Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dick Cheney (nailed on house floor) on Baghdad, quote from 1991: MUST SEE THIS!

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Danieljay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:09 PM
Original message
Dick Cheney (nailed on house floor) on Baghdad, quote from 1991: MUST SEE THIS!
Edited on Thu Feb-15-07 01:22 PM by Danieljay
Appearing on ABC's This Week, Cheney was asked why Operation Desert Storm had not gone "all the way" to remove Saddam Hussein from power. "I think for us to get American military personnel involved in a civil war inside Iraq would literally be a quagmire," Cheney replied. "Once we got to Baghdad, what would we do? Who would we put in power? What kind of government? Would it be a Sunni government, a Shia government, a Kurdish government? Would it be secular, along the lines of the Baath party, would it be fundamentalist Islamic? I do not think the United States wants to have U.S. military forces accept casualties and accept responsibility of trying to govern Iraq. I think it makes no sense at all." Dick Cheney 2001

Charles Gonzales just read that quote on the house floor. It was awesome!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_B._Cheney
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. is this on YouTube (yet)?
Edited on Thu Feb-15-07 01:10 PM by npincus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danieljay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. it just occurred, 5 minutes ago... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. excellent....
linky?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Here's a link to Rep. Gonzalez's page so we can thank him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Ected Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Careful, Careful: You Have the Date Wrong
Cheney made that statement in 1991, NOT in 2001. But the hypocrisy still rings true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danieljay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. thank you, corrected....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chrisbur Donating Member (161 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. Yea, by 2001 he never would have said something like that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. So how does it "make sense" now?
I think it makes no sense at all.

I hope some professional "reporters" ask the Vice President this question.

I hope they ask him about:
1) The civil war inside Iraq that would literally be a quagmire;
2) Once we got to Baghdad, what would we do?
3) Who would we put in power?
4) What kind of government?
5) Would it be a Sunni government, a Shia government, a Kurdish government?
6) Would it be secular, along the lines of the Baath party, would it be fundamentalist Islamic?
7) Why now can the United States have its U.S. military forces accept casualties and accept responsibility of trying to govern Iraq?

The media should be all over this like flies on shit on a hot, summer day...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. It makes sense now, in that between then and 2003 Cheney became
CEO of Halliburton, arranged the modern contractor system, and guaranteed profits for himself and his cronies.

THAT made it worthwhile.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #6
28. Odd that Tim Russet hasn't asked him these things on Press the Meat
:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

Long ago in the olden days before the military/industrial/prison complex bought up all the media, there were reporters who would have asked Cheney these questions. I wonder if these 1991 comments have been posted here at DU before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. what happened to him????
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Different bush in the white house.
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fed-up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. 16 years to develop a plan and they STILL HAVE NO PLAN.........nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacklyn75 Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
11. Wow! I sure hope this gets out! Unbelievable! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gruenemann Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. Everything changed after 9/11
That's their convenient answer to everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Ected Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I Defy the Media to Press Cheney on HOW 9/11 Changed This
Our useless corporate media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #13
29. Gruenemann is correct to predict this reply from Lord Vader
And you are correct to offer a very appropriate counter to that slogan. It's disgusting how the media lets them get off the hook if they just repeat the senseless slogan, "911 changed everything." What's with that? Might as well say, "Git 'er done!"

Well, 911 didn't change everything. Stupid is still stupid.

I noticed you're getting off to a good start here at DU. I like what you've got to say, Mr. Ected.

Lasher
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kitkat65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. You know it. The answer to that that bull is 9/11 changed OUR political landscape.
NOT Iraq's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Wing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
15. It didn't make sense back then because Bush was about to be voted
out of office, and they couldn't risk starting the real war without having plenty of years after of being in power to reap the benefits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
16. It always irked the right-wingers that George Bush I didn't finish the job.
They just don't think past their nose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. Yes, they knew better but didn't care.
They decided that the climate in America was ripe to accept the price of US casualties and being entrenched in quagmire thanks to 9/11. They went in and ousted Saddam knowing full well they were creating an unstable nation that would plummet into a civil war, one in which the US military would be fighting.

