Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush says he inherited policy of "regime change" from Clinton

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 09:48 PM
Original message
Bush says he inherited policy of "regime change" from Clinton
http://www.kplctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1597608

January 12, 2004

Monterrey, Mexico-AP -- President Bush is declining to criticize former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, who claims in a new book that the White House planned to topple Saddam Hussein before Nine-Eleven.

Bush says he inherited a policy of "regime change" in Iraq from the Clinton administration and adopted it as his own. He says the administration was working out its policy when Nine-Eleven hit.


Funny, Collin Powell said the same thing just before the invasion last March. However, his spin on this policy is in the totally opposite direction.


Powell Acknowledges Iraqi Regime Change as a Goal of U.S. Policy

08 March 2003

SECRETARY POWELL: The previous American administration, President
Clinton and his colleagues in that administration, also had a similar
policy of regime change, which was adopted in 1998 and, frankly, was
also endorsed by the United States Congress at that time. And the
reason that policy was adopted because it was thought that's the only
way you're going to be able to get disarmament, because this regime
will not do it on its own, it will never change its spots, so to
speak. And so regime change became American policy.
We inherited it, looked at it, and said this is still sensible. But we
have no illusions about the nature of this regime or the nature of its
leader, Saddam Hussein. And do we believe that the Iraqi people would
be better off with a different leader? Do we believe the region would
be better off without a Saddam Hussein? Sure we do. But our principal
objective, and the reason we brought it to the UN, was to eliminate
weapons of mass destruction. We never brought regime change into the
UN.


Even funnier is the fact that the PNAC wrote a letter to Clinton in Jan. 1998, urging him to change his policy because it was not succeeding. They told him, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. From what I heard, Clinton tore this letter up after he read it.


http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

<snip>

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.



So once again, Bu$hler and Co are proving that they are so full of it, they can't even keep their own bs straight anymore.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sagan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Pa-the-tic


Chimpy also inherited a strategy of going after Osama, and he chucked that right out the window so Crisco Johnnie could get his jollies going after porn.

Chimpy also inherited a strategy of a balanced budget and jobs for Americans and we all know what happened to that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeunderdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
70. Apparently he didn't inherit the policy of not leveling countries
to accomodate your whims. Even if Clinton had agreed with the regime change, he understood the concept of illegal wars and used responsible judgement. Bush chose to lie about it under oath.

This week alone:

Colin Powell admits no Al Queda connection
Bush admits to policy of regime change
All remaining weapons inspectors "quietly withdrawn" from Iraq

Where are the impeachment headlines?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudnclear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Hey, didn't this administration change all the policies of the last admin?
this is so pathetic. It is beneath what should be the "dignity" of leader of the most powerful nation on earth. Bush is a fool and a dolt who sits in this seat of power based on privilege alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingyouth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. Too bad he didn't inherit other Clinton "policies"
Like peace and prosperity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jazzgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. They only take credit for the Clinton policies that they can
Edited on Mon Jan-12-04 10:29 PM by Jazzgirl
twist to their advantage. They twisted this policy all the way to war. As a matter of fact, they twisted so out of context it makes me want to
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
3. BLAMING CLINTON FOR IRAQ?!?!?!
I-I-I-I can't even type.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ochazuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. I know! It's that funny.
We're into the looking glass here, people!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #21
40. Beyond the looking glass
GW Bush is looking more and more like a poster child for an anti-drug PSA.

"Drugs can make you lose your grip on reality. Drugs can make you stupid. Don't Do Drugs"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #40
56. Please read this!!!
I saved this post from GD - It details a person's view of junior non-stop. It is great!!

