Posted on 01/19/2005 5:36:11 AM PST by crushkerry
Her own words prove that she doesn't know what she's talking about.
Just a question, but how come you left this out as one of your seven reasons for going to war. It seems to me it is the most important reason because it is unassailable. No one disputes that Hussein was routinely firing missiles at our pilots and presumably no rational person would dispute the fact that firing missiles at our pilots constitutes an act of war that had to responded to in order to eliminate the threat (i.e. Hussein).
Coleman was terrific in standing up to Kerry and Dodd. Absolutely outstanding.
You'll notice that the text of the resolution you cite contains no specifics as to WMD's. It talks about "the national security of the United States", which is a very general term that is explained in detail in the "Wherefore" clauses. When you look to Congressional intent in legal cases, you don't just look at the text, but at the legislative history, and that's what the "WHEREFORE" clauses are.
And the point here is that the "WMD, period" language used by Boxer in the confirmation hearings is not used in the text but in the 'Wherefore" clauses. Had the text you cite specifically mentioned WMD's you would have a better point, but the fact remains that WMD's are mentioned only in the "Wherefore" clauses, along with many other reason cited in my piece.
Great info! Bumping for reading at my leisure, later. :)
You sound like a criminal defense lawyer for Hussein. Do you dispute that A) Hussein was routinely firing missiles at our pilots; B) that that reason is listed in the Iraq War Resolution as one of the grounds for going to war that Congress approved; and C) firing missiles at another country's pilots constitutes an act of war which the country being attacked is entitled to respond to?
See my reply #85
Reports like this is the reason I love you guys :)
Rock on!!
If you cannot discern from where the documentation of my refutation of your absurd contention stems, what can I say?
The rest of us understand plain English and the context of Boxer's statements and implied accusations directed to Rice are summed up correctly at the top of the thread, contrary to your post.
In layman's terms she is an evil deceitful hissy-fit drama queen monster. AND a major poster girl for bad Botox results.
If you are thinking that the only reason for going into Irac is that you will find a big pile of WMD, you have to be retarded.
Thanks, but as I just emailed to my writing partner Pat Hynes, it's amazing (well, not really) that the MSM doesn't do this stuff. It took me 5 minutes to do the "research" and 45 minutes to write the piece, and about 10 minutes of that was the html coding. It truly is a new world we live in.
And Kerry had just said that foreign leaders wanted to help the U.S. and their help was being rebuffed. Rice refuted some of that (she wasn't aware of offers to help, if they wanted to help they only need say so, etc) but Kerry also had cited India and Coleman directly stated he had personally visited that area recently and the PM of India stated that relations between the U.S. and India have never been better.
Heads up, all, Boxer is LIVE now, "questioning" Dr. Rice.
also here as you know
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1323591/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.