On Jan 27, 10:56Â*am, Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 27, 7:47�am, "JimH" wrote:





"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

...
On Jan 26, 5:56?pm, "Eisboch" wrote:

Why didn't Big Bill do something?

Eisboch

Some non-YouTube items that might be of interest to you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n3749494.shtml

***

Weapons inspectors, on the ground in Iraq from 1991-1998 (Clinton
years. mostly) were able to verify with "90-95% certainty that Iraq
had disarmed from the proscribed weapons", according to the chief
weapons inspector at that time. Obviously this intel was available to
Clinton, as well as to his successor.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0721-02.htm

***

Bill Clinton bombed Iraq for four days in 1998, reportedly because
Hussein had suddenly refused the weapons inspectors access to certain
areas. At the time, he was *severely* criticized by the Republican
majority in congress- most of whom claimed he was "wagging the dog" to
divert attention from the impeachment proceedings. Obviously as
recently as 1998 the Republicans thought a blow job in the oval office
was a greater threat to national security than any potential weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...cripts/clinton...

***********

It is popular to criticize Clinton for "doing nothing to combat Al
Qaida" during his term in office. It is not true that Clinton, "did
nothing". On August 20 1998, he ordered a cruise missle attack on Al
Qiada training camps in Afghanistan, and in a speech warned the
American public that Al Qaida was specifically planning to attack the
US. This was also the time that Clinton bombed a pharmacuetical
factory in the Sudan suspected of making or researching chemical
weapons. You undoubtedly remember all of the Sudanese protests (echoed
loudly by Limbaugh and the Republican party) that the factory was
actually producing aspirin. Once again, the majority of Republicans
were charging that there was no actual basis for these attacks and
that Clinton was "wagging the dog" to divert attention away from his
marital infidelity and the impending impeachment.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9808/20/us.strikes.02/

**********

And finally, here's a good synopsis of �conservative reaction to the
Clinton attacks on Iraq:

http://www.conservativeusa.org/wagdog.htm

I can't avoid smiling at the outraged comments that those cruise
missles "Cost $2-million apiece!". Don't we now spend $2million every
few minutes in Iraq?

*********************

Carry on, gentlemen. Just thought I'd toss a few facts into the mix.
===============

I thought you were just blowing a gasket about political and OT posts here
Chuck. �Strange.

You're right, Jim. I get sucked in once in a while. 243 posts in this
thread and four of them are mine (including this one).

Eisboch is a pretty stand up guy who wouldn't deliberately make a
false statement to promote his political agenda. When he commented
that Big Bill didn't do anything about Iraq, I thought that perhaps it
would be a kind gesture to refresh his memory. Otherwise, I'm staying
out of this.

Let the name calling and personal attacks continue.....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you read carefully, you will find that there is actually a lot of
non-namecalling going on, and even some discussion. Personally, I
always welcome your input, just wish you would admit to being
interested and wanting to participate.