God Bless Our Courageous President.........
george, you're a son of a bitch You're a bastard. You're a jerk. You're a traitor. and dictator.also a
retard and an embarrassment. and a drunken, drug addled punk. You're a sissy, mamma's boy, and
you're dumber than your daddy. You're a wimp like him too. your mom must be a real bitch to
have raised up a bunch of leeches and parasites like she did.she's more of a man than you or your
dad together, and that's not a compliment. You're a liar of the worst kind, and you're a two face.
you are not a godly man at all, but a hypocrite of rare distinction. you will go down in history as a
failed moron like your dad, only worse. you've never read a real book in your life. you were an F
student who got a C from your daddy's contributions to yale. You're a draft dodger and a
deserter. You're a blowhard prick, and you can't understand reporter's questions. you've never had
a real job, and wouldn't make it past one month if you did have one. you'd be fired as an
incompetent. you've had everything handed to you, and you don't even appreciate what you've
got. You're a snob, and an inbred effete fop. plus you have a stupid face. you look like an ape, and
when you talk, you talk like an ape. you don't have any real ideas in your head, and you have no
knowledge of the world other than what your told by your babysitters that your dad hired to
surround you. you'd lose a debate with a 12 year old.you're vile and insipid. mundane and
dimwitted. You're the dullest knife in the bush drawer. when god was handing out brains you
thought he said trains and stood there waiting. you are against a woman's right to choose, but you
had one of your staffers pay for your girlfriends abortion. you snorted up half of peru and you
smuggled drugs by the ton. you drank a river of jack daniels and you lied about being sober. you
stole the presidency with your father's help and you skated through your whole life on your last
name. you knew 9-11 was coming and you went to hide on the pig farm to be prepared for it, and
didn't warn the victims. you let them die by the thousands and then stood there at ground zero
playing the hero. you promised you'd get the perps dead or alive and then you utterly abandoned
the hunt. you are a whore of the sleaziest kind, and you worship manna, not jesus. you defile the
name of christ, and you pretend to be a religious man. you know jesus wouldnt' bomb babies, but
you tell the easily fooled born agains that lie.you talk bad about hitler, but it was hitler and your
grandpa prescott that made your family billionaires. you took money from the bin ladens to help
your oil company and then you couldn't find oil in texas. you stole money from retirees and
laughed all the way to the bank. you hugged the widows of soldiers and 9-11 victim's families
knowing that you could have saved them. you are a heartless, cold, reptilian cocksucker.you have
no soul, yet you attend church and carry a bible around.you stink, you suck, and you make us all
sick. you will be remembered as the worst president the nation ever suffered through, and your
name will be synonymous with failure and greed and ineptitude. you have invited the world's ire,
and hatred.you have disgraced all the founding fathers and every citizen who ever gave their life
for democracy and liberty. You're a confederate asshole and a racist. you can barely hide your fear
and loathing of black people. you pissed on the bill of rights and you shit on the constitution. your
name will be scraped off monuments and your statues will be toppled and broken up into gravel.
you've brought down hellfire on innocent people without so much as an apology. you now
prepare to bring suffering and agony to millions all for your trillionaire, warpig pals.there is oil in
your veins instead of blood. i hope your happy george. your a real son of a bitch. fuck you. fuck
your dad, and fuck your mom. fuck your nazi grandpa and your effeminate giddy father the c.i.a.
monster. fuck your brother jeb, and fuck your ugly wife. fuck your whole family.you have fucked
america and now america is saying fuck you george. kiss my bitter patriotic ass you son of a bitch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #40
72. Drugs or Mad Cow Disease?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Funny...
I don't remember Clinton changing any regimes while in office. This is beyond pathetic. When will these losers stop hiding their shortcomings behind Clinton?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ochazuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. Pathetic! That's it! That's the word.
Fits these administration loosers to a T.

We live in a pathetocracy. Spread the word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formernaderite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #4
38. Oh, there was a war conflict ripe with regime change
Well there was that little Kosovo War conflict...a military action I and countless others on the left never supported. I remember alot of dems who were pretty gung-ho about that war. Funny how we aligned ourselves with the terrorist KLA faction. Once the administration decided to go in, keeping Milosovic around afterwards was not even a consideration. Let's see....he's where now? Sitting in a cell.
Don't get me started.....and sorry, I'm not sure Clinton wouldn't have moved on Iraq given the right circumstances...remember he's from the DLC Lieberman faction of the party.
Bottom line...alot of us would like to see a democrat elected from the democratic wing of the democratic party... finally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #38
60. What a load
"Regime change" doesn't mean "military invasion". Clinton preferred working with economics to war -- just as bloody, perhaps, in the long run, but man, are you ever true to your name. :eyes:

