House Majority Leader warns against unprovoked attack on Iraq

Drudge | 08/08/02 | Drudge

[The Magical Mischief Tour]

House Majority Leader warns against unprovoked attack on Iraq Thurs Aug 8 2002 16:30:05 ET

House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) addressed an Iowa crowd on Thursday and raised questions about whether he would support an American war against Iraq and Saddam Hussein.

"My own view would be to let [Saddam] bluster, let him rant and rave all he wants and let that be a matter between he and his own country. As long as he behaves himself within his own borders, we should not be addressing any attack or resources against him.'

"If we try to act against Saddam Hussein, as obnoxious as he is, with proper provocation, we will not have the support of other nation states who might do so."

"He has a right to hold dominion within his own national boundaries, as obnoxious as he is and as comical as he can be."

Developing...

[headsonpikes]

"He has a right to hold dominion within his own national boundaries..."

With that point conceded, people of Earth should prepare to enter the box-cars.

Neither Gubmints or tyrants have any 'right to hold dominion', IMNSHO.

[Lucas1]

Is he for real? For this quote "As long as he behaves himself within his own borders, we should not be addressing any attack or resources against him."

Ummm hello...I think there is plenty of evidence to show that Saddam supports terrorism around the world.

[rintense]

What is this guy's story anyway? Sheesh. He seems so, oh I dunno, inept, to be HML.

[wallcrawlr]

Bully!!!!!!

How can you say that? You know how much humanitarian work America does in the world.
BULLY???!??!?!??!

You are way off. Sit down and figure it out.

[ProudAmerican2]

Well, I certainly agree with that statement. But, something tells me we will disagree on what constitutes provocation.

Iraq attacks us. We respond with a massive retaliatory strike. This is our stated policy. Quite simple, really...

[bok]

I agree with him and mexico is a much bigger threat than iraq.

[ProudAmerican2]

Then when the time comes, Bush prevents evidence of why we are going into Iraq, Armey can come out and say even a skeptic like himself was convinced by Bush's evidence. We'll see.

If they had the evidence, then we would have seen it by now.

[ProudAmerican2]

Neither Gubmints or tyrants have any 'right to hold dominion', IMNSHO.

Sovereignty anyone?

[Dog Gone]

Iraq attacks us. We respond with a massive retaliatory strike. This is our stated policy.

I think you missed a few recent speeches by our President.

[headsonpikes]

Screw gubmints, God gave man dominion, not a Great Man.

[ProudAmerican2]

I think you missed a few recent speeches by our President.

My mistake. That used to be our policy.

[justshe]

Excellent point, Dog Gone.

[Dog Gone]

If they had the evidence, then we would have seen it by now.

This is not an administration that is known for disclosing more than it has to or needs to. When it's time to line up Congress and/or the UN, that would be an excellent time to reveal additional evidence.

Reveal it now before you're ready to act, and you run the risk of it becoming old news.

[joeyman]

I take it you're not going to be doing the fighting....

[justshe]

I disagree. As soon as the evidence is shown, we should be ready to attack. I think we are nearing that point. Rumsfield has already stated there is a direct connection. I trust both he and President Bush on this issue.

[MonroeDNA]

Ditto your comments.

This has to be a set up, and the liberal media can't help but to wet their diapers and broadcast it far and wide.

Then the evidence will come out, 24 hours AFTER we bomb.

[ProudAmerican2]

Screw gubmints, God gave man dominion, not a Great Man.

And we have dominion over the governments of the other 191 countries...

Good grief, spell government correctly. You sound like an idiot when you mispell government.

[HumanaeVitae]

Armey's inner paleocon just couldn't keep it's mouth shut...:-)

[HumanaeVitae]

it's=its

[RightWhale]

Armey's first step in declaring for a Presidential run in 2004

That would be the only logical reason. Several Democrats have also carved out a little war territory for their campaigns. This isn't the time for Doves, though.