Skip to comments.Joseph Farah: Madeleine Not-so-bright
Posted on 04/25/2006 5:26:08 PM PDT by wagglebee
Nothing infuriates me more than political hacks who vacillate with the wind or who practice one thing when they are in power and preach another when they are not.
Meet Madeleine Albright or, as I like to call her, Madeleine Not-so-bright.
Once again, she was sounding off in the New York Times this past weekend about the impending Iraq disaster and how Saddam Hussein had not posed an imminent threat and how "You can't go to war with everybody you dislike."
At least this time, Not-so-bright, who has a history of trashing U.S. foreign policy on foreign soil, had the courtesy of slamming the American war effort to a U.S. newspaper while on American soil. However, it should be pointed out the Arab and Muslim media quickly seized on the interview.
"I think Iraq may end up being one of the worst disasters in American foreign policy," she said not content to let history judge the war being fought in the here and now by real, live American soldiers.
Is this the same Madeleine No-so-bright who served as secretary of state during the Clinton administration?
Because she's certainly singing a far different tune today than she was back then.
Let's review the record:
Was Saddam Hussein's Iraq "just somebody we didn't like"? Is that Madeleine Not-so-bright's revisionist view of history? He certainly didn't sound like just someone we didn't like back in the days when she was in power and concluding he had weapons of mass destruction, had used them and would certainly use them again.
Maybe she needs to be reminded that Saddam Hussein had survived the years of sanctions and bombings her administration employed to depose or contain him or whatever the goal was.
And let's not forget that while Not-so-bright now opposes the military action we took in deposing Saddam Hussein, she remains 100 percent in favor of the military action we took to depose Slobodan Milosevic. Now, even with 20-20 hindsight, would anyone suggest Serbia under Milosevic represented a graver national security threat to the United States than did Iraq under Hussein?
I wonder why Not-so-bright wasn't telling her boss, "You just can't go to war with anybody you dislike"?
Of course, no one will ever ask Madeleine Not-so-bright these questions because she is taken seriously by my colleagues in the press. She is considered a "real scholar," a woman of achievement, a foreign-policy whiz.
It's no secret I don't have a lot of use for the Bush administration. But I will tell you this: Under the circumstances, I don't believe we had any real choice but to invade Iraq. The invasion was a success. Iraq is better off without Saddam Hussein. And our military forces are kicking butt on the terrorists there rather than here.
Iraq, therefore, despite many mistakes and some setbacks, remains one of the great accomplishments of the Bush administration.
Can someone point to a comparable achievement during the Clinton-Not-so-bright years?
Not-so-bright is not only not so bright, she's incompetent.
I'm very fond of this quote:
Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.
--60 Minutes (5/12/96)
ROFL...I hadn't heard that but it could only come from her.
Her incompetence is but one small step above Janet Reno's.
I missed this under "News/Activism Editorial" and tried to post it.
Anyway, it has good quotes. When it comes to words, I think the Democrats were the greater hawks. Their changing positions remind me of their lack of seriousness on matters of war and world affairs. They are a phony bunch. Neither we nor our allies can rely upon them. Get us into war and cut and run, that's the MO.
They definitely decided to crack a few eggs with the troops once the WMD issue fell in their laps.
<< Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima ... >>
Hmmmmm. No mention of Wartime London or Coventry, Lesley?
Nor of the Holocaust?
Liberalism is a psychosis.
And every liberal? Lower than shark s**t!
Yes...Of course it was justified to starve a half a million kids to death over WMD, but liberating them is immoral.
"I'm for democracy, but imposing democracy is an oxymoron. People have to choose democracy and it has to come up from below," she said.
doesn't this hasbeen old hag know that the people have chosen democracy and the fight is coming from the people. President George W. Bush only toppled Saddam!!!
Quotes from Albright during the late '90's
1. "Secretary Of State Madeleine Albright Said Saddam "Had The Capability With The VX Agents To Destroy Every Man, Woman And Child On Earth." ALBRIGHT: "Weapons of mass destruction are the threat of the future. I think the president explained very clearly to the American people that this is the threat of the 21st century. It's hard to control, hard to get at, that we need to â you know, Saddam Hussein had the capability with the VX agents to destroy every man, woman and child on earth. So we have a serious problem here. He is a threat." (PBS' The Newshour With Jim Lehrer, 12/17/98)"
2. Albright: "[W]e Are Concerned, As The President Said, About [Saddam's] Ability In The Long Run To Threaten His Neighbors, And Frankly, To Threaten All Of Us With Weapons Of Mass Destruction." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 12/16/98)"
3. "Albright Accused Saddam Of Pursuing Dual Threats To International Peace: Terrorism And Weapons Of Mass Destruction. ALBRIGHT: "Countering terror is one aspect of our struggle to maintain international security and peace. Limiting the dangers posed by weapons of mass destruction is a second. Saddam Hussein's Iraq encompasses both of these challenges, while posing yet a third. .. As we look ahead, we will decide how and when to respond to Iraq's actions based on the threat they pose to Iraq's neighbors, to regional security and to U.S. vital interests. Our assessment will include Saddam's capacity to reconstitute, use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction." (Madeleine Albright, Remarks At The American Legion Convention, New Orleans, LA, 9/9/98)"
4. Albright: "[Saddam] Has Chosen To Spend His Money On Building Weapons Of Mass Destruction And Palaces For His Cronies." (Madeleine Albright, Remarks To The Chicago Council On Foreign Relations, Chicago, IL, 11/12/99)"
5. "Albright Justified A December 1998 Attack On Iraq As A Way To Increase America's Security And "Deal With The Threat" Of Saddam's Weapons. ALBRIGHT: "President Clinton felt very strongly that it was in our national security interest to deal with the threat that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, their capability, their future capability of threatening us, the neighbors, the regional stability with them, and that we had a responsibility as the United States to deal with a threat of this kind." (CNN's "Early Edition," 12/18/98)"
#6 is Albright's 'degrade' speech!!!
6. "Albright Argued Saddam's Pursuit Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction And His Insistence On Lifting Economic Sanctions Was An "Incompatible Position." ALBRIGHT: "The purpose of it ... is to degrade Saddam Hussein's ability to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors. And the targets are related to that. They're going after weapons of mass destruction facilities, after military facilities, command and control security. ... [T]his is because Saddam Hussein has insisted that he wants to keep his weapons of mass destruction and have sanctions lifted, a clearly incompatible position." (NBC's Today, 12/18/98)"
7. "Albright Said The Risk That Rogue State Leaders Like Saddam "Will Use Nuclear, Chemical Or Biological Weapons Against Us Or Our Allies Is The Greatest Security Threat We Face." ALBRIGHT: "Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm. In discussing Iraq, we begin by knowing that Saddam Hussein, unlike any other leader, has used weapons of mass destruction even against his own people." (CNN's "Showdown With Iraq: International Town Meeting," 2/18/98)"
I do not know where the following quote came from - but I do hold the clinton administration, all of them, responsible. All the clinton gang wanted was the power of the office, to hell with everything else!!!
"the price of Bill Clinton's "lack of" foreign policy can be seen right here at Walter Reed -- young men who returned from Iraq with their bodies shattered after George Bush had to do the job the Clinton Admin refused to".
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.