Why don't you try saying it again, "there's no difference between Gore and *". Huh? No one's taking you seriously anymore? Fancy that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ferretherder Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. Ya' know, come to think of it,...
...I was watching a replay of the Hindenburg disaster the other night and I started thinkin', 'hey, I bet Clinton's name is all over this!' And then, I was watchin' this TLC special on the extinction of the dinosaurs and I found myself sayin''Ya' know, this is classic Clinton methodology to the core!' And another time, I was listenin' to this old-time radio broadcast of the Mercury Theater production of 'War of the Worlds', and guess what?...I found myself thinkin', 'well, by God, if this ain't got Clinton's MO written all over it, well I just don't know!'

Ah been trahin' ta tell mister Bush that that dirty so-and-so Clinton is bahahnd uh helluva lot more'n people thank!

Hay! Whutsa' happnin' ta' mah brain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kat45 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. It won't be long before they mention Clinton's penis. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MASSAFRA Donating Member (461 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. Even if Clinton
thought that regime change was good for Iraq, Clinton did not have a pre-emptive strike policy in place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salinen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Hopefully O'neill will have the same effect
as Clintons penis. I like that word "Impeachment"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
young_at_heart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Did Clinton plan to "take out" any dictators on Day 1?
Somehow I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
8. There's no doubt about it!
Bill Clinton's behind it all. He's probably guffawing loudly from his hideout in a mountain right now!


Putting a mental whammy on Bush, without his ever knowing it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonAndSun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. Great sig line....
the difference between the two is staggering. Bill is telling AWOL, "you're gonna f**k it up, aren't you?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
10. Bottom line: Bush committed an impeachable offense!
Bush planned for a war of aggression against Iraq since before the day he took the oath of office. Bush lied to the nation and the world. Bush conspired with others to lie to the nation and the world. Bush lied to Congress on the State of the Union Address.

Bush is now trying to use security as a pretext to suppress from the public documents bearing on his guilt.

Bush committed an impeachable offense, and Democrats should file for Articles of Impeachment!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
12. Unbelievable!
He made this aggressive, pre-emptive attack strategy the hallmark of his presidency. Now that its starting to backfire on him, he's going to blame Clinton? Give me a break!

Fuck you chimpy! I registered 7 more new voters today. Each and every one a new Democrat. Ha! Ha! ha! ha! ha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #12
53. I got four!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Holly Donating Member (306 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Now I've heard it all
Bush* is blaming Clinton for waging an immoral war. The difference unless Bush*(ugh) has failed to notice...Clinton didn't launch an invasion, that has killed so many. Unbelievable.I actually feel sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flamingyouth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
14. Bush inherited a policy of Always Blaming Clinton
That's what it seems like to me. :shrug:

Does this loser *ever* take any responsibility for *anything*???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WealthAndDemocracy Donating Member (128 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. That about sums it up
He blames someone else, then someone else bails him out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
16. Yeah, Right---------------Lying Fucking Asshole
Everybody KNOWS that the Shrubbite puppeteers policy from DAY ONE was A.B.C., Anything But CLINTON, that the Shrubbites totally IGNORED the GORE Report, the HART-RUDMAN Report, and the briefing from the outgoing Administration, that the Shrubbite policy was ANTHING BUT CLINTON, A.B.C.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
isbister Donating Member (902 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
17. September 11th changed everything...
Doesn't that sound familiar? Wasn't that the previous excuse... after no WMD and no Al qaeda/September 11th links were found?

