Posted on 10/24/2015 8:29:04 PM PDT by DaveinOK54
I will give you that in hind sight, it is more obvious how bad of a blunder Iraq war was. Very few repubs were against Iraq war. Hillary voted for Iraq war.
However credit should go to Trump for the foresight for opposing Iraq war. He saw the folly of removing Muslim dictators who kept the jihadists under control.
In Washington overnight, the man tasked by the Bush Administration with finding Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, Dr David Kay, was outlining why he thought there weren't any weapons ... So far, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq and Dr Kay now believes it's unlikely any stockpiles of such weapons existed in the lead-up to the war.
In the lead up to the invasion:
Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis were cooperating with U.N. inspections, and in February 2003 had provided Blix's team with the names of hundreds of scientists to interview, individuals Saddam claimed had been involved in the destruction of banned weapons. Had the inspections been allowed to continue, Blix said, there would likely be a very different situation in Iraq today....
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/03/18_blix.shtml
But then there were announcements that if we didn't invade Iraq immediately there would be a mushroom cloud, etc. ... As fate would have it, the risk of that nuclear attack is now much closer.
Thanks. I’ll check it out.
“I do believe Saddam had WMD’s, if not why then did all sources tell Bush and Blair that he did? Many of the Democrats believed it as well and approved of Bush’s actions.
OBAMA IS TO BLAME SOLELY FOR ISSA....when he gave notice of our pulling out of Iraq and the deadline. OBAMA’S SOLELY TO BLAME for what is happening now.”
They watch the trucks take them into Syria .
They are still sitting in what is left of Damascus .
Eventually they are going to go BOOM!
Oh and the Iraq war was the Clintons idea .
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/07/iraq.uranium/
Bush and the Obama pull out:
xnews.com/politics/2014/09/11/bush-in-2007-delivered-eerily-accurate-warning-about-iraq-unrest/
Obama took credit for the Iraq Victory until he lost the Peace:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/06/19/president-obama-took-credit-in-2012-for-withdrawing-all-troops-from-iraq-today-he-said-something-different/
Obama and the SOFA negotiations:
http://www.floppingaces.net/2015/05/19/the-truth-about-the-status-of-forces-agreement/
Every major demoncrat stood up on the floor to speak in favor of going to war to remove Saddam from power. And all based on the same exact intel Bush had available to him. That is, all except Barack Hussein Obama, who loves to boast that he opposed the war from the beginning. ie, even though everyone else at the time was convinced Saddam had WMDs and would use them on us or our allies. Hussein, apparently just didn't care.
=================================================
Pre-war quotes from "lying" House and Senate democrats...
"In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.
In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. Hillary Clinton
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10288&position=all
John Kerry: “I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq – Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991.” (July 2002)
John Kerry: “I believe the record of Saddam Hussein’s ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force if necessary.”
"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." -
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John F. Kerry
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10174&position=all
John Kerry on the floor of the Senate
October 2002:
"With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question:
Why?
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?
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John F. Kerry
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10171&position=all
John Kerry: “I would disagree with John McCain that it's the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it's what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that--that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It's the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (October 2002)
John Kerry: “If You Don’t Believe . . . Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.” (January 2003)
John Kerry: Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator who must be disarmed. (March 2003)
“The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.
Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. Ted Kennedy
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=S10090&dbname=2002_record
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."..."Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction." –
Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Sen. John Edwards
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10325&position=all
"There is no doubt that since that time Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." –
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
http://usinfo.org/wf-archive/2001/011207/epf510.htm
"We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." -
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002
Online with Jim Lehrer – Public Broadcasting Service
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec02/iraq_12-10.html
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
Congressional Record – Robert Byrd
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S9874&position=all
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."-
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record –Sen. Jay Rockefeller
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" –
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
Congressional Record – Rep. Henry Waxman
MY SOURCE FOR ALL OF THESE QUOTES:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050405093734/http://www.americandaily.com/article/4694
And had we not attacked what would the world look like now? Can you answer that? You really don’t know.
The Central Intelligence Agency, working with American troops during the occupation of Iraq, repeatedly purchased nerve-agent rockets from a secretive Iraqi seller, part of a previously undisclosed effort to ensure that old chemical weapons remaining in Iraq did not fall into the hands of terrorists or militant groups, according to current and former American officials.
