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

Skip to comments.

Bush says he inherited policy of "regime change" from Clinton
Associated Press ^ | Jan. 12, 2004

Posted on 01/12/2004 4:30:17 PM PST by Alissa

Monterrey, Mexico-AP -- President Bush is declining to criticize former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, who claims in a new book that the White House planned to topple Saddam Hussein before Nine-Eleven.

Bush says he inherited a policy of "regime change" in Iraq from the Clinton administration and adopted it as his own. He says the administration was working out its policy when Nine-Eleven hit.

The president made the comments during a news conference with Mexican President Vicente Fox. Fox was an opponent of the Iraq war but congratulated the U-S for capturing Saddam.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush43; clintonlegacy; oneill; pauloneill; regimechange; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-156 next last
To: elli1
I actually heard Ari say this & I interpreted it to mean that any way that Saddam got dead (including even some ''wet work'') would be fine & dandy w/ the folks at the WH.

I seem to remember the media wetting themselves when Ari said something about the cost of one bullet ....

61 posted on 01/12/2004 8:24:39 PM PST by optimistically_conservative (A couple of guys with boxcutters in Germany posed no imminent threat until Sept. 11 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: elli1
History has been revised since then. For some reason we have a press and opposing party that rewrites over anything beyond a week old. All the facts and rational explanation will not overpower their rewrite.

That bozo ex-treasury secretary's new book bombshells are actually press conference material from three years ago. How shocking is that? I hope he credits Ari Fleisher with his material.

62 posted on 01/12/2004 8:27:49 PM PST by blackdog (I'm hooked on phonics but smoking it is not so easy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
Let's see if Clinton (who is so fond of sounding off in order to differentiate his policies and actions from W's) is going to corroborate this statement!
63 posted on 01/12/2004 8:30:19 PM PST by Floratina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: uncbob
You missed my point, I think. I don't understand why a person would not vote for Bush over ANY Democrat because of ONE ISSUE that hasn't even played out yet.

Most of those who say he's losing there vote, follow that sentence with "...if..." and then name something that hasn't even happened yet and, more than likely, is just a rumor.

I don't agree with ALL of the immigration policy he put out this week, but I am willing to see how it plays out. Call me ignorant, but that's the way I see it.

64 posted on 01/12/2004 8:31:14 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Floratina
Well, since Bush didn't say it, I doubt he'll corrobarate it.
65 posted on 01/12/2004 8:33:03 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Texasforever
"Judging from the fact that you're asking a total stranger who to vote for, I recommend you don't vote, period."

Speaking of voting . .

~ Take the FReeper Immigration Reform Poll ~

Question ...

After hearing President Bush's speech, do you approve of his immigration reform plan?

Yes
530 votes - 22%

No
1,576 votes - 65%

Undecided
291 votes - 12%

2,397 votes total; you voted "No"

66 posted on 01/12/2004 8:34:06 PM PST by Happy2BMe (Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
I voted. I voted no. So do you interpret the results af that poll as a massive move to dump Bush?
67 posted on 01/12/2004 8:36:05 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
" He's basically admitting that he considered removing Saddam before 911, but so what? He never claimed that the reason we were removing Saddam was because of 911. "

Indirectly, it WAS because of 9-11. The Attack on America caused us to wake up and realize how truly catastrophic terror attacks could be.

....And Hussein has a history of supporting a variety of terrorists ---including religious terrorists.
.....And, uniquely among the world's dictators, Saddam openly financed terrorists, and enjoyed publicly boasting about it, repeatedly.

Obviously, he had to be target #1.

68 posted on 01/12/2004 8:36:22 PM PST by cookcounty (Howard Dean, mayor of a picturesque small town in New England.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
What does that have to do with the fact that you don't know who to vote for?
69 posted on 01/12/2004 8:40:02 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
My vote is included in the majority - the 65%
70 posted on 01/12/2004 8:42:22 PM PST by Happy2BMe (Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

That bozo ex-treasury secretary's new book bombshells are actually press conference material from three years ago.

Yes...Now that you mention it, I think I remember hearing either Rumsfeld or Myers say that they took an old plan off the shelf & blew the dust off of it--that there are all sorts of war/ contigency plans laying for all sorts of scenarios laying around at the Pentagon. And that the dusty old plan was just a baseline thing that Franks looked at when he came up w/ his war plan.

71 posted on 01/12/2004 8:43:28 PM PST by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
He's basically admitting that he considered removing Saddam before 911, but so what?

Exactly where does he say that?

Q Thank you, President Fox. President Bush, is it true, as your former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill says, that you started planning for the invasion of Iraq within days of your inauguration? Do you feel betrayed? And should he have released those documents?

