The Democrats LIED about WMD's in Iraq

ScarryKerry.com ^ | May 14, 2004 | Jeff Head

[Jeff Head]

You are welcome.

[Jeff Head]

The Independent American Party is another and they are fully supportive of the Constitution Party. More and more like them need to join forces.

[cookcounty]

The "Bush Lied about WMD" crowd are such morons. In February of 2001. The Bush administration's position was that Iraq had WMD. Amonth before, that same view was held by then-President Clinton, Gore, Albright, Berger, et.al. So in February of 2001Bush was lying, but in January, Clinton & company were telling the truth? If there was a lie, it was invented by the Clinton administration, then repeated by the trusting George W.

Though I believe there was no lie. The WMD existed. Six people in Mosul may have found some of them (see the new anthrax thread).

[Jeff Head]

You are right, there was no lie. Hussein used them in the Iraq-Iran war and on his own people.

The only difference is that an administration came along that was serious about dealing with the overall threat, while the other was simply playing politics.

[TigersEye]

The fact is, Iraq should have been invaded with or without WMD's because of their abject violation of accords signed with us that ended the Gulf War, which they consistently violated for over ten years.

You betcha! The first time Saddam fired on one of our planes in the no fly zone we should have leveled Baghdad.

[Jeff Head]

The son of my senior administrative assistant in 1990-1991 was with the 82nd in the blocking force south of Baghdad back then.

When we had 500,000 troops in theater was the time to go...he said later that every Iraqi they saw was going the other way at the time and that Saddam and his cronies were ready to flee in a big way and leave the city open to us back then.

At that time we had the necessary force structure to completely pacify the belligerents instead of bypassimg them.

IMHO, it's time we do it now...and I believe we can do it (if we are committed to it) with the forces we have there now.

You got Fremail

[I got the rope]

sweet!

[Joe Brower]

Wow, Jeff, thanks for this. I was discussing this very thing with a lady who's a local journalist, and she was repeating the same old tired mantra, which I heavily deflected. A good gal, but she's swallowed a bit more of the leftmedia agitprop than she realizes. I just emailed her this list you compiled -- it will be interesting to see her response.

[ForGod'sSake]

The Independent American Party is another and they are fully supportive of the Constitution Party. More and more like them need to join forces.

While I have never seriously considered voting third party(not even Perot) for practical reasons, I generally agree with the ones on the right and support their efforts. Combining/joining forces would probably be a worthwhile goal, but I don't see it happening because, well, it hasn't happened. Too many egos?

Patience is not my strong suit but I plan on giving the Pubbies enough time to actually make a difference. I also realize they're fighting an 800 pound gorilla in the media. This, more than anything IMO, scares the bejeebers out of way too many conservative politicians and gives them the appearance of walking on eggshells. Over the next two or three election cycles we'll see just how important the internet has become in spreading the word. Hope springs...

FGS

[jim macomber]

"The fact is, Iraq should have been invaded with or without WMD's because of their abject violation of accords signed with us that ended the Gulf War, which they consistently violated for over ten years."

Indeed, given not just the proliferation of terror but the instability and prospect of worse emanating from Middle East conflicts and circumstances as they have existed, a major, powerful, and preferably benign presence has been needed for a long time which has led me to consider on occasion that, if there were never any WMD, never any Saddam, never any excuse at all to go there and show the way......then maybe we should have made one up.