Anybody got a scorecard? I'm getting all of these mixed up... oh, that's the idea, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gate of the sun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
18. when all else fails
blame it on Clinton.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
22. OK, so if "regime change" in Iraq was originally Clinton's
idea, then I guess the Freepers will now be anti-Iraq war? After all, all things Clinton are evil, right? How can they possibly support a policy that Clinton devised and Chimpy was helpless to do anything else but follow? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Freeps can now follow the Chimp to the gallows
Sure hope they won't get by with this again. Big Dog did not do this sinful thing. Not only karma, but a nice fiery place waiting for this presidential impersonator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
24. What happened to the conservative belief in personal responsibility?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. That only applies to Dems. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WealthAndDemocracy Donating Member (128 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
25. I thought we went to war because of 911 and the WMD's
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
number6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. me too ...
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
27. Actually, what he meant to say was....
..."I inherited it from Clinton's DICK!" :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
31. I pointed that part out on the Yahoo boards.
Bush is such a fucking loser!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dudeness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
32. Clinton did however order missile strikes on Iraq..
..these took place on june 27 1993 and september 3 and 4 1996..causing civilian casulties..these were fairly strong messages to the iraqis that they were still under the US gun..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
33. What a fucking liar
just as predicted here at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
34. But what about the Hart-Rudman study?
what about the on-the-record reports that the Clinton administraion said that Bush's biggest issue, the one that would take up most of its time, was TERRORISM???

Saddam was a dictator, a shit, but he was not connected to Osama and Al Q terrorism.

If they want to try to spin their way out of this, reporters better step up and ask those questions, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
35. Bush attacking Clinton reminds me of the spanish fable Don Quixote!!!
In his hallucination,
Clinton has now turned into his windmill enemy.

He just ain't there.........hello????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
36. * is nothing but a lying sack of sh*t.
I hope and pray the American people are able to see this for the pathetic ruse that it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-04 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
37. I guess Clinton "captured Saddam" in that case!!!
!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
39. I feel honored to burst the bubble here folks
Having spent my time in the military Honorably and still not made the switch from Green to Democratic party which makes me a non-flier

Greens on No-Fly list? How long before it's you?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1009202


I would like to say on behalf of all the millions that have been killed that that "regime change" has been going on longer than most people living have been on this earth, wake up and smell the coffee already

Los Angeles Independent Media Center

Original article is at http://la.indymedia.org/news/2002/11/22725.php
basic stats for US imperialism
by cecil • Sunday November 24, 2002 Sunt 04:18 PM

a reference guide for activists.
Basic Statistics for United States Imperialism
Contents:
1—list of interventions for “regime change”
2—list of air warfare campaigns
3—list of client states
4—list of states held by debt-leverage imperialism
5—list of foreign base hosts
6—list of murder toll
7—list of unsavory rightists supported
8—list of perverted international bodies
9—list of interventions for opposing liberation
10—list of interventions pre-1941
11—list of covert operations
12—list of front organizations
13—list of low intensity conflicts
14—list of proxy wars
15—list of foreign policy doctrines
16—list of propaganda campaigns
Bibliography
Useful Periodicals
Relevant Hyperlinks

1. Chronological list of interventions, with the purpose of effecting “regime change,” attempted or materially supported by the United States—whether primarily by means of overt force (OF), covert operation (CO), or subverted election (SE):
a) OF and SE imply, necessarily, prior and continuing CO.
b) OF = directly applied state terrorism by the United States repressive apparatus i.e. the Departments of War/Defense, Energy, Treasury, and State. N.B. the formation of the National Security Council (1947) and the Office of Homeland Security (2002).
c) CO = reconnaissance, classical coups d’etat, legal harassment, disinformation (through media, legal, NGO, student, labor, and other front groups), bribery, sabotage, assassination, proxy warfare, running ratlines for fascist émigré groups, and assorted
(snip)

