Imagine if CLINTON had invaded a nation, using the excuse of "WMD"

[LynnTheDem]

and how that "WMD" must not fall into the hands of terrorists.

Imagine if CLINTON was told about 109 weapons & equipment storage sites the UN had under lock & key.

Imagine if the UN told CLINTON about those sites, in writing, several times, asking CLINTON to make sure those sites were immediately secured by US forces on their invasion.

Imagine if CLINTON promised the UN that those sites would be immediately secured, especially as the entire reason for CLINTON's invasion, CLINTON said, was to prevent the spread of any "WMD".

Imagine if CLINTON then invaded...and never bothered to order one single one of those weapons/equipment sites secured. Not one out of all 109 of them. That are now totally looted.

Imagine if the UN had had all those sites secured and monitored for years...until CLINTON came along and invaded, totally ignoring every one of those 109 sites.

Imagine that, after CLINTON caused the deaths of over 1600 US troops in the name of preventing the spread of "WMD"...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5048966,00.html

Way to go, CLINTON, you MFing asshole!

Oh wait...

[oasis]

1. Since there would be no 9/11 under Clinton, the sales job on a war

would be even more difficult.

Remember, Clinton insisted on having competent people in his administration. He would have heeded Richard Clarke's warnings on OBL.

No Con"duh" Rice to fall asleep at the wheel.

[Bouncy Ball]

2. The reich wing would have torched the White House with Clinton in it

despite the fact that the White House supposedly belongs to all of us, and not a particular president, they wouldn't have cared.

He would have been strung up by his toenails and impeached completely.

But reich wingers have no morals, they have no compunction, they are complete and total hypocrites, and doing the wrong thing is PERFECTLY OKAY as long as someone on THEIR side does it.

It's not about being right or doing good for them, it's about winning. Period.

[LynnTheDem]

5. So ya don't think the RW will do shit about BUSH and the 109 now-looted

sites in Iraq?

No, me either.

[Bouncy Ball]

6. Nope, not at all.

In fact, I'd bet my left arm they won't.

[LynnTheDem]

8. Nope I agree. They'll come up with excuses, totally missing the fact

that there is NO EXCUSE.

[Erika]

3. The Right Wing attacked Clinton from Day 1

They never accepted him as president and did everything possible to undermine him. Clinton kept us safe through containment and gave us a peace dividend. We prospered.

What has Bush given us?

[applegrove]

4. I agree. The neocons ruined their perfect little Utopian take on War.

They can never undo that. This mess is theirs. Just like Vietnam was Johnson's.

Now to shame them into participating more earnestly in humanitarian interventions.

[LynnTheDem]

7. "Now to shame them into participating more earnestly in humanitarian

interventions"???

Um NO, I don't THINK so.

[applegrove]

9. You don't think the Nato should have gone into Kosovo with the

peacekeepers and the bombings?

You don't think that they should have gone into Rwanda? You don't think that they should have gone into the WWII? You don't think that pressure and power should be brought to bear (perhaps it is) in Darfur?

That is the liberal position on War. Humanitarian reasons and in self-defense.

All other war is crap.

[LynnTheDem]

10. First of all, BUSH does NOT do "humanitarian".

Second, our troops are not trained for humanitarian interventions, they're trained to bomb the fuck out of people.

Third, Iraq was in no need of a humanitarian intervention, not by bush, not by the UN.

Fourth, bush wasn't in office during the 100 days of Rwanda.

Fifth, I don't want bush or any one of his sociopath Cartel to TOUCH another country, not for humanitarian, not for ANYTHING unless that nation is raining bombs down on us.

And by the way, humanitarian interventions are NOT WARS. So your "all other war is crap" is crap.

[applegrove]

11. There are three reasons for war it seems. I would like to get

Bush's clarification on the humanitarian issue. Because they don't seem to want to use that as a precedent. Even though it is already out there.

They'll use it in press conferences. But I want to see more action on Darfur.

[LynnTheDem]

12. There is ONE reason for WAR;

Self-defense.

[moddemny]

20. "There is ONE reason for WAR;"

"Self-defense."


Don't forget defending your friends also.

[bpilgrim]

16. there were only 2 911/TERROR & WMD.

the ONLY humanitarian reason for intervention in Iraq prior to our ILLEGAL INVASION was to END the SANCTIONS on FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE, etc.

and all the other after the fact reasons are and were BS. Do you not understand the history of our interventions in Iraq and the run up to this recent war not to mention the criminal PNAC cabal running the show now?

if not, i am VERY glad you found DU :toast:

It will give us another golden opportunity to EXPOSE them again to you and all the lurkers STARVING for information :loveya:

peace

[bpilgrim]

15. "humanitarian interventions" has been the ONLY pretext for war since WWII

fyi

also i don't think you want to encourage the neoCONs to do anymore, do you?

peace

[applegrove]

13. Link to today's Darfur Daily News: June 03, 2005 thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3780933#

[bpilgrim]

14. Clinton will serve a useful purpose as an example of why it's IMPEACHABLE

offense to LIE to weTHEpeople, let alone the rest of the world.

peace

[Sgent]

17. Bout the same

You will never convince me that Clinton's intervention was anything more than a "wag the dog". It was europes problem, europes issue, and someone explaine to me why we have to get involved.... especially right when Clinton is undergoing investigation/impeachment.

[Deja Q]

18. Google it. Be prepared for a shock.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=clinton+saddam+wmd+1998&btnG=Google+Search

Looks like he was trying to play the same game also, though to a different extent.

However, repukes in some of those links are trying to cover *'s pathetic ass. But Clinton was always an enabler.

Fuck it. It's all politics and we're all pawns in their game.

[ikojo]

19. If CLINTON had pushed the PATRIOT Act the Republicans

would not have rolled over like the Democrats did.

The Republicans would not have authorized an attack on Iraq if a Democrat sat in the White House as the Democrats did when it came to authorizing Bush to attack Iraq.

What the Republicans do better than the Democrats is act as an OPPOSITION party even when they are in charge.

What the Democrats do better than the Republicans is roll over and adopt a lighter version of the Republican agenda.

[Deja Q]

21. VERY true. The rethugs knew they'd have to get the public to blindly agree

so that's where 9/11 was allowed to happen.

There's no way Clinton could have gotten away with it, and in 1998 it's obvious he tried. (whatever is the truth, I still find it very disturbing that a brief google search revealed Clinton was doing the IDENTICAL song and dance about Saddam and WMDs in 1998.)

Again, they're professional politicians. They live in their own world. They want us to blindly trust them. But instead more and more people prefer to choose to NOT trust them. On either side. And that makes life easier for the fascists. For the rest of us gave up in the system a long time ago.