PRESIDENT BUSH: First, let me say, I appreciate former Secretary O'Neill's service to our country. We worked together during some difficult times. We worked together when the country was in recession, and now we're coming out of recession, which is positive news. We worked together when America was attacked on September the 11th, which changed how I viewed the world. September the 11th made me realize that America was no longer protected by oceans, and we had to take threats very seriously no matter where they may be materializing.

And, no, the stated policy of my administration towards Saddam Hussein was very clear. Like the previous administration, we were for regime change. And in the initial stages of the administration, as you might remember, we were dealing with Desert Badger, or fly-overs and fly-betweens and looks, and so we were fashioning policy along those lines. And then, all of a sudden, September the 11th hit. And as the President of the United States, my most solemn obligation is to protect the security of the American people. That's my -- to me that's the most solemn thing an American President -- or any president -- must do. And I took that duty very seriously.

And as you know, not only did we deal with the Taliban, we gave -- working through the United Nations and working through international community, we made it clear that Saddam Hussein should disarm. And like he had done with a lot of previous resolutions, he ignored the world's demands. And now he's no longer in power, and the world is better for it. The Iraqi people are better for it; America is better for it; Mexico is better for it. The world is more peaceful as a result of Saddam Hussein not being in power.

And the task at hand, Mr. President -- and he and I -- he knows this fully well -- is to make sure that the aspirations of the Iraqi people are allowed to flourish. And we'll get there. It's a tough task right now. It's hard work, but we've done hard work in the past. And a free Iraq is going to be in the world's interest.

Thank you very much.

PRESIDENT FOX: Thank you, Mr. President. Good afternoon.

END 2:45 P.M. (Local)

72 posted on 01/12/2004 8:44:03 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
As to O'Neill's motives, I truly believe that he is an earnest man who really believes that the entire Iraq affair was a waste of time.

That he is wrong, imho, is not a question that an adoring media has chosen to raise.

Bush handled the question extremely well, btw, looking generous while O'Neill came off as churlish.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

73 posted on 01/12/2004 8:44:23 PM PST by section9 (Major Kusanagi says, "Click on my pic and read my blog, or eat lead!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
Are you being deliberatly obtuse, or are you just this dense?

What does a FR poll have to do with who you will vote for for POTUS?
74 posted on 01/12/2004 8:44:54 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative

I seem to remember the media wetting themselves when Ari said something about the cost of one bullet ....

Now, just Stop It. You're reminding me of how much I miss Ari!

75 posted on 01/12/2004 8:46:42 PM PST by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: section9
Bush handled the question extremely well, btw, looking generous while O'Neill came off as churlish.

Friday evening, on the hourly radio news update, the anchor quoted an unnamed "administration official" who said, "we didn't listen to O'Neill when he was here, why should we start now?"

ROFL

76 posted on 01/12/2004 8:47:17 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: uncbob
Carl Rove will take any and all votes he can get

You just proved the point. The GOP wrote off the unappeasable "base" in 2000. The history of the "base" voting 3rd party ala Perot 1992, sitting at home in a huff in 1996 and 2million of them sitting at home or voting for PJB again in 2000 removed all doubt that the "base" was an opposition party. Bush and the GOP now owns the center right and independents due to the complete take over by the fringe left of the democrat party. That places the GOP and Bush with about 55% of the vote for 2004. California was the first test of that new base with a moderate Republican wining a landslide against both a red meat conservative and a flaming liberal. Sorry guys but you can demand all you want but the "my way or the hi-way base" is on the hi-way with the GOP looking at them in the rear view mirror. You have only yourselves to blame.

77 posted on 01/12/2004 8:48:10 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Hey!

I was just hanging out over at LePer.org, and they can't seem to make up their mind whether it's you or me posting under the name "Man In The White Coat".

LOL!!

I tested Freddy, and just dropped the phrase "man in the white coat" on a response to Jim, and they're all jumping up and down over there claiming that they have "proof" that it's me.

If I do this often enough, dumbass Neil will ban every new member that the ankle biters think is me.
78 posted on 01/12/2004 8:48:29 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Gift Is To See The Trout.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
And as the President of the United States, my most solemn obligation is to protect the security of the American people. That's my -- to me that's the most solemn thing an American President -- or any president -- must do. And I took that duty very seriously.

And as the President of the United States, I, Bill Clinton, think to protect the security of the American people is a joke. What we need to do is tell everyone we are ok and find some more women to hit on, and ya know I take the pursuit of women very seriously.

79 posted on 01/12/2004 8:48:30 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
What's funny about these people is their insistence on calling themselves "the base".

Last I checked, the base of anything could not possibly be it's narrowest point.
80 posted on 01/12/2004 8:49:58 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (The Gift Is To See The Trout.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-156 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