Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 04:52:58 +0000, NOYB wrote:
There is no difference in the conclusions reached by the Clinton administration in 1998, and the conclusions reached by the Bush administration in March, 2003. The only difference that exists is how each administration decided to deal with the threat that all sides believed existed. Clinton signed the Iraqi Regime Change Act and fired several hundred crusie missiles at Iraq...and Bush finished the job with a coordinated air campaign and ground assault. Oh, come on, Clinton never signed an Iraqi Regime Change Act. He did sign an Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998. It's scope and funding was quite limited. Revising history isn't that easy when there is a public paper trail. http://www.fcnl.org/issues/int/sup/iraq_liberation.htm |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "thunder" wrote in message news ![]() On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 04:52:58 +0000, NOYB wrote: There is no difference in the conclusions reached by the Clinton administration in 1998, and the conclusions reached by the Bush administration in March, 2003. The only difference that exists is how each administration decided to deal with the threat that all sides believed existed. Clinton signed the Iraqi Regime Change Act and fired several hundred crusie missiles at Iraq...and Bush finished the job with a coordinated air campaign and ground assault. Oh, come on, Clinton never signed an Iraqi Regime Change Act. He did sign an Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998. It's scope and funding was quite limited. Revising history isn't that easy when there is a public paper trail. http://www.fcnl.org/issues/int/sup/iraq_liberation.htm Let's not split hairs about my capitalizing "Iraqi Regime Change Act". The Iraqi Liberation Act called for regime change...and thus became known to many as the "Iraqi regime change act". From Section 3: SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ. It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:30:00 +0000, NOYB wrote:
Let's not split hairs about my capitalizing "Iraqi Regime Change Act". The Iraqi Liberation Act called for regime change...and thus became known to many as the "Iraqi regime change act". From Section 3: SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ. It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Iraq Liberation Act of 1998'. OK, it may be splitting hairs, but there is a lot of that going around. Did GWB use the phrase "imminent threat"? Maybe not, but he used many similar terms, "grave threat", "urgent danger", etc. Did GWB link Iraq with 9/11? Perhaps not, but he did use Iraq and 9/11 together on countless occasions. Was it about WMDs, WMD programs, WMD program activities? The Liberation Act was to support dissident Iraqi groups in bringing about democracy in Iraq. It's scope *and* funding was quite limited. Nowhere did it refer to invading and overthrowing Saddam, SOB that he was. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "thunder" wrote in message news ![]() On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 06:30:00 +0000, NOYB wrote: Let's not split hairs about my capitalizing "Iraqi Regime Change Act". The Iraqi Liberation Act called for regime change...and thus became known to many as the "Iraqi regime change act". From Section 3: SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ. It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Iraq Liberation Act of 1998'. OK, it may be splitting hairs, but there is a lot of that going around. Did GWB use the phrase "imminent threat"? Maybe not, but he used many similar terms, "grave threat", "urgent danger", etc. Did GWB link Iraq with 9/11? Perhaps not, but he did use Iraq and 9/11 together on countless occasions. Was it about WMDs, WMD programs, WMD program activities? The Liberation Act was to support dissident Iraqi groups in bringing about democracy in Iraq. It's scope *and* funding was quite limited. Nowhere did it refer to invading and overthrowing Saddam, SOB that he was. It also didn't call for launching several hundred cruise missiles at Iraq either. Did you have a problem with Clinton's decision to do so? |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:12:03 +0000, NOYB wrote:
It also didn't call for launching several hundred cruise missiles at Iraq either. Did you have a problem with Clinton's decision to do so? I honestly don't know. It could be argued that in the absence of WMDs, his policies worked, but I'm of the school that military intervention is the *last* resort. I'm also of the opinion that Bush 1 sufficiently defanged the *******, and that sanctions were keeping Saddam bottled up. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General | |||
Bush Quotes | General |