The extraordinary arms purchase plan, known as Operation Avarice, began in 2005 and continued into 2006, and the American military deemed it a nonproliferation success. It led to the United States’ acquiring and destroying at least 400 Borak rockets, one of the internationally condemned chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein’s Baathist government manufactured in the 1980s but that were not accounted for by United Nations inspections mandated after the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
Note that despite the firestorm of slander the Bush administration endured over its “lies” on WMD, the president never acted to declassify the information on the CIA buyback program, and as a result today it is an article of faith on the left that he lied us into war.
At the time of the invasion of Iraq, there was no way to know that:
These munitions were remnants of an Iraqi special weapons program that was abandoned long before the 2003 invasion,
But:
they turned up sporadically during the American occupation in buried caches, as part of improvised bombs or on black markets.
American Thinker reported on the WMD evidence found in Iraq 11 years ago.
The CIA’s program appears to have put at risk soldiers who were not warned of the risks they faced in handling these potent weapons:
Not long after Operation Avarice had secured its 400th rocket, in 2006, American troops were exposed several times to other chemical weapons. Many of these veterans said that they had not been warned by their units about the risks posed by the chemical weapons and that their medical care and follow-up were substandard, in part because military doctors seemed unaware that chemical munitions remained in Iraq.
In some cases, victims of exposure said, officers forbade them to discuss what had occurred. The Pentagon now says hundreds of other veterans reported on health-screening forms that they believed they too had been exposed during the war.
Aaron Stein, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, said the belated acknowledgment of a chemical-rocket purchases, as well as the potentially worrisome laboratory analysis of the related sarin samples, raised questions about the military’s commitment to the well-being of those it sent to war.
We have been fed a line of bull over Saddam and WMDs.
President Bush “lied” about Iraq’s WMDs – thus goes the article of faith among liberals, endlessly repeated by the likes of Ron Fournier and Jon Stewart as a kind of progressive catechism. Except that it is a libel, as even the New York Times indirectly acknowledges today.
C.J. Chivers and Eric Schmitt write:
The Central Intelligence Agency, working with American troops during the occupation of Iraq, repeatedly purchased nerve-agent rockets from a secretive Iraqi seller, part of a previously undisclosed effort to ensure that old chemical weapons remaining in Iraq did not fall into the hands of terrorists or militant groups, according to current and former American officials.
The extraordinary arms purchase plan, known as Operation Avarice, began in 2005 and continued into 2006, and the American military deemed it a nonproliferation success. It led to the United States’ acquiring and destroying at least 400 Borak rockets, one of the internationally condemned chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein’s Baathist government manufactured in the 1980s but that were not accounted for by United Nations inspections mandated after the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
Note that despite the firestorm of slander the Bush administration endured over its “lies” on WMD, the president never acted to declassify the information on the CIA buyback program, and as a result today it is an article of faith on the left that he lied us into war.
At the time of the invasion of Iraq, there was no way to know that:
These munitions were remnants of an Iraqi special weapons program that was abandoned long before the 2003 invasion,
But:
they turned up sporadically during the American occupation in buried caches, as part of improvised bombs or on black markets.
American Thinker reported on the WMD evidence found in Iraq 11 years ago.
The CIA’s program appears to have put at risk soldiers who were not warned of the risks they faced in handling these potent weapons:
Not long after Operation Avarice had secured its 400th rocket, in 2006, American troops were exposed several times to other chemical weapons. Many of these veterans said that they had not been warned by their units about the risks posed by the chemical weapons and that their medical care and follow-up were substandard, in part because military doctors seemed unaware that chemical munitions remained in Iraq.
In some cases, victims of exposure said, officers forbade them to discuss what had occurred. The Pentagon now says hundreds of other veterans reported on health-screening forms that they believed they too had been exposed during the war.
Aaron Stein, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, said the belated acknowledgment of a chemical-rocket purchases, as well as the potentially worrisome laboratory analysis of the related sarin samples, raised questions about the military’s commitment to the well-being of those it sent to war.
We have been fed a line of bull over Saddam and WMDs.
