Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Another quote from Bill Clinton

Expand Messages
  • Richard Kelly
    That very same Wall Street Journal editorial of November 18,2005 also has this Clinton quote. In June of 2004, over a year after the liberation of Iraq, Mr.
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 12, 2006
      That very same Wall Street Journal editorial of November
      18,2005 also has this Clinton quote.

      In June of 2004, over a year after the liberation of Iraq,
      Mr. Clinton had this to say to Time magazine:

      You know, I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the
      left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the
      U.N. inspections were over...After 9/11, let's be fair here, if
      you had been President, you'd think, Well, this fellow bin Laden
      just turned these three airplanes full of fuel into weapons of
      mass destruction, right? Arguably, they were super-powerful chemical
      weapons. Think about it that way.

      So, you're sitting there as President, you're reeling in the after-
      math of this, so, yeah, you want to go get bin Laden and do Afghan-
      istan and all that. But you also have to say, "well, my first respon-
      sibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this
      terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical
      and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I've
      got to do that."

      That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff
      unacounted for"


      Richard Kelly
    • Ram Lau
      ... I neither thought that going to Iraq was a wise move since the very beginning nor have any intention or motivation to defend the position the Democrats.
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 12, 2006
        > That very same Wall Street Journal editorial of November
        > 18,2005 also has this Clinton quote.

        I neither thought that going to Iraq was a wise move since the very
        beginning nor have any intention or motivation to defend the position
        the Democrats. Most Democrats in Washington are "gutless worms" to
        paraphrase Cafferty's description on Arlen Specter.

        I honestly think that the Iraq war has turned the War on Terror into a
        war that will last for generations and made Orwell's world of 1984 a
        reality.

        Ram
      • Gregory
        Ram, As we know there were many voices raised against the invasion of Iraq. One of my Democratic Senators, Russ Feingold, when voting NO on the war had this to
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 12, 2006
          Ram,

          As we know there were many voices raised against the invasion of Iraq.
          One of my Democratic Senators, Russ Feingold, when voting NO on the war
          had this to say.

          "But, Mr. President, I am increasingly troubled by the seemingly
          shifting justifications for an invasion at this time. My colleagues,
          I'm not suggesting there has to be only one justification for such a
          dramatic action. But when the Administration moves back and forth from
          one argument to another, I think it undercuts the credibility of the
          case and the belief in its urgency. I believe that this practice of
          shifting justifications has much to do with the troubling phenomenon of
          many Americans questioning the Administration's motives in insisting on
          action at this particular time.

          What am I talking about? I'm talking about the spectacle of the
          President and senior Administration officials citing a purported
          connection to al Qaeda one day, weapons of mass destruction the next
          day, Saddam Hussein's treatment of his own people on another day, and
          then on some days the issue of Kuwaiti prisoners of war.

          Mr. President, for some of these, we may well be willing to send some
          250,000 Americans in harm's way. For others, frankly, probably not.
          These litanies of various justifications -- whether the original draft
          resolution, the new White House resolution, or regrettably throughout
          the President's speech in Cincinnati -- in my view set the bar for an
          alternative to a U.S. invasion so high that, Mr. President, I'm afraid
          it almost locks in -- it almost requires -- a potentially extreme and
          reckless solution to these problems."

          I think words of this type will be the ones history will review and
          recite when observing the wrong and deadly course our country finally
          took.

