

Caveat II: The deaths of American Servicemembers is every Americans business.

[JoFerret]

3. My goodness they are defensive

All Clinton's fault (naturally.)

[confludemocrat]

29. ...especially if they have to trot Rumsfeld out:bottom-of-the-barrel time!

Cheney's done his share of the lying, now they bring on this sorry, bloody , incompetent asshole.

[Maggie_May]

4. Then if this is what they say

I guess there will be no problem with finishing Phase 2 of the pre war intelligence.

[rd_kent]

5. It always comes back to Clinton, doesn't it?

Seems like all Neocon refer back to Clinton for blame when they have nowhere else to go. It's funny to watch Hannity do it all the time, but not very often do you see the Crawford group doing it.

[madeline_con]

35. It's a strange obsession they all seem to share.

When DUH-bya's war crimes are mentioned, the "B.J. of the Century" is brought up. Again. :eyes:

[Loonman]

6. Yep, this is the meme...even though it means nothing

Every statement anybody made in regards to what Saddam could, can or would do meant nothing after the inspectors left and Bush invaded.


Why aren't the Dems saying this?

[tecelote]

7. Forget what Clinton said, let's discuss what Bush says...

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

- Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

[triguy46]

8. This is beyond comprehension...

Clinton didn't invade, didn't suggest invasion, it was purely the neocons who now argue 1 + 1 =5. And the audacity to invoke the Big Dog in this when the neocons loathe him, can't stand him, ridicule him, now he's their "best answer" to critics? This is truly an administration with no vision...hell they can't even lie very well anymore.

[twaddler01]

9. Give it up Bushy Cons! n/t

[rodeodance]

10. Clinton and Gore need to speak up NOW--

[Efilroft Sul]

25. Damn straight

Clinton and Gore need to say NOW that they believed the threat posed by Saddam was overstated in the intel they received. Hence, they chose NOT to invade.

And if they really want to hit the PNAC crew in the nuts, they also should say that they would never have entered this country into an undeclared war without an exit strategy or the broad support of the western world.

[superconnected]

11. Nearly 6 years into his term, everythings still Clintons fault.

Dear JR,

When you took the office of the presidency, you became responsible for your actions.

When you decide to invade a country, you are responsible for that decision.

Now grow a back bone.

Awe forget it. No use asking you to be a man and take responsiblilty.

Call Daddy Clinton and ask him how to get out of this. After all, you feel he got you into it. He must be running the country if he tells you who to invade.

Forget Daddy Bush. He will tell you to stay in iraq, and you KNOW that's affecting your polls. Your own party will turn on you as you get less popular.

Signed,

Someone concerned about your position as president in lieu of your mental accountability.

[lthuedk]

12. And the conspiracy continues...

It makes no sense for Rumsfeld to attack our right to speak-particularly during Bush's undeclared act of aggression against the Iraqi people. But then, his and all neocon defense strategy has been set forth in plain view, as outrageous as it appears.

If Fitzgerald doesn't or can't move ahead somehow, then I will:



As a Project for a New American Century signer, Rumsfeld is already exposed as strictly un-American.

Stephen Pitt

[Mountainman]

13. They still lied. What Clinton said or didn't say makes no difference.

They lied first about WMD's, then 9/11 and Saddam, then Saddam's nuclear threat, then Al qaeda and Saddam working together, then democracy, then Saddam is a bad man, now it's fighting the terrorists.

All lies!

[jayfish]

14. How Many Of These Statements Were Made Prior To Operation Desert Fox?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/desert_fox.htm


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/1998/981219-end01.htm

/// CLINTON ACT ///
IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO MAKE A DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF
OUR OPERATION. BUT BASED ON THE BRIEFING I'VE JUST
RECEIVED, I'M CONFIDENT WE HAVE ACHIEVED OUR MISSION.
WE HAVE INFLICTED SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE ON SADDAM'S
WEAPONS-OF-MASS-DESTRUCTION PROGRAMS, ON THE COMMAND
STRUCTURES THAT DIRECT AND PROTECT THAT CAPABILITY AND
ON HIS MILITARY AND SECURITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
/// END ACT ///

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/1998/981219-uk-cook.htm

FOREIGN SECRETARY:
I have called this press conference because I want to spell out to the people of Britain why our forces are bravely risking their lives destroying Saddam's threat to humanity. Our objective is to achieve by military action the disarmament that Saddam will not allow the UN inspectors to carry out on the ground. In particular, we have struck at his capacity to produce missiles or to deploy aircraft without pilots but with chemical and biological weapons. We are aiming to set back by years his capacity to threaten his neighbours with those weapons of mass terror.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/1998/981219-strike4.htm

/// SHELTON ACT ///
I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL COMBAT
OPERATIONS OF THE PAST FOUR DAYS HAVE DEGRADED SADDAM
HUSSEIN'S WEAPONS-OF-MASS-DESTRUCTION PROGRAMS, HIS
ABILITY TO DELIVER WEAPONS, AND HIS ABILITY TO THREATEN
THE SECURITY OF THIS STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT REGION.
/// END ACT ///

Jay

[underpants]

17. Doesn't matter-What did the UNMOVIC inspectors find?

Timeline:

IWR vote ---> UN1441 vote ---> UNMOVIC finds nothing ----> bombing begins

right there. It doesn't matter what anyone said only thing that matters is that there were no WMD. They built the case for war on WMD and they knew there were none before he bombing started.

