Did Clinton EVER Lie to get us involved in a War???

Internet Archive Wayback Machine ^ | 7/21/2003 | RaceBannon

[Burkeman1]

Sure I can. He ain't Clinton:)

[swheats]

Did Clinton ever lie to get us in a war?

The question is how often. I hate the comparison of Clinton and Bush on anything and I wish Sean Hannity would cut it out.

[nopardons]

Not enough. ;^)

[Outraged]

Hey, do you happen to have the info on the Clinton SOTUS where he intentionally lied about China having no nuclear warheads pointed at us when the fact was China had like 13 pointed at us?...Inquiring minds want to know.

[olliemb]

"I wonder why he allowed so many false and misleading statements prior to the new doctrine of pre-emption"

That is what I, too, was addressing. Your premise that there were many false and misleading statements, I don't agree with. What were the many false and misleading statements?

Do you really think that hBush would make all this up or intentionally mislead when everyone knows how the media is as well as the democrats reaction? Do you really think that he would put his presidency on the line and just parrot what was told him?

Why the 10+ years of UN sanctions, Clinton bombings,no fly zones, etc. if there were no weapons of mass destruction? What was the UN reacting to??

Bush is not evil nor is he dumb.Saddam is evil and dumb. He had only to show what he did with the WMD that the UN said he had. He left behind all those mass graves as his legacy. Saddam was a sponsor of terrorism. He paid the homicide bombers $25000 for each event. The Alqaeda member (forget his name) was in Bagdad getting medical care, what do you think he did with all those missing vials of nerve gas? Was the UN all wrong? There was unanimous vote against Iraq. The UN did not have the balls to put teeth in its message and take aggressive military action.

The US still can't find the anthrax killer here in the USA. Does that mean that he did not exist? No,we just have not been able to find.

If you look at all the paperwork--the multiple agencies reporting to Bush re: intelligence said the nuclear threat was real--our CIA was not sure--but all the other agencies were. Now they are all wrong and so is the British government according to you.

[olliemb]

That is what I don't understand--the 9/11 commission is upset with FBI b/c they did not pick up on the leads and before Hillary was shrilling about connecting the dots.

Now when the dots are connected, they don't like it.

[RaceBannon]

http://www.alamo-girl.com

[RDangerfield]

harpu: Drawing comparisons between i42 and W (discussions about whether or not i42 ever lied) just adds to the credibility of whether there are real similarities between i42 and W. Leave it alone - paleeze!

Amen. This constant reference to all things Clinton when Bush is 30 months into his term is making many voters and other observers ask: when does Bush take over? Is Bush so weak that Clinton is still running the show through his "holdovers?" If so, why elect Bush again. That is territory where Bush people do not want to go right now. Better to help prop up Bush than remind voters right now about those bad old days when they had jobs.
--Raoul

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.."IS it SAFE?" = HILLARY on Senate Armed Services Committee..

http://www.TheAlamoFILM.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=629

[harpo11]

Damn straight he did. Kosovo. He just started bombing the hell out of a sovereign nation. A nation that never lifted a finger against America or her allies. He killed 2,000 innocent Serbians, bombed a maternity ward, bombed out all the bridges and much of the infrastructure, left the country in an environmental nightmare, all because he said Slobo was mass murdering, Clinton and his pals in the media called it, ethnic cleansing.

So far none such fact has come up to prove Clinton was telling the truth. Should we be surprised? No, Clinton has always been and will always be a liar.

Incidentally, Saddam really was heavily into ethnic cleansing, but the leftie media and their team mates, the democrats, sure aren't moved by the scenes of women and children's bodies buried in mass graves, or the torture and rape chambers.

Haiti, big joke. Somolia, failure of a CIC to act honorably. Sudan aspirin factory, another big joke. Empty tents in Afghanistan, another whooping lie.

I'd say even his little attempt at finding a resolution to the hostilities between Israel and Palestine were nothing but photo-ops.

[CJ Wolf]

So this boils down to...I know you are but what am I?

[Eva]

What about the so-called ethnic cleansing by Milosovic, that was never verified?

[Darksheare]

You're still in denial over those castor beans, husk and all, aren't you.

[billbears]

And you're still in denial about these thousands and thousands of liters of WMD not existing as well I see

[Darksheare]

What about the chemical weapons that were not destroyed, and were still in existence when teh inspectors were kicked out in 98 or so?
THOSE are still unaccounted for.

You're heavily into defending Saddam.
And you're still in denial.
I'm sorry your boy got spanked, but that's just the way it is.
Deal with it.
Elif Air Ab Dinich.

[billbears]

So instead of providing evidence I get called names? As the accuser you are the one that must provide proof. Seeing as proof does not exist, logically I have to conclude that the arguments presented by the President are faulty

[Darksheare]

Names?
You don't know arabic?
I thought you'd know it since you support Sadman.

Just plug it into a translation proggy then.

ANd the evidence is there.
Re-read the FIRST HALF of the post.
Reading IS FUNDAMENTAL.

[billbears]

I thought you'd know it since you support Sadman.

LOL!! There you go again, calling names. But what else should I expect? I don't support Hussein but I also don't support empire and the neverending war cause that refuses to go after the actual culprits

As for the first half of your post I did read it. But I thought we as conservatives didn't support the UN. Or is it just when it suits our needs we bow to their 'all knowing wisdom'. Forget our own intelligence that tells us different. The UN, the whipping post of conservatives for decades, finally produces a document that condones a warhawks position instead of condemning it, so therefore it must be true...

[billbears]

But alas I see you're playing the dutiful liberal game, ignoring the original question choosing instead to go off on a tangent. So the question is put to you. Because Clinton lied to get the Armed Forces of these United States into a war, does that condone President Bush doing the same?

[Darksheare]

NAME CALLING?
You support him in everything you say.'
You prove it in every post.

And what part of that post did you not understand?
There were still several tons of chemical weapons left over after Desert Storm.
Some were stored in a warehouse and monitored with equipment.
THIS IS DOCUMENTED and HANS BLIX DID MENTION IT.
The inspectors were kicked out, and tehy left the chem weapons and the momnitoring equipment behind.
Fast forward a couple years.
The inspectors are back, and doing their bumbling oaf act.
The first place they go to is where the chem weapons and monitoring equipment HAD BEEN.
Now, shouldn't that have been there still IF Iraq had been honest?

Guess what, the qeapons AND the monitoring equipment were gone.
AND THOSE WEAPONS ARE STILL UNACCOUNTED FOR.

You're heavily into denial, aren't you.