"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
So all N. Korean nuclear weapon research sat dormant for 6 years, eh?


Let me put it this way... Did the N.Koreans unapologetically build atoms
bombs while Clinton was President?

Yes. The difference was that they hid it the entire time, and the Clinton
administration took them on their word.

No. Did they do so while George Bush Jr was President? Yes.

They just continued doing what they were doing.


Apparently you draw from these facts that Clinton failed and Bush
succeeded.




... Saddam continued to aid and abet terrorists

There is no proof that Saddam Hussein has ever had any links whatever to
anti-US terrorism. The White House has said so many times, when will you
get with the program?



There's plenty of proof. He paid the families of terrorist suicide
bombers in Israel.

And that is anti-US terrorism? Remember too, that there is no proof that
Saddam ever actually paid his bounty, there is more evidence that he used
this offer as a PR tool to increase his "street cred" in the Arab world.


... He harbored terrorists like Abu Nidal and Ramzi Yousef.

Yeah, back in the Reagan Administration... I guess that's why Don Rumsfeld
was such buddies with him back in those days...

Ramzi Yousef bombed the WTC in 1993.


... His intelligence agents met with al Zarqawi and Mohammed Atta.
That's all what you'd call "proof".

Actually, that meeting is now believed to have never taken place.

Believed by whom? You? Democrats?


And if it did take place, the result was the Saddam refused to give any
funds or training to Al-Queda. Not that fundamentalist Al-Queda would have
been eager to buddy up to a brutally secular Arab ruler anyway, but hey
let's ignore that little inconvenient fact...



... commit genocide against his own people

Is this our business? We don't interfere in other countries that carry
out far worse genocides.


Sure we do. Maybe not all, but a lot of them.

Like the former Yugoslavia, right? Odd how it's conveniently forgotten
that Republicans fought intervention tooth & nail, then railed at Clinton
for not intervening sooner.




... and threaten his neighbors.

Yep, the first President Bush told him it was OK to invade Kuwait,


You've been spending too much time on liberal conspiracy web pages.

Really? I guess reality is a liberal conspiracy, then.

From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War
** * ** quote ** * **
In late July, 1990, as negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait stalled, Iraq
massed troops on Kuwait's borders and summoned American ambassador April
Glaspie for an unanticipated meeting with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
Two transcripts of that meeting have been produced, both of them
controversial. According to the transcripts, Saddam outlined his
grievances against Kuwait, while promising that he would not invade Kuwait
before one more round of negotiations. In the version published by The New
York Times on September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop
buildup, but went on to say:

But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
the late '60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen
to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using
any suitable methods via [Chadli] Klibi [then Arab League General
Secretary] or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these issues
are solved quickly.

Some have interpreted these statements as signalling a tacit approval of
invasion, although no other evidence of this has been presented. Although
the State Department did not confirm the authenticity of these
transcripts, US sources say that she had handled everything "by the book"
(in accordance with the US's neutrality on the Iraq-Kuwait issue)
** * ** end quote ** * **

Now, that was rather long, NOBBY, and I don't expect you to actually grasp
all of it. The key point is that the US ambassador told Saddam personally
that the US didn't have a problem with his invasion plans.


You're full of **** on this issue. The idea that the US would give tacit
approval to the invasion of Kuwait...and then send 600,000 troops to the
region to toss them out less than a year later flies against any and all
logic. You'd have to be out on the farthest fringe of conspiracy nuts to
even consider such a scenario. And your proof that this occurred? The New
York Times. Puh-leaze.










and sold him weapons (including WMDs) to fight Iran.


Nope. Bush wasn't President when those weapons went to Iraq.

Really? But he was certainly Vice President, nyet? And didn't those
weapons sales continue until right before the start of Gulf War 1?

WMD sales continued until right before the start of the Gulf War? That's
news to me. You sure are reading from some funny history books. Do you
find those in the Fiction section at Barnes and Noble?




... And al Qaeda grew emboldened by Clinton's withdrawal of troops from
Somalia.

???

I thought they were all PO'd because of US troops on Saudi Arabian soil,



That's not what emboldened them. Read bin Laden's 1996 Fatwah:

" But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous
propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of
the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force,
including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However,
when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American
Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying
disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton
appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge ,
but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been
disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and
weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every
Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations "

You agree with Osama Bin Laden?

Yes. We were disgraced and withdrew...and consequently appeared impotent
and weak to the Muslim world. Did you see it happen another way?