          Gregory

          --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau" <ramlau@...> wrote:
          >
          > > That very same Wall Street Journal editorial of November
          > > 18,2005 also has this Clinton quote.
          >
          > I neither thought that going to Iraq was a wise move since the very
          > beginning nor have any intention or motivation to defend the position
          > the Democrats. Most Democrats in Washington are "gutless worms" to
          > paraphrase Cafferty's description on Arlen Specter.
          >
          > I honestly think that the Iraq war has turned the War on Terror into a
          > war that will last for generations and made Orwell's world of 1984 a
          > reality.
          >
          > Ram
          >
        • THOMAS JOHNSON
          Rep. Abraham Lincoln (R.Il) stood before the House of Representatives in 1848 and harshly criticized President Polk for getting us into the Mexican-American
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 14, 2006
            Rep. Abraham Lincoln (R.Il) stood before the House of
            Representatives in 1848 and harshly criticized
            President Polk for getting us into the
            Mexican-American War for political purposes, and
            conventional wisdom was that his political career was
            over because he had criticized the administration in a
            time of war.
            President McKinley was against the Spanish-American
            War but the newspapers had public opinion so solidly
            for the war that he knew he would never get re-elected
            if he opposed it. Shame on all the senators that
            supported the war, or rather gave Bush the
            authorization, but shame on the administration for
            getting us into what may turn out to be the biggest
            mistake in US history. And if that wasn't bad enough,
            handling the post-occupation with mind-boggling
            incompetence.

            Tom

            --- Gregory <greggolopry@...> wrote:

            > Ram,
            >
            > As we know there were many voices raised against the
            > invasion of Iraq.
            > One of my Democratic Senators, Russ Feingold, when
            > voting NO on the war
            > had this to say.
            >
            > "But, Mr. President, I am increasingly troubled by
            > the seemingly
            > shifting justifications for an invasion at this
            > time. My colleagues,
            > I'm not suggesting there has to be only one
            > justification for such a
            > dramatic action. But when the Administration moves
            > back and forth from
            > one argument to another, I think it undercuts the
            > credibility of the
            > case and the belief in its urgency. I believe that
            > this practice of
            > shiftinRg justifications has much to do with the
            > troubling phenomenon of
            > many Americans questioning the Administration's
            > motives in insisting on
            > action at this particular time.
            >
            > What am I talking about? I'm talking about the
            > spectacle of the
            > President and senior Administration officials citing
            > a purported
            > connection to al Qaeda one day, weapons of mass
            > destruction the next
            > day, Saddam Hussein's treatment of his own people on
            > another day, and
            > then on some days the issue of Kuwaiti prisoners of
            > war.
            >
            > Mr. President, for some of these, we may well be
            > willing to send some
            > 250,000 Americans in harm's way. For others,
            > frankly, probably not.
            > These litanies of various justifications -- whether
            > the original draft
            > resolution, the new White House resolution, or
            > regrettably throughout
            > the President's speech in Cincinnati -- in my view
            > set the bar for an
            > alternative to a U.S. invasion so high that, Mr.
            > President, I'm afraid
            > it almost locks in -- it almost requires -- a
            > potentially extreme and
            > reckless solution to these problems."
            >
            > I think words of this type will be the ones history
            > will review and
            > recite when observing the wrong and deadly course
            > our country finally
            > took.
            >
            > Gregory
            >
            > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau"
            > <ramlau@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > > That very same Wall Street Journal editorial of
            > November
            > > > 18,2005 also has this Clinton quote.
            > >
            > > I neither thought that going to Iraq was a wise
            > move since the very
            > > beginning nor have any intention or motivation to
            > defend the position
            > > the Democrats. Most Democrats in Washington are
            > "gutless worms" to
            > > paraphrase Cafferty's description on Arlen
            > Specter.
            > >
            > > I honestly think that the Iraq war has turned the
            > War on Terror into a
            > > war that will last for generations and made
            > Orwell's world of 1984 a
            > > reality.
            > >
            > > Ram
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Ram Lau
            ... But the Republicans were then predominantly the liberals. Party switching didn t really happen until Thurmond s switching in the late fifties. Just thought
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 14, 2006
              > Rep. Abraham Lincoln (R.Il) stood before the House of
              > Representatives in 1848 and harshly criticized
              > President Polk for getting us into the
              > Mexican-American War for political purposes, and
              > <snip>
              > President McKinley was against the Spanish-American
              > War but the newspapers had public opinion so solidly
              > for the war that he knew he would never get re-elected
              > if he opposed it. Shame on all the senators that

              But the Republicans were then predominantly the liberals. Party
              switching didn't really happen until Thurmond's switching in the late
              fifties. Just thought I should mention that.

              Ram
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.