I supported going in. We didn’t know what Saddam had, and it was better to be safe than sorry. But I never supported spending trilions on Bush’s harebrained scheme to bring liberty and democracy to the muslim world. We should have gotten out fast and gone on to deal with Iran. Instead we got so bogged down that we lost any chance to do anything about the mullahs. The result is Iraq allied with a nuclear soon to be nuclear armed Iran.
Why else you think both major political parties were attacking Trump?
The Republican party is now admitting that Trump is probably going to win.
Anyhow, how does this tie back to Blair and Iraq.
Well many insiders at all levels within the different government bodies and certainly high up insiders are very pissed off.
Apparently, there is a criminal element within our governments that are running wild. We know them as “The Establishment”.
The bottom line is this.... They (the Establishment/Globalist) wanted to bring in a world government as the Bible warns us. This is why they do not care about the borders by the way. They no longer believe in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights even though they swore an oath to uphold and protect them. The excuse the Establishment/Globalist used was September 11th, 2001 in order to get things accelerated. To eventually bring in the world government or a “new” world order. Which is really the old order of Kings and Queens, but instead of a king or queen you have a government body (The U.N.) at the top. Thus, there will be no more borders. Countries will be like States today and the U.N. will be the Federal or World Government. Say adios to the Bill of Rights.
Anyhow, that is not the worst part. The worst part is that it will come out that criminal elements operated within the U.S. government created September 11th, 2001 (see 28 pages of the 911 report). This will be done in order to hurt the United States Reputation world wide.
Our Establishment/Globalist will be double crossed in order to hurt our reputation and make the case for Global Government. Yes there really is NO HONOR among thieves. The criminal elements will be exposed.
For the record, it has always been part of the plan, but I suspect many in the Establishment/Globalist did not know this part. They thought they would just merge with the U.N world government.
Oh no... they will be feed to the wolves and go down in history as the U.S. biggest Traitors since Benedict Arnold.
It's already happening right now with Syria, ISIS and Russia.
That's what is at play. Hence, Tony Blair is speaking out now in order to avoid a serve punishment later down the road.
Agree it’s been a disaster and has hurt our reputation world wide.
I would take GREAT glee in this if it didn’t cause thousands of American soldiers to die and hundreds of thousands to be permanently head injured because George W was so in bed with the sauds, that even though 19 were from Saudi Arabia, he attacked that powerhouse and world power Iraq.
Two cent dictator was a foil for iran and no fly zone kept kurds safe.
No look were these dictator-less countries are falling apart and breeding ground for terrorists,
keeping troops there would have stopped alot of this.
making saudi arabia into glass would have helped more.
exactly...just destroy their militaries..then move on...
2. Hans Blix was the Mr Magoo of wmd inspections. His job was to NOT find wmd.
3. We recovered thousands of chemical wmd, seed stockpiles for bio weapons, yellowcake uranium, parts and plans for uranium centrifuges.
4. isis is now in control of thousands of chemical weapons that were in UN sealed bunkers.
5. Chemical weapons were used against our troops.
6. Zarqawi was in Iraq working on wmd at Saddam's invitation.
7. Zawahiri came to Iraq at Saddam's invitation to coordinate operations against the West.
General Georges Saada.
convoys of suspected wmd going into Syria before the war.
Friends who were there and saw them.
I could go on but it's late
Obama’s went against Military Advice, see General Lloyd Austin.
Notice, we were scheduled to get out of Afghanistan but are saying there.
SOFA is not binding and some Iraqis indeed wanted us to stay. We sort of half-###ed the deal.
Whether people care or not, we basically did stop genocide against the Kurds, Saddam was convicted of that genocide whether it was going on at the time of the invasion, I don’t know. But that is a “good thing” we did.
How can one blame the trouble in Libya on Bush? This is faulty, obviously, Obama/Clinton/McCain(?) are responsible for the Libyan invasion. Yemen is hard to blame on Bush as well. Egypt is hard to blame on Bush. We should not have withdrawn troops from Iraq, that is a problem too, so maybe in that case, one can split the blame if one has too.
Assad let Jihadis attack Iraq from Syria, there is really a lot of blame to go around.
All but one of the hijackers was in Iran in the prior 12 months to 911; plenty of blame can be said of Iran about 911: http://www.bloomberg.com/bb/newsarchive/aYoOcZ6NT3wo.html
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.