Period. discussion over.

[jayfish]

18. A Little Backup Can Go Along Way. -NT-

Jay

[Solly Mack]

15. Remember back, to Cheney's comment regarding Clinton

and the cutting back on certain military equipment and troops.

Remember how Bush and Cheney attempted to claim "Clinton ruined our military" - but the truth is, it was Cheney himself who set those policies in place under GHWB.

So that came out - and now do you recall what Cheney said?

"If I made a mistake then, then Clinton should have corrected it - and he didn't" (so somehow it's his fault)

Well?

Guess what?

:)

it works both ways

[The_Casual_Observer]

16. This is supposed to get them off the hook for Iraq.

Clinton was fooled! See! Don't blame us, we are a dumb as Clinton!

I don't think this old rove campaign of "using their words as weapons against them" is going to work anymore, Iraq is too horrible hide with cheap campaign tricks.

[rodeodance]

19. good article here explaining the difference:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/11/07/bush-clinton-iraq
Why Bush’s Case On Iraq Was Different From Clinton’s

The Bush administration’s talking point these days in defending its use of false pre-war intelligence is to blame Clinton. Scott McClellan said last week that critics “might want to start with looking at the previous administration.” Sen. George Allen (R-VA) repeated the mantra on CNN this Sunday: “ecognize that even the Clinton administration thought Saddam posed a threat.” And Bill Kristol writes in the Weekly Standard that the White House should “fight back” by pointing out that Clinton administration officials “believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.”

To justify the war against Iraq, the Bush administration made a number of exaggerated and misleading claims about the Iraqi threat that went far beyond the public statements issued by the Clinton administration. Going beyond the argument that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, the Bush administration made a unique case on two specific fronts to justify the war: the supposed connections to al Qaeda and the Iraqi nuclear threat.

The administration argued that the evidence in these two areas amounted to a “grave and gathering threat” in a “post-September 11th world.” On the eve of the Iraq war, Bush said:

The danger is clear: Using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other.

[The_Casual_Observer]

24. A boob like george allen looks forward to any opportunity

to engage in a childish senseless non-productive argument like that.

[Solly Mack]

20. This is what I "hear" when they do that -if you didn't question Clinton

then why are you questioning me - is what I get from it when they do the "well, Clinton did it, said it, believed it - whatever "it" happens to be at the time.

some days they blame Clinton for all things bad ...other days they use Clinton as an excuse for their own actions. As if anything Clinton did or didn't do- real or imagined - justifies their actions.

[pearl]

21. This would be laughable

if it weren't so fucking Tragic! :puke:

[Solly Mack]

22. I think it's all the more tragic because it's true

I think that is their intent when they pull the "But Clinton said..."

See? If you agreed with Clinton - then Golly! Why aren't you agreeing with me!...

it's childish, it's silly...and it's fallacious to the max...but then so is the Bush Regime.

[Ilsa]

23. Goddam these people for dredging up whatever

excuses for their cruelty. I hate them.

[daleo]

26. The latest Bush/Rumsfeld excuse

"The Clenis made me do it"!

[milkyway]

27. And AFTER Clinton, weapons inspectors were in Iraq providing new

evidence--evidence that showed their were no WMD's.

Next the wingnuts will be digging up old FDR quotes about Iraq.

[LostinVA]

28. Clinton's still President??? Yay!!! Oh, wait....

[crossroads]

30. Spin spin spin...

These black widow spiders busy weaving their yarns... but the American people are seeing thru the tangled webs thay have woven... AMEN!

[bahrbearian]

32. Aren't the Repugs the opposition partly to the Dems

Why wouldn't he question Clinton's motive to "Regime Change". Just like the dems did in the run-up to war... opps never mind the last part.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

33. So how come he ignored what Clinton said about

Osama bin Laden?

[SillyGoose]

34. Condi and Powell both said in 2001 Saddam was not a threat.

How does Rumsfeld explain that? Forget about Clinton, he didn't invade Iraq and he wasn't the President when we invaded Iraq. How does this administration explain their own f**ing statements iin 2001 about Saddam Hussein not being a threat? That's what I want to know.

"We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq..."
Colin Powell 2/24/01

"But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."
Condoleeza Rice 7/29/01

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm
(there is also video of those statements at the link)

[madeline_con]

36. Wasn't that before Chalabi was getting $340,000 a month? n/t