You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #29: The problem was that some of what he said contradicted [View All]

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #12
29. The problem was that some of what he said contradicted
what he said in the late 1990s after the inspectors were out.

The other thing was that even if you knew with certainty what he said was true, it said nothing of any possible effort on Saddam's part from 1998 on. Could Saddam have smuggled stuff from the former USSR? They had unsecured nuclear weapons that people like Senators Nunn and Lugar adviced buying up faster than we are. (Remember the first debate - Kerry responded nuclear proliferation as the greatest threat in the first debate and Bush ineptly tried to repeat Kerry's answer)

Read some of the speeches on the Iwr or Levin - no one ruled out possible WMD. I think nobody disagreed on the lead to get inspectors back in. Where the disagreement was was on what language to put into a resolution. Once Leiberman and Gephardt backed the IWR, the key amendment was Durbin's. This was a simple, straight forward amendment that put Bush's promise - that only WMD would be a cause to go to war explicitly into the bill. (Implicitly it was there as wording was removed that described other reasons.)

When we knew EXPLICITLY that Bush lied about why he invaded was after his 2005 swearing in, when people like Dr Rice and other administration people openly argued that they invaded to spread democracy, the theme of Bush's highly praised innaugral address. Very few papers or people noted this change in reason. (I heard the 2 MA Senators and Dean). There was no outrage from the media and none from the mainstream of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Even more reason why IWR vote disqualifies those who voted "YES" xkenx  May-16-07 09:29 PM   #0 
  - Substituting political calculus for courage is the soup du jour on Capitol Hill  Selatius   May-16-07 09:32 PM   #1 
  - "thousands of American soldiers"  GreenArrow   May-17-07 07:38 AM   #21 
  - It's true--came from Carl Levin too.  xkenx   May-18-07 07:09 PM   #57 
  - Red state politicians voted for the IWR because their  jcrew2001   May-20-07 11:04 PM   #71 
  - I agree.  AtomicKitten   May-16-07 09:35 PM   #2 
  - Business as usual.  pocoloco   May-16-07 09:38 PM   #3 
  - This is depressing  Big Pappa   May-16-07 09:41 PM   #4 
  - that's a nice irony there  GreenArrow   May-17-07 07:43 AM   #23 
  - Integrity is not gone; you just have to look for it in the right places.  xkenx   May-22-07 03:09 PM   #77 
  - I understand why you're upset about their vote, but think of this.  napi21   May-16-07 09:50 PM   #5 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   May-16-07 09:56 PM   #6 
  - You did not KNOW the truth  karynnj   May-16-07 10:08 PM   #8 
  - absolutely correct  venable   May-16-07 10:19 PM   #11 
  - OK, call me stupid, but I was also foolish enough to believe that  napi21   May-16-07 10:12 PM   #9 
  - You make a good point.  Alamom   May-17-07 06:09 AM   #19 
  - Understand your feelings. It's easy to be a bit naive about one's president.  xkenx   May-17-07 11:51 AM   #42 
  - Kick  Tellurian   May-17-07 02:38 PM   #52 
  - "he was only pResident for a few months at the time"?  krkaufman   May-17-07 01:46 PM   #50 
  - But congresspeople are paid to be smart.  xkenx   May-24-07 09:12 AM   #78 
  - you could not have known  venable   May-16-07 10:16 PM   #10 
     - The truth was out there ...  blue agave   May-16-07 11:38 PM   #15 
     - the truth was out there,  GreenArrow   May-17-07 08:01 AM   #25 
     - just to be clear  venable   May-17-07 08:36 AM   #28 
        - totally disagree  Carolina   May-19-07 07:41 PM   #63 
     - Yes, she could have known.  Clark2008   May-17-07 08:44 AM   #30 
        - Well, I didn't know. So I guess I just have "half a brain". Not everyone  beachmom   May-17-07 12:37 PM   #47 
        - You're not in the senate, I don't believe.  Clark2008   May-20-07 12:13 PM   #67 
        - totally agree  Carolina   May-19-07 07:45 PM   #64 
  - Wrong! You should read Scott Ritter's books.  xkenx   May-16-07 10:36 PM   #12 
  - The problem was that some of what he said contradicted  karynnj   May-17-07 08:38 AM   #29 
  - No, I did not have one moment's hesitation.  LWolf   May-17-07 06:46 AM   #20 