What I've never been able to understand is how they thought they could keep the majority of Americans terrorized to a point that wouldn't question them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kitkat65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. So when ARE they going to release what was discussed at that energy policy meeting Cheney
had with all the oil bigwigs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jonathan50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Rummy knew America would not accept a quagmire.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...

The secretary of defense continued to push on us ... that everything we write in our plan has to be the idea that we are going to go in, we're going to take out the regime, and then we're going to leave," Scheid said. "We won't stay."

Scheid said the planners continued to try "to write what was called Phase 4," or the piece of the plan that included post-invasion operations like occupation.

Even if the troops didn't stay, "at least we have to plan for it," Scheid said.

"I remember the secretary of defense saying that he would fire the next person that said that," Scheid said. "We would not do planning for Phase 4 operations, which would require all those additional troops that people talk about today.

"He said we will not do that because the American public will not back us if they think we are going over there for a long war."

Brigadier General Mark Scheid, chief of the Logistics War Plans Division after 9/11


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
18. Olberman and Dobbs should play this clip...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Olbermann...yes. Don't hold your breath for Dobbs.
Just sayin'... B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
20. Oh My Goodness
This should be all over the news but I doubt it will.

This refutes their claim of ignorance that they didn't fully understand about the religious factions.

Al Franken used to play a tape of Bill Kristol on NPR where he said there was no evidence of Sunni, Shia tensions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. Correction: Cheneyou$$elf fully understood about the factions.
He just didn't tell his money-making monkey about them...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. Bill Kristol didn't seem to know it either
He called this Pop Sociology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
24. I believe right after 9/11, Cheney stated Saddam was "in a box"
I could not find the quote, as google was overwhelmed with Wolf Blitzer's interview with Cheney from a few weeks back where Blitzer had repeated the "in a box" quote back to Cheney.

I could not find the original quote, however.

I did find this one, however:

September 16, 2001
TIM RUSSERT : Do we have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraqis to <9/11>? VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY: No....

http://www.motherjones.com/mb/mt-search.cgi?tag=Cheney&...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-15-07 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
27. WOW
Gotta love it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egalitarian Donating Member (379 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
30. Here's a link to a speech in which Cheney says the same thing.
He's reflecting on the first Gulf War here:
<snip>
I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we were going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we'd have had to hunt him down. And once we'd done that and we'd gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we'd have had to put another government in its place.

What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi'i government or a Kurdish government or Ba'athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable?

I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq.
<snip>

go here for complete speech in April of 1991 http://web.archive.org/web/20041130090045/http://www.wa...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egalitarian Donating Member (379 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. OMG, more from the Great Dissembler in 1992
snip
Going to Baghdad, Cheney said in 1992, would require a much different approach militarily than fighting in the open desert outside the capital, a type of warfare that U.S. troops were not familiar, or comfortable fighting.

"All of a sudden you've got a battle you're fighting in a major built-up city, a lot of civilians are around, significant limitations on our ability to use our most effective technologies and techniques," Cheney said.

"Once we had rounded him up and gotten rid of his government, then the question is what do you put in its place? You know, you then have accepted the responsibility for governing Iraq."
snip

article here http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/192908_cheney29....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
33. What timing for this comic strip:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire Walk With Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
34. Puts to rest the claim that they don't know anything about local powers and religions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
35. Self-committment
Therefore, since what Cheney said then has proven to be true and what he says now is clearly a lie, the sane Cheney of then has effectively delcared his present self insane and thereby signed his own committments papers right in the Congressional Record.

What are they waiting for? Take him away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftyladyfrommo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
36. Jeez! The one time in his life he was right about something. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paparush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-16-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
37. There's No Way he could have predicted that we would re-invade
Just like those levies.

Just like those planes hitting the buildings.

No way he could have predicted.
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 Sat Aug 23rd 2014, 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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