Skip to comments.
Straight Talk from General Anthony Zinni
UCLA Burkle Center for International Relations ^
| 5-14-04
| General Anthony Zinni
Posted on 05/25/2004 12:01:18 PM PDT by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-126 next last
Probably a better statement of the General's views than 60 Minutes.
1
posted on
05/25/2004 12:01:24 PM PDT
by
SJackson
To: SJackson
there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein --- this is a clear alert of DNC talking points. Bush never said he was an immiment threat. He said he was a gathering threat and that it would be derelict of duty to wait until an enemy (especially one with a motive who has vowed revenge) becomes an imminent threat. The rats get away with this one EVERY DAY. Someone has to return volley this krap.
To: SJackson
And what I find our biggest flaw is, we never take time to understand the culture Is he kidding? Americans are so other-culture-looking it's preposterous. This is the country that stepped all over itself not to step on the toes of Arab-Americans after 9/11.
This is a stupid statement. America is not the God of the world and shouldn't be expected to be.
3
posted on
05/25/2004 12:08:12 PM PDT
by
what's up
To: SJackson
Zinni is just another Clinton traitor. 20/20 hindsight. Easy to complain. Just goes to show, fire all holdovers from the Democrat machine immediately.
To: SJackson
was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein Another statement lifted straight out of Hellery Clinton's talking points. Looks like she's offering him the Sec of Def slot in her administration.
5
posted on
05/25/2004 12:09:50 PM PDT
by
what's up
To: SJackson
I saw him on H & C with Tom Clancy. Very disturbing statements he's making.
6
posted on
05/25/2004 12:10:05 PM PDT
by
Humidston
(You heard it here - BUSH/RICE - 2004)
To: SJackson
When President Clinton brought Barak and Arafat we came closeHogwash. Arafat never came close to accepting Barak's exceedingly generous offer and never made a counter-offer.
To: SJackson
"It might have taken six months, nine months, or a year. But who cares? There was no imminent threat. Believe me. I saw the intelligence before the war. There was no imminent threat. Trust me. No imminent threat. I told Senator Lugar that, at my testimony a month before the war. He asked me, 'Is there an imminent threat?' I said no. This more than anything demonstrates why it is a good thing that Zinni no longer has a say in how America responds to threats against its citizenry. Hussein was firing missiles at our pilots in the leadup to the war. That made Iraq one of only two entities in the entire world (the other being Al Qaeda) that was actively targeting Americans prior to the war against Hussein. Zinni's response to these clear and specific acts of war on Hussein's part would have the same as his response to Osama bin Laden's declaration of war and acts of war against the United States during Bill Clinton's tenure as president - which is to say Zinni would have done nothing. I guess that makes Zinni part of the "Thank You Sir. May I please have another" wing of the American foreign policy establishment.
To: SJackson
"It might have taken six months, nine months, or a year. But who cares? There was no imminent threat. Believe me. I saw the intelligence before the war. There was no imminent threat. Trust me. No imminent threat. I told Senator Lugar that, at my testimony a month before the war. He asked me, 'Is there an imminent threat?' I said no. Gosh, even Kerry has dropped this French talking point.
9
posted on
05/25/2004 12:14:02 PM PDT
by
Shermy
To: SJackson
Is this Bush bashing orchestrated? I don't mean tin foil hat stuff but this drip drip drip of totally disloyal subordinates is disturbing
10
posted on
05/25/2004 12:14:30 PM PDT
by
SF Republican
(You know what I like about John Kerry? Nothing)
To: SJackson
in the world, with the exception of the crazies and extremists and jihadis, wants us to fail. Not the French, not the Arabs, they want us to succeed --- baloney. The stinking french and russians damn well want us to fail so they can slink in and pick up the pieces and recover their financial losses. The arabs are psychos. They want us to beat saddam but want us to lose to the insurgents. Go figure. Their machismo is in deep schizophrenia with their intellect. And a sizable number of politicians and their media friends - want - us - to - fail. This MUST be understood by the voters before november.
To: SJackson
there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein,
This boob is a general
Right wait till the threat is imminent and then overnight get an invading force with all its logistical requirements in place and ready to step off the next day and be in Bagdad the following day and the threat neutralized
12
posted on
05/25/2004 12:15:07 PM PDT
by
uncbob
To: what's up
Another statement lifted straight out of Hellery Clinton's talking points. Looks like she's offering him the Sec of Def slot in her administration. Clearly he's setting himself up as a player in a Kerry administration.
13
posted on
05/25/2004 12:15:09 PM PDT
by
SJackson
(Strength of the prophets of Israel...proclaimed the Truth when everything was against it, A. Malraux)
To: Shermy
When President Clinton brought Barak and Arafat we came closeAnd the real question is why is Tom Clancy involved in this embarrassment of an anti-Bush rant?
To: Humidston
< I saw him on H & C with Tom Clancy. Very disturbing statements he's making. >
I saw this interview also. Sean read him the infamous quote "Saddam Hussein is an imminent threat...has WMDs..." and asked what he thought of that quote. Zinni began discounting one by one how that just was not true. Then Sean blew him out of the water by telling him that it was a quote by Bill Clinton (Zinni's former CIC) about Saddam Hussein. Zinni was panicked and caught totally off guard. He stuttered and stammered. It was funny as heck. He looked like he wanted to strangle Sean. Clancy just looked on with a grin.
15
posted on
05/25/2004 12:18:06 PM PDT
by
GOP_Proud
(Those who preach tolerance seem to have the least for my views.)
To: SJackson
The decision to remove Saddam was made by the President with the aupport of 75% of Congress and 70% of the American People. It was not based on an imminent threat. I can't believe he's spouting this crap. The question was one of waiting until the threat becomes imminent.
- Did we want Saddam to chose the time and place of our next confrontation?
- The sanctions were already falling apart. France and Russia were violating them with commercial flights to Baghdad. How was Saddam to be contained if the sanctions disappeared?
- Could Saddam be deterred? Normally, deterrence requires the deteree have something he doesn't want to lose. Saddam had already proven his people were expendable. The only thing he valued was himself.
It was not "elective surgery". It might have been postponed but that postponement could cost more lives in the long run. This was all debated (endlessly) and the decision was made.
To: Numbers Guy
Last night did you watch Hannity pin Zinni down like a frog being setup for dissection?
To: SJackson
This is pretty amusing, the liberals turning the first Presdent Bush into some kind of saintly, all-knowing figure. Sure didn't sound like that in 1992 when they were beating his brains out. But now, he's the be-all and end-all of international relations to them. It is to laugh.
To: SJackson
When ever the hind sight lecture includes the phrase "There was no imminent threat" you can be sure that the rest of the story will line up with the Democrat talking points. They have told the lie of "immanent threat" over and over until it is accepted as the true statement by the president.
To: SJackson
When ever the hind sight lecture includes the phrase "There was no imminent threat" you can be sure that the rest of the story will line up with the Democrat talking points. They have told the lie of "imminent threat" over and over until it is accepted as the true statement by the president.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-126 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson