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

Reply #4: Will...can I ask you about this post from 2004... [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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-09-07 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Will...can I ask you about this post from 2004...

I have read a number of your pieces on truthout etc, and you have criticized the 28 Senate Dems that voted for the IWR...and implicit in this post is oppostion to the IWR on your part...yet in the above mentioned post you appear to be defending John Kerry's vote on the IWR...and endorsing it yourself...

Is this true?

Particularly in these passages

The 'Yes' vote on the IWR essential to the establishment of effective weapons inspections. Only the threat of force made the previous inspections effective. I asked Scott Ritter personally if his seven years in Iraq as an inspector would have been effective without the threat of force. He said the inspections would have been useless without the threat.

The threat of force got rid of the weapons from 1991-1998. The threat of force was needed to get rid of whatever he might have developed since. As Ritter said in my book, no one was absolutely sure they hadn't retained any of their weapons capabilities.

If you were in favor of weapons inspectors, YOU WERE IN FAVOR OF THE THREAT OF FORCE TO BACK THE INSPECTORS. There is no separating the two. Period.

Then the following responses...

#4 in that thread

Any President - even Mr. Gore - would likely have looked hard at Iraq post-9/11 because of that nation's history of WMD development. Gore would have gotten inspectors into the game, and would have asked for a threat of force to back the inspectors up.

The difference is the handling of that power, not the delivery of it.

#10 in that thread

Just because he let them in

doesn't mean he wasn't going to fuck with them. He was no angel, and the whole history of inspectons was him fucking with them until we blew his shit up.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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