Skip to comments.
Here We Go Again: Saddam Hussein has said "unconditional" before (White House Press Release)
NRO ^
| 9/18/2002
Posted on 09/18/2002 8:45:57 PM PDT by Utah Girl
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
1
posted on
09/18/2002 8:45:57 PM PDT
by
Utah Girl
To: Utah Girl; *Bush Doctrine Unfold; randita; SierraWasp; Carry_Okie; okie01; MJY1288; socal_parrot; ..
Bush Doctrine Unfolds :
To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below: |
|
click here >>> |
Bush Doctrine Unfold |
<<< click here |
|
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here) |
To: Utah Girl
What I'm suspecting is that I'm hearing bullcrap from both Saddam Hussein and from the White House. The resulution is simple. Take up Hussein's agreement on inspections. If we are barred at the door from inspecting a suspicious area, dial in a cruise missile and blow whatever it is up within 20 minutes. The ticket is cancelled right there. It should have been that way from minute one.
Saddam wants to be a recalcitrant hot shot. Bush wants a war and a crisis to puff his chest about.
3
posted on
09/18/2002 9:07:58 PM PDT
by
RLK
To: Utah Girl
I would have to say, "enuf said!" Thanks for the post.
To: Utah Girl
The letter says we can only inspect military sites, not hospitals or schools.
Guess UNCONDITIONAL has a different meaning to Iraq!
5
posted on
09/18/2002 9:33:37 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
To: Utah Girl; weikel; hchutch; PsyOps
"Saddam is a fool and naive....he is more foolish than I thought...."
![](http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/image1.nsf/ae82f18a8e1b160b852568ba007e7e5e/40b132d2e76071a085256b4c006fb9b9/$FILE/goinglowres.jpg)
"FEAR IS OUR ALLY" "The Regional US Special Force Commanders will now have control over these Iraqi territories....FEAR will keep the Republican Guards in line.....FEAR of the Highway of Death retaliations....."
To: CyberAnt
SO!!! I wasn't the ONLY one to notice!!!! As soon as GW saw that he must have burst out LAUGHING!!!! Only a FOOL would say that wasn't a ploy!!!!
To: Roger_W_Isom
Actually, if you go to WhiteHouse.gov and read the list of offences by Iraq, the word UNCONDITIONAL appears many, many times. However, upon further reading, you find the same CONDITIONAL approach each time.
If Iraq thinks this will work with GW, he's sadly mistaken. I agree with George Will - Sadaam thinks he's still dealing with an x42 type, and he has no idea what he's in for.
8
posted on
09/18/2002 11:49:09 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
To: RLK
You are so wrong about Bush - I cannot tell you how far off you are.
As for Sadaam. The White House already knows the letter from Iraq said there was a condition to the inspections. We can only inspect military sites, not hospitals or schools. It never was UNCONDITIONAL. Kofi LIED!
Of course, that would pretty much tell us that hospitals and schools are where Sadaam will hide his stuff. We CAN'T bomb it ... the hospitals and schools are filled with innocent people. We know that ... and so does Sadaam.
Also ... even if we could call in a strike on a location they would not let us inspect ... what happens to the inspectors who are still there??
Your logic and your perceptions are way off the beaten path. You can disagree with GW if you want to, but don't make snide remarks about his character when you have nothing to back it up.
9
posted on
09/18/2002 11:55:45 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
The Peanuts cartoon of Lucy holding the football - and promising Charlie Brown she won't pull it away, this time - comes to mind.
This time Charlie ain't buyin it.
10
posted on
09/19/2002 12:00:31 AM PDT
by
D-fendr
To: RLK
= Iraqi Hostage Crisis.
No thankyou. Bush ain't falling for the ploy. War before the end of this year.
To: D-fendr
The Peanuts cartoon of Lucy holding the football - and promising Charlie Brown she won't pull it away, this time - comes to mind. Great idea for a political cartoon! Everyone remembers that image so the idea would be immediately clear.
12
posted on
09/19/2002 12:07:51 AM PDT
by
Dianna
To: CyberAnt
You can disagree with GW if you want to, but don't make snide remarks about his character when you have nothing to back it up.
---------------------------------
A few years back on, I think May 27, I happen to remember a presidential candidate debate between McCain, Bush, and Alan Keyes. Bush and NcCain spent a major proportion of the time arguing over who was putting nasty campain literature on whose windshields so as to avoid talking about serious issues. There was demand to force drug companies to produce medicine of demanded types at prices people arbitrarily wanted to pay. Dr. Keyes brought up the constitutional issue of involuntary servitude relative to this. Bush and McCain drowned Keyes out and laughed him off the stage. At that point it was clearly demonstrated who the bums were.
As far as I'm concerned Bush has neither character nor intelligence. You can agrue with that from your level of understanding, but it won't change my evaluation.
13
posted on
09/19/2002 12:13:08 AM PDT
by
RLK
To: RLK
I don't trust Bush. I don't believe he's competent, honest, or intelligent. Period. Neither did I like McCain or Owlgore.
14
posted on
09/19/2002 12:15:47 AM PDT
by
RLK
To: RLK
As far as I'm concerned Bush has neither character nor intelligence. You can agrue with that from your level of understanding, but it won't change my evaluation. That says more about you character that it does about Bush's. I won't comment on your intelligence until I see some.
To: Texasforever
I'll stand with what I said.
16
posted on
09/19/2002 12:23:08 AM PDT
by
RLK
To: Senator_Palpatine
"General Franks, prepare your troops."
"Saddam is as clumsy as he is stupid."
17
posted on
09/19/2002 6:38:16 AM PDT
by
hchutch
To: RLK
"my level of understanding"
Is that statement anything like "you're too stupid to understand".
Typical liberal - reduced to name calling.
And ... for whatever it's worth, I saw that debate and there is no way your candidate was laughed off the stage.
18
posted on
09/19/2002 7:18:11 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
To: CyberAnt
Is that statement anything like "you're too stupid to understand".
-----------------------
It's a combination of unwillingness, and incapability to examine anything beyond superficiality.
I notice you don't answer why Bush, as well as McCain, refused to address the legitimate constitutional issue Keyes brought up during the debate.
Oh, wait a minute. I know what's coming. The all purpose answer used to deflect serious questions. "First, you gotta win."
19
posted on
09/19/2002 9:55:46 PM PDT
by
RLK
To: RLK
Excuse me ... is there some reason you are blaming me for Key's poor performance?
I personally don't care for Mr. Keys; but to each his own. If you like him, be my guest. But don't try to blame me because he didn't do well.
I have been a Bush supporter since before most people. He's not perfect. There are things he has done in the last 2 years which I don't agree with.
The danger is people try to throw the baby out with the bath water. Even if there are a few things I don't agree with GW about, I'm not going to pull my support over ONE issue.
20
posted on
09/19/2002 10:14:47 PM PDT
by
CyberAnt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 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