  - Yeah, he could have had gas or bio  Jai4WKC08   May-17-07 12:19 PM   #45 
  - "Right or wrong, there was a possibility that there were nerve gas.."  Carolina   May-17-07 12:49 PM   #48 
  - Right. But trusting that George W Bush would do the right thing ...  krkaufman   May-17-07 01:28 PM   #49 
  - How about this  riverdale   May-20-07 08:37 PM   #69 
  - After listening to Senator Durbin in at least two speeches which addressed these issues,  EST   May-16-07 09:58 PM   #7 
  - Hillary is by far the worst choice for President but Obama is not what he is selling himself as.  w4rma   May-16-07 10:39 PM   #13 
  - do not get your point  rufus dog   May-17-07 02:06 AM   # 
  - The point is not Obama - The point is diversion from Edwards  WesDem   May-17-07 08:57 AM   #35 
  - This was in response to rufus dog  WesDem   May-17-07 12:17 PM   #44 
  - deleted  xkenx   May-17-07 09:02 AM   #36 
  - do not get your point  rufus dog   May-17-07 02:06 AM   # 
  - do not get your point  rufus dog   May-17-07 02:06 AM   #18 
  - "I can not think of one candidate who is lower on my list"  GreenArrow   May-17-07 08:00 AM   #24 
     - Plastic empty people do not write 2 bestsellers or have the forsight on this war before hand  illinoisprogressive   May-17-07 08:19 AM   #27 
        - the other poster wasn't talking about Obama  GreenArrow   May-17-07 08:51 AM   #33 
  - Nor is Edwards what he is selling himself as.  wyldwolf   May-17-07 07:40 AM   #22 
  - And neither is your boy.  Clark2008   May-17-07 08:50 AM   #32 
  - Shhhh... no one's supposed to know that Edwards cosponsored the IWR.  MH1   May-19-07 02:08 PM   #61 
     - Edwards is one of the reasons for my OP. I'm going to periodically  xkenx   May-19-07 07:15 PM   #62 
  - You have posted that list many times  karynnj   May-17-07 08:54 AM   #34 
  - How many times you gonna post that hit piece that has been debunked?  rinsd   May-17-07 11:27 AM   #41 
  - "disqualifies"  oasis   May-16-07 10:39 PM   #14 
  - Did we ever find the anthrax killers?  Old and In the Way   May-17-07 12:21 AM   #16 
  - "they were substituting political calculation for courage"  Vickers   May-17-07 12:36 AM   #17 
  - Everyone needs to be honest and come clean completely about this whole thing.  illinoisprogressive   May-17-07 08:16 AM   #26 
  - It's not that simple, not really  WesDem   May-17-07 08:47 AM   #31 
  - Thanks, WesDem, for amplifying my OP so clearly.  xkenx   May-17-07 09:21 AM   #37 
  - No argument  WesDem   May-17-07 09:31 AM   #38 
  - It's also impossible  seasonedblue   May-17-07 10:06 AM   #39 
  - "we don't know who didn't" ... read the full NIE  krkaufman   May-17-07 01:55 PM   #51 
     - That's an incredibly excellent idea!  seasonedblue   May-17-07 02:40 PM   #53 
  - Imminent.  Gregorian   May-17-07 11:07 AM   #40 
  - You're exactly right about imminent. Saddam's capabilities were even  xkenx   May-17-07 12:14 PM   #43 
  - And what about later votes? Sorry, but it is a big mistake to judge  beachmom   May-17-07 12:33 PM   #46 
  - Sorry, I'll disagree and restate the OP  xkenx   May-17-07 03:11 PM   #54 
  - Respectfully, Voting to authorize the use of force against another country...  bunnies   May-17-07 03:46 PM   #55 
     - Exactly!  xkenx   May-17-07 07:17 PM   #56 
     - Welcome to DU  Carolina   May-20-07 05:27 PM   #68 
        - Abe Lincoln's words were 150 years old and could have been spoken today.  xkenx   May-21-07 09:11 AM   #73 
  - Exactly Why Bush Gets Away With WAR LIES  sandnsea   May-18-07 08:09 PM   #58 
  - Gutless Dems.+Kool Aid Rethugs = Our leadership. PTUI!  xkenx   May-19-07 09:18 AM   #59 
  - If everyone had the same intelligence  sandnsea   May-19-07 02:03 PM   #60 
  - Yeah, Dem. enablers  xkenx   May-20-07 11:42 AM   #65 
  - I can assure you ....  Trajan   May-20-07 12:07 PM   #66 
  - The OP is for the Dem. primaries, obviously.  xkenx   May-20-07 10:23 PM   #70 
  - It's a good guideline for judging character.  Lord Helmet   May-21-07 03:15 AM   #72 
  - Agreed. It was an enormous blunder morally, politically and  Jacobin   May-21-07 03:19 PM   #74 
     - Aye....sound judgment is a key qualification of such an office,  FrenchieCat   May-21-07 03:45 PM   #75 
        - Right! Why should we have to settle?  xkenx   May-21-07 06:53 PM   #76 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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