It's about 43 pages in a thumbnail outline just for refreshers

http://www.awolbush.com/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
41. "Regime Change" is NOT the same as....
...Invasion, Occupation, Suppression, Confiscation and Privitization of Iraqi Assets.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lowflyer10 Donating Member (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. An tailor-made answer.
Amerkuns will go "oh, yeah. That's right." and move on. Why are we getting wrapped up in things that won't get traction. Focus on things that will dig in.
How about the revived drug trade in Afghanistan (which, oh by the way, is financing the Taliban resurgence). Leave Iraq alone for now. The Iraq thing will manifest itself sooner or later. Patience. Quit predicting the future--let it happen. Wait for the facts. Don't get set up for an October surprise by complaining about WMDs not being found or Osama is still on the loose. Those are baseless arguments in Nov if they come to pass prior to then. FOCUS!!!!!
Afghanistan. Not much reporting on that. More time has passed with Afghanistan. More facts are available. Quit living on false hopes....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lowflyer10 Donating Member (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Sorry, meant to respond to original thread..... Newbie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. nonetheless...
you have a valid point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Gardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 06:31 AM
Response to Reply #44
51. Welcome to DU!
I was a Newbie not so long ago myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
42. what a wicked web bush weaves when pacticing to DECIEVE
I'm trying to use the words Deception , Deciet and Decieve ,
My new project .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
schultzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
45. Clinton refused the PNAC letter. Bush is a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
47. Clinton's penis, he means. rove is spinning wildly to create distractions
right now... with O'Neil revealing bushco's true colors and bush coming up surprisingly short in the polls, rove will make bush say and do ANYTHING that will distract and deceive the American people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #47
57. Clinton’s penis is up to it’s old tricks.
The Clenis that won’t go away. It stalks the halls of the white house and interferes with everything. They’ve asked it nicely to leave but it refuses to take a hint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fridays Child Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 04:00 AM
Response to Original message
48. DoYouEverWonder, I don't know if Clinton tore up the PNAC letter...
...but if you read their subsequent letter to Lott and Gingrich, you'll find that they complained about Clinton's rejection of their plan:

-snip-

Dear Mr. Speaker and Senator Lott:

On January 26, we sent a letter to President Clinton expressing our concern that the U.S. policy of "containment" of Saddam Hussein was failing. The result, we argued, would be that the vital interests of the United States and its allies in the Middle East would soon be facing a threat as severe as any we had known since the end of the Cold War. We recommended a substantial change in the direction of U.S. policy: Instead of further, futile efforts to "contain" Saddam, we argued that the only way to protect the United States and its allies from the threat of weapons of mass destruction was to put in place policies that would lead to the removal of Saddam and his regime from power. The administration has not only rejected this advice but, as we warned, has begun to abandon its own policy of containment. (emphasis added)

more at http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqletter1998.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #48
61. Thanks for the additional info
at least it's documented that Clinton rejected their brand of insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malva Zebrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 06:04 AM
Response to Original message
49. He is wild and desperate now--Clinton?
Edited on Tue Jan-13-04 06:20 AM by Marianne
laughable. --hear that hissing sound? That inflated pouch he displayed on the USS Lincoln sprung a leak and suddenly is the size of a walnut fast becoming a pea.

This macho man stunt began a subtle shift in the perceptions being reported about photo op big bully, Bush.

Roundly criticized for his strutting about like a preening peacock, it seemed that Act 1, was a big Rove flop. The situation further deteriorated when he blamed the sailors for the"Mission Accomplished" banner-just as he now tries to blame Clinton for his own murderous impulsive drives to bring this country to war.

He did that twice; both initiatives, miserable failures resulting in the deaths of thousands and thousands

--the publicity began to shift against him--that carrier stunt and strut cost him some loss of credibility--followed by the urban legend attempt with the next stunt to fly to the hangar in Bagdhad on Thanksgiving, and serve a stone cold, culinary display turkey to the hand picked adoring troops who were cheering him loudly.

Urban legend , mythmaking, secrecy and mysticism surrounding this stunt, was that he boarded AF1, streaked off into the sunset on a mission, a holy sort of a mission , disguised in a baseball cap, along with his "normal looking" partner, Condoleeza Rice, but, an added embellishment could not be resisted-- AF1 was recognized by a British Air pilot as it streaked by him on it's way to Bagdhad. !

I think he is a Humpty Dumpty at this point and no one is going to try to stop his fall. He is scrambled eggs along with toast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnitaR Donating Member (958 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
50. Guess Clinton had a map dishing out the damn oil too?
Go fuck yourself George! You are a disgrace.

