Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Madeleine Albright says Republicans wanted war with Iraq in '98
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-03272006-632480.html ^ | March 27, 2005

Posted on 03/28/2006 3:15:56 PM PST by Shermy

PHILADELPHIA - Republicans urged the Clinton administration to invade Iraq as early as eight years ago, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said Monday at a political fundraiser.

"I remember when we were in office, starting in 1998, various Republicans were coming to us wanting a ground invasion," Albright said.

She did not name the people she said made those requests nor say what prompted them. But 1998 was when the Iraqi government defied a United Nations-imposed "no-fly" zone and began firing on planes attempting to enforce it.

Albright's remarks came in response to a question about an article in Monday's editions of The New York Times. The story said the Bush administration had decided to go to war two months before doing so "even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons."

Albright spoke briefly to reporters outside a fundraiser for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Bob Casey that his campaign said was expected to raise $100,000.

She reiterated her earlier statements on the war in Iraq: "This was a war of choice, not of necessity." Albright has also said that now that the war is in progress, it is critical to win it.

Casey, who is trying to unseat U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said he was disturbed by the newspaper account.

"A lot of Americans understand now that we were misled on a lot of things about the war in Iraq. And that's why we have elections," he said.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bravosierra; halfbright; jihad; kla
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: Shermy
And that's why we have elections," he said. - I thought it was in the constitution?
21 posted on 03/28/2006 3:24:19 PM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Christian4Bush

Thanks, Christian. Not that the left ever lets the facts get in the way of a good agenda. LOL


22 posted on 03/28/2006 3:24:31 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

Madeline Halfbright, at it again. Filthy, lying scum of the earth liberal swine.


23 posted on 03/28/2006 3:24:43 PM PST by jw777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

Maddy Halfbright.....obviously a member of the Stupid Lost Tribe....

I guess she still believes Clinton's versions of his Monique "problems"........

Former Democrat Administration hacks, seem INCAPABLE of staying out of the news....
They certainly don't fill the bill as "Loyal Opposition"..

From stealing government documents, traitorous speeches in foreign venues, to undermining America's interests - worldwide.... These bastards like Clinton, Gore, Carter, etc, etc....should be required to register as Foreign Agents.....

Speaks well for political assassinations, doesn't it?

Semper Fi


24 posted on 03/28/2006 3:24:54 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy; zagor-te-nej; Lion in Winter; Honorary Serb; jb6; Incorrigible; DTA; ma bell; joan; ...

And even more Americans realize we were misled into supporting the terrorist KLA in the ethnic cleansing campaign of the Serbian province of Kosovo-Metohija.


25 posted on 03/28/2006 3:25:22 PM PST by FormerLib (Kosova: "land stolen from Serbs and given to terrorist killers in a futile attempt to appease them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coop

Are you accusing the impeached one of playing wag the dog? LOL


26 posted on 03/28/2006 3:25:24 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Altair333

I suspect that letter's a forgery. It referred to the Impeached Rapist as "honorable." :-D


27 posted on 03/28/2006 3:25:55 PM PST by Coop (Proud founding member of GCA - Gruntled Conservatives of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Republicans urged the Clinton administration to invade Iraq as early as eight years ago

And if he had, we would hear the following:

1) Bill Clinton was a courageous war President, who finished what Bush I refused to finish in Iraq I.

2) The liberation of the Iraqi people was one of the greatest humanitarian war efforts of all time.

3) The loss of ______ (fill in the number) of Americans was a small price to pay to liberate 25,000,000 people from the worse dictator since Hitler.

4) Bill Clinton saved us from a possible terrorist attack in the future, which may have involved WMD.

5) Bill Clinton, winner of the Nobel Peace prize 1999

6) President Al Gore.

7) Cindy Sheehan - Whose son was killed in the invasion declare: "My son was a true hero who died for a noble cause, I weep not for his loss, but that we could not have done more for those Iraqi's that Sadaam killed. Thank you President Clinton."

28 posted on 03/28/2006 3:25:57 PM PST by Michael.SF. (Well, Kerry did win the exit polls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Shermy

You'd think that she would check the facts.


30 posted on 03/28/2006 3:26:26 PM PST by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: river rat
These bastards like Clinton, Gore, Carter, etc, etc....should be required to register as Foreign Agents.....

I'm quite certain they already have.

Oh, you mean in America, don't you??

31 posted on 03/28/2006 3:27:16 PM PST by Coop (Proud founding member of GCA - Gruntled Conservatives of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Peach

"I guess you've forgotten the "hawks" in the Democratic party who urged regime change in Iraq. Interesting."

I didn't say democrats didn't urge Clinton to have regime change. I responded to those who said what Albright was saying about being urged to invade in 1998 was only made up.

I'll admit it- I've thought this Iraq war was sheer and utter idiocy from the start. And I see nothing "conservative" about it- more like a Utopian fantasy that we topple Saddam and the first democracy in the history of the God-forsaken Arab world will arise.


32 posted on 03/28/2006 3:27:24 PM PST by Altair333 (Please no more 'Bush's fault' posts- the joke is incredibly old)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Coop

"I suspect that letter's a forgery."

Follow the link- it's from the group's own website. It's a famous letter - has been discussed widely.


