Which is worse? Selling Saddam WMD's or throwing medals away?

[mediaman007]

There is no comparison. I'm excited about some Freeper mentioning the medals to me. This is the easiest counterattack ever!

Kerry should smack them with this!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. For some unknown reason

It just simply doesn't resonate with people that it was Bush and Company that gave Saddam the weapons to begin with.

[bryant69]

2. Interesting comparison

Although they might counter that that was George H. W. Bush and therefore shouldn't apply--but that might not occur to most of them. It also robs them of their best counter to the whole Saddam argument which is that that was a different time and we shouldn't judge it based on today's standards (as the same argument works both ways)

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[heidiho]

3. Always Keep the LIAR topic there

Let's hit them over and over with it - They are LIARS, CHEATS and have no regard for human life.

[leftofthedial]

4. throwing away medals of course

because the bushgang says so. That's why!

[Tinoire]

5. Selling the WMDs & there too, Kerry must tread lightly for he helped sell

"If you don't believe Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me."
NBC Meet the Press Transcript
Date: 08/31/2003
http://www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.php?speech_id=M000018741

I think Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction are a threat, and that's why I voted to hold him accountable and to make certain that we disarm him. I think we need to."
(NPR's "All Things Considered," 3/19/03)

Kerry's 14 Years of Warning Us About Saddam's WMD

<snip of the first 12 year's worth of quotes>

"Mr. Kerry … Said Iraq’s Weapons Of Mass Destruction Posed ‘A Real And Grave Threat’ To The United States." (Dave Boyer, "Key Senators Of Both Parties Back Bush On Iraq War," The Washington Times, 10/10/02)

"Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don’t even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents? Does he do all of these things because he wants to live by international standards of behavior? Because he respects international law? Because he is a nice guy underneath it all and the world should trust him?" (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)

"It would be naive to the point of grave danger not to believe that, left to his own devices, Saddam Hussein will provoke, misjudge, or stumble into a future, more dangerous confrontation with the civilized world." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/9/02, p. S10171)
January 2003


"e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America’s response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world’s response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm." (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 1/23/03)
"If You Don’t Believe Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldn’t Vote For Me." (Ronald Brownstein, "On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd," Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)
February 2003


Kerry Said Leaving Saddam Hussein "Unfettered With Nuclear Weapons Or Weapons Of Mass Destruction Is Unacceptable." (Jill Lawrence, "War Issue Challenges Democratic Candidates," USA Today, 2/12/03)
" said the Bush administration has taken too long to make its case for military action, ‘but nonetheless I am glad we’ve reached this moment in our diplomacy.’ Kerry added: ‘Convincing evidence of Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction should trigger, I believe, a final ultimatum from the United Nations for a full, complete, immediate disarmament of those weapons by Iraq. Over the next hours, I will work with my colleagues in the Senate to fully examine the evidence offered by the secretary for a complete and close reading. But, on its face, the evidence against Saddam Hussein appears real and compelling.’" (Wayne Washington, "Kennedy, Others Question Timing Of Attack But Presidential Hopefuls Back War With Iraq," The Boston Globe, 2/6/03)
March 2003


"Senator John F. Kerry … had lambasted Bush’s diplomatic efforts, despite voting last fall in support of a congressional resolution authorizing military action to disarm Iraq of any weapons of mass destruction. ‘It appears that with the deadline for exile come and gone, Saddam Hussein has chosen to make military force the ultimate weapons inspections enforcement mechanism,’ Kerry said." (Glen Johnson, "Critics Of Bush Voice Support For The Troops," The Boston Globe, 3/20/03)
I think Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction are a threat, and that’s why I voted to hold him accountable and to make certain that we disarm him. I think we need to …" (NPR’s "All Things Considered," 3/19/03)

http://www.plainnakedtruth.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=9
=================================


=

Published on Monday, February 9, 2004 by Newsday / Long Island, NY
Kerry, Too, Needs to Clear the Air
by Scott Ritter

<snip>

Today, on the issue of the war in Iraq, it is John Kerry who is all pious rectitude.

"I think the administration owes the entire country a full explanation on this war - not just their exaggerations but on the failure of American intelligence," Kerry said following the stunning announcement by David Kay, the Bush administration's former lead investigator in Iraq, that "we were all wrong" about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in that country. The problem for Sen. Kerry, of course, is that he, too, is culpable in the massive breach of public trust that has come to light regarding Iraq, WMD and the rush to war.

Almost 30 years after his appearance before the Senate, Sen. Kerry was given the opportunity to make good on his promises that he had learned the lessons of Vietnam. During a visit to Washington in April 2000, when I lobbied senators and representatives for a full review of American policy regarding Iraq, I spoke with John Kerry about what I held to be the hyped-up intelligence regarding the threat posed by Iraq's WMD. "Put it in writing," Kerry told me, "and send it to me so I can review what you're saying in detail."

I did just that, penning a comprehensive article for Arms Control Today, the journal of the Arms Control Association, on the "Case for the Qualitative Disarmament of Iraq." This article, published in June 2000, provided a detailed breakdown of Iraq's WMD capability and made a comprehensive case that Iraq did not pose an imminent threat. I asked the Arms Control Association to send several copies to Sen. Kerry's office but, just to make sure, I sent him one myself. I never heard back from the senator.

Two years later, in the buildup toward war that took place in the summer of 2002, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on which Kerry sits, convened a hearing on Iraq. At that hearing a parade of witnesses appeared, testifying to the existence of WMD in Iraq. Featured prominently was Khidir Hamza, the self-proclaimed "bombmaker to Saddam," who gave stirring first-hand testimony to the existence of not only nuclear weapons capability, but also chemical and biological weapons as well. Every word of Hamza's testimony has since been proved false. Despite receiving thousands of phone calls, letters and e-mails demanding that dissenting expert opinion, including my own, be aired at the hearing, Sen. Kerry apparently did nothing, allowing a sham hearing to conclude with the finding that there was "no doubt" Saddam Hussein had WMD.

Sen. Kerry followed up this performance in October 2002 by voting for the war in Iraq. Today he justifies that vote by noting that he only approved the "threat of war," and that the blame for Iraq rests with President George W. Bush, who failed to assemble adequate international support for the war. But this explanation rings hollow in the face of David Kay's findings that there are no WMD in Iraq. With the stated casus belli shown to be false, John Kerry needs to better explain his role not only in propelling our nation into a war that is rapidly devolving into a quagmire, but more importantly, his perpetuation of the falsehoods that got us there to begin with.

<snip>

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0209-03.htm

==========

We like to say that Bush is an idiot but Bush is apparently sharp enough to fool John Kerry.

What does that say about Kerry? Even more stupid than Bush? Or just plain old easily fooled?

Is that what we want in a President? I don't care what the DLC says- it is NOT too late to pit someone with a CLEAR, UNASSAILABLE HISTORY of non-complicity with the neo-con/liberal agenda against Bush.

It only boils down to ABB because the DLC's greatest nightmare is that they won't be able to pursue their neo-liberal agenda. The problem is not the word conservative or liberal, the problem is the word "neo" as in gloriously marching towards the New World Order of corporate globalization & exploitation of peoples who have already been determined to be second-tiered.

[samsingh]

6. selling saddam wmd's is worse

but everyone on this board and thinking people everywhere already know that.

[mouse7]

7. Ribbons, ribbons dammit, ribbons!

Please stop allowing the neo-cons to set the terms of the debate. Kerry never threw his medals. Kerry threw a set of his ribbons. A person has multiple copies of their ribbons for each uniform jacket they own.