You prance around like big macho cowboy in your flight suit but the minute someone dares question you... you hide behind everyone else.

Is this country so blind and stupid that they don't care about what he has done?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
52. Check out this five minute video out and then pass it on!
Edited on Tue Jan-13-04 07:13 AM by 0007
http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html

See and hear and make up your mind if Clinton had anything to do with junior's Iraq plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BiggJawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
54. He "inheirited" a huge whomping SURPLUS from the Big Dog, too....
And where did that go?

Where are those "Cooking with Cat Food" recipes I had from the Reagan Era?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ikojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
55. Is there nothing this administration will not
blame on Clinton?

Oy vey! Yeah I am sure Clinton supported overthrowing Saddam Hussein, it is not outside the realm of possibility, however he would have gone through the UN and not done it unilaterally.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DerekGD Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
58. If Clinton was behind the invasion
does that mean the Republicans will no longer attack Democrats for being weak on terrorism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
59. The obvious difference in 'policies' is that Clinton didn't invade...
...and occupy Iraq against the will of the entire world.

- The Bushies just don't 'get' that everyone now knows that Iraq didn't present ANY kind of danger to our country. That's where their whole bullshit story falls apart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
62. US policy quite often includes a wish list
Yeaht he US policy was that we would prefer if Saddam was not in power just as we had policy on North Korea as well as every country and region around the world.

A half century of US policy towards North Korea included wanted a democracy to replace the dictatorship and keeping the threat of military action on the table. Clinton used the threat of military action (which comes is many forms) front and center in negotiations on their nuclear power program. No reasonable assessment thinks that that combination NK would have at least 100 warheads by now had it not been handled in that way. W has reversed 50+ years of policy towards NK on at least one (if not two) occassions by promising non-aggression.

So US policy towards Iraq was set but HOW you attempt to implement it offers several options and to varying degrees. A full military occupation is the extreme and as we have seen stretches the military to dangerous levels and in occupying an entire country commits the military for the foreseeable future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. An honest assessment, I wish somebody would do a poll asking,,,,,,,,
What percentage of US population, in their own opinion, as a whole, runs around with Rose colored glasses on. At least Clinton knew what the State department was for and how to use it. Not that I agreed with most of it, but he did use the tools at his disposal correctly, which saved a lot of wear and tear on everybody, unlike *
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #63
64. Thanks
you are right just because you have a stated objective doesn't mean you have to attack or go all out overextending yourself and showing your hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddogesq Donating Member (915 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
65. Like a spoiled child, Bush continues to blame mistakes on others.
What the fuck was Clinton supposed to do, have a nicey-nicey policy towards Saddam? Unfortunately, the Bushbots will only understand "it's Clinton's fault," because they are the only three words in the English language they can accurately recite on a daily basis. When presented with the concept that the ENDS don't justify the MEANS, the Bots look totally bewildered. Forget about postwar plans concepts either. These Bush lovers are just too stupid to even waste time thinking about.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
66. Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 passed by Congress and signed by Clinton
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d105:1:./temp/~bdOyIc:@@@X|/bss/d105query.html

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.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c105:4:./temp/~c10539LBaJ::

Even Dennis Kucinich voted for this.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1998/roll482.xml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Key words there
"support efforts" does NOT mean "invade and remove Saddam ourselves". I get the impression from reading what you posted that it was the intent for Iraq's own people, or their neighbors, to do the "dirty work", with the US providing aid, a framework, and assistance to the same.

It doesn't say we needed to wage a war and do it ourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #68
71. But it did establish the policy
That the United States should work toward regime change. It did not specify the methods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maeve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
67. If Dubya ever takes responsibility for something, THAT will be news!
Like the cartoon "the Family Circus" this midAdministration is over-run with blaming "Not Me" and "Ida Know".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bushisanidiot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-13-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
69. What He Inherited Was A Surplus AND A Plan To Get Bin Laden
he destroyed the surplus and ignored bin laden.


what a friggin idiot!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fovea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-14-04 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
73. That rushing sound
is *'s last series of lies and denials before
the defenistrations start.

Yeee Haw!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC