phirili
(451 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:38 PM
Original message |
Dean was in support of invading Iraq |
|
On January 31, Dean told Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times that "if Bush presents what he considered to be persuasive evidence that Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction, he would support military action, even without U.N. authorization
Snip: And then on Feb. 20, Dean told Salon.com that "if the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.
Snip: He likewise tried to claim Bush lied on Saddam, even when Russert quoted Dean from January: "I would be surprised if he didn’t have chemicals and biological weapons.”
Snip: Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, another Democratic contender, followed Mr. Kerry's lead yesterday with a similar accusation on NBC's "Meet the Press in June." "We were misled," Mr. Dean said. "The question is, did the president do that on purpose or was he misled by his own intelligence people?"
Imagine if Dean had to vote in Congress on giving the President the option to invade Iraq.
Dean should not be projected as an antiwar candidate; his statements do not support an antiwar position.
|
artr2
(863 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:40 PM
Response to Original message |
1. This is old news .. what's your point?? |
|
Just trying to stur up folks?
|
Hawkeye-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:40 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-21-03 06:41 PM by HawkeyeX
Buck stops here. Dean SUPPORTED the Iraq war only if time was given -- 60 to 90 days for the inspectors to complete the search for WMD's... So far NOT even one iota of WMD's was found.. and it's been close to a year already...
http://deandefense.org/archives/000633.html
|
neuvocat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:40 PM
Response to Original message |
not systems
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:45 PM
Response to Original message |
4. If by support you mean against you are correct. |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-21-03 06:46 PM by ezmojason
I was there last winter.
Dean's statments were anti-Iraq invasion and anti-unilateral-preemptive war in general.
Your revisionist history is foolish.
Link please.
|
Hep
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:47 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Step into the time warp! |
|
I was for invading Iraq if Saddam posed a threat. What's your point?
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. That was Dean's position and it was a sensible one. |
|
If Saddam posed a serious threat, I would have supported an invasion of Iraq too, but he didn't.
|
Skinner
ADMIN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-21-03 06:58 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I'm locking this thread. |
|
The title is deliberately misleading. And there are no sources for the "evidence" provided.
Please review the rules for starting threads in the General Discussion forum, which are posted at the top of the GD forum listing.
Skinner DU Admin
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 11:47 PM
Response to Original message |