33 posted on 03/28/2006 3:28:18 PM PST by Altair333 (Please no more 'Bush's fault' posts- the joke is incredibly old)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Let me jog her memory:


Bush's Rush To War Was Several Years In The Making(Good Chronology of UN Resolutions on Iraq)
San Antonio Express-News | March 12, 2003 | By Jonathan Gurwitz



Insanity, goes a popular saying, is doing the same thing over and over yet expecting a different result.


By that nonclinical definition, the U.N. Security Council — and anyone who believes it can, in its current form, offer a meaningful solution to the Iraqi crisis — is certifiably nuts.


The Security Council has passed 17 resolutions related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, to which President Bush now feels compelled to add an 18th "final opportunity" for Iraq to comply fully with its international obligations.


Here, then, is an abbreviated version of President Bush's "rush to war," which has, in fact, spanned 12 years, three U.S. presidents and a series of unanimous Security Council votes.


Resolution 687, April 3, 1991: "Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of all chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities ... (and) all ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometers."


Resolution 707, Aug. 15, 1991: "Condemns Iraq's serious violation of a number of its obligations ... which constitutes a material breach of the relevant provisions. ... Demands that Iraq provide full, final and complete disclosure.


Resolution 949, Oct. 15, 1994: "Underlining that it will consider Iraq fully responsible for the serious consequences of any failure to fulfill the demands in the present resolution ... demands that Iraq cooperate fully."


Resolution 1060, Oct. 12, 1996: "Deplores the refusal of the Iraqi authorities to allow access to sites ... which constitutes a clear violation of the provisions of Security Council resolutions. Demands that Iraq cooperate fully ... and that the government of Iraq allow ... inspection teams immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to any and all areas, facilities, equipment, records and means of transportation which they wish to inspect."


Resolution 1115, June 21, 1997: "Condemns the repeated refusal of the Iraqi authorities to allow access. ... Demands that Iraq cooperate fully."


Resolution 1134, Oct. 23, 1997: "Condemns the repeated refusal of the Iraqi authorities ... to allow access. ... Decides that such refusals to cooperate constitute a flagrant violation. ... Demands that Iraq cooperate fully."


Resolution 1154, March 2, 1998: "Stresses that compliance by the government of Iraq with its obligations ... is necessary for the implementation of Resolution 687, but that any violation would have severest consequences for Iraq."


Resolution 1194, Sept. 9, 1998: "Determined to ensure full compliance by Iraq ... condemns the decision by Iraq to suspend cooperation ... which constitutes a totally unacceptable contravention of its obligations. ... Demands that Iraq ... cooperate fully."


Resolution 1205, Nov. 5, 1998: "Demands that Iraq ... provide immediate, complete and unconditional cooperation."


Resolution 1441, Nov. 8, 2002: "Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions. ... Decides ... to afford Iraq ... a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations ... with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687."


From the perspective of international law, the international community remains in a state of war with the regime of Saddam Hussein. The 1991 cease-fire was premised on Iraq's acceptance of all provisions of Resolution 687, most notably the obligation to unconditionally disarm.


Iraq's manifest failure to do so renders operative its diplomatic antecedent — Resolution 678, which authorizes member states "to use all necessary means to uphold and implement ... all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area."


With or without an 18th resolution, the United States and its coalition of the willing are fully justified in using force against the regime of Saddam.


That Russia, China and France, whose troops are today operating in Chechnya, Tibet and the Ivory Coast respectively in promotion of narrow, national interests — and often brutally so — without any U.N. sanction, might veto the legitimate use of force against Iraq is the proverbial nail in the coffin for a United Nations that has consigned itself to irrelevancy.


The first casualty of a war with Iraq may be, mercifully, the U.N. legacy of impotence and hypocrisy. May it, if nothing else, rest in peace.
34 posted on 03/28/2006 3:28:19 PM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Altair333
I've thought this Iraq war was sheer and utter idiocy from the start. And

Consistently wrong is still consistent.

35 posted on 03/28/2006 3:28:27 PM PST by Coop (Proud founding member of GCA - Gruntled Conservatives of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
I was in on the one in '91, and wanted to finish it then, and every year since. Including 1998, 2001 etc.

Does that make me a bad person?

36 posted on 03/28/2006 3:28:36 PM PST by ExGeeEye (All Hail the Great Folger, creator of hot brown goodness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People -- Version 3.0
by John Hawkins


Since we haven't found WMD in Iraq, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is saying that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Well, if they're going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same "lies" since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Here are just a few examples that prove that the Bush administration didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction...

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated 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 refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, 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 Qaeda 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 will continue to increase his capacity 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." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"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." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"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." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)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. ...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. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. 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. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002


37 posted on 03/28/2006 3:30:07 PM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

These Dems sounded so tough because they knew Clinton and not-at-Albright would never order a ground invasion. They scored "strong on defense" points knowing they wouldn't have to back it up.


38 posted on 03/28/2006 3:30:55 PM PST by KingKenrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dhs12345

"You'd think that she would check the facts."

It's a game for the Dems to create a history where what they accuse Bush of lying about they themselves espoused under Clinton.


39 posted on 03/28/2006 3:32:50 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Thanks, Christian. Not that the left ever lets the facts get in the way of a good agenda. LOL

I know. That's why we need people like you, for those who ARE willing to read, listen and reason.

40 posted on 03/28/2006 3:33:24 PM PST by Christian4Bush (FreeRepublic and Rush Limbaugh: kevlar protection from the Drive-By Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson