|
Go
 |
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
 |
|
|||
|
Speak,
Thanks for supplying the links. I knew that they were going to eventually find something hidden. You dont obstruct UN weapons inspectors for no good reason. I just was never able to find any conclusive information anywhere in print or online. How do you manage to find the time to come across this? BTW, I have read the Iraq Liberation Act, and as far as I can tell, it resolves the removal of Saddam and installing a democracy, but not by invasion of Iraq by US ground troops but by economic, diplomatic and by fostering opposition groups within Iraq. I dont think Clinton was able to do more than bomb the country because congress did not resolve more than this. |
||||
|
|
|
Clinton was the Commander in Chief and it was his position to determine how the objective would be accomplished. His mistake was in thinking he could achieve victory in Iraq using a strategy that succeeded in Afghanistan. He sorely misunderestimated Saddam.
Clinton made it absolutely clear that Saddam had to be removed by force. But, as a draft dodger (who fled to England to organize anti-US rallies then was invited to Moscow for warm fuzzy get-togethers in 1969, but that's another issue) who despised our military he was incapable of using our armed forces appropriately. When Clinton made the case for eliminating Saddam, he warned of dire consequences for failure to do so. Sadly, when he allowed Saddam to declare victory over the US, he made those consequences real: "If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." - Bill Clinton In addition, Joe Lieberman (Al Gore's running mate) explained that Gore was simply going to send in the tanks without wasting six months discussing the matter with the UN. The objective was established, its legality under UN resolution and US interests was clear, there was nothing left to do but order the military to finish the job - as is the President's prerogative. Once a Republican was elected, those Democrats pretended to have amnesia, pretended Bush was starting all the trouble, basically waging propaganda warfare against the US on Saddam's behalf. When they think they can gain from it, Democrats wage war against the US. I can never, ever vote for a Democrat again. Live Free |
|||
|
 |
though wasn't America the last to get in the war against Nazi's,and it was because of japan's attack on pearl harbor, is that the america you believe in,a bunch of people who only go to war when it suits them.I mean Europe asked us to help them for years,and we never complied. |
|||
|
|
|
yes real leaders jump into situations and not waste time debating and weighing what the consequenses could be,you said it not me. |
|||
|
|
|
Real American leaders do their duty to America, first and foremost.
Your comments on this, and my response, are too general. "Think before you leap!" - A Kzin General Live Free |
|||
|
Speak, You still do not have me convinced that Clinton chickened out. The Liberation Act states nowhere that the US will invade Iraq and forcibly remove Saddam. It doesnt matter if Clinton or Capt Crunch is commander in chief, congress did not resolve this. BTW, the part you are omitting about Clinton is that he went overseas as a Rhodes scholar to study at Oxford. The fact that he did not get drafted as a result of this is incidental. I seem to recall a previous president who never saw military action either. And he was no Rhodes scholar. I'm not putting that man down, but both men had no stomach to see combat first hand. |
||||
|
|
|
It is the job of the Commander in Chief, not Congress, to plan and direct military operations. It is the role of Congress to approve the budget that the President requests. The Left seemed to understand this, as they spewed hate at Bush for sending in the tanks (as is the prerogative of his office) to succeed where Clinton had failed so miserably. Clinton's problem was that he wanted to achieve an Afghanistan-like victory, to get the Mujahedeen in Iraq to do the heavy fighting. Clinton was terribly ignorant of Saddam's true power. Saddam's intel agencies tracked communications to the rebel groups and exterminated them. Clinton bombed the hell out of Iraq for several days in 1998 but Saddam declared victory. Clinton's plan was a miserable failure. As for Clinton evading the draft... Here is the text of the letter that former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton wrote to Col. Eugene Holmes, director of the Reserve Officers' Training Corp (ROTC) program at the University of Arkansas, on Dec. 3, 1969 ( Link ) I have written and spoken and marched against the war. One of the national organizers of the Vietnam Moratorium is a close friend of mine. After I left Arkansas last summer, I went to Washington to work in the national headquarters of the Moratorium, then to England to organize the Americans here for demonstrations Oct. 15 and Nov. 16. Read the entire letter several times to see what Clinton's motives were. Look for that phrase, "to maintain political viability"... these Leftists know the performance they must put on to continue moving up the ranks. Live Free |
|||
|
Speak,
The point I am making is that congress authorizes war, in this case, they did not authorize invasion of Iraq, nor were they resolving to develop a coalition of nations to assist with that task. Once in war, then the prez can call the shots and make the budget requests. If you want to say that Clinton and congress fell short of what needed to be done to remove Saddam, that would be more accurate. This is not Clinton sole decisions at play here. In regards to him dodging the draft and ptotesting the Vietnam war and studying overseas, that is his business to do so. I'm not defending the man, I'm just saying that when there's war, there will be protests. |
||||
|
lol |
||||
|
|
|
That's not quite how I remember it. It is up to Congress to "declare war" - but the President's power to wage war in an existing conflict is not micromanaged by Congress. The war against Iraq started in 1991 and I do not believe it was a "declared war" then either. But, somewhere along the line, the President got power to wage war even if undeclared by Congress. The Persian Gulf war WAS approved by Congress even though a formal declaration of war was not made. The Persian Gulf War never ended. There was a temporary cease-fire granted to Saddam on the condition he meet certain mandates. Saddam did not meet those mandates. All through the 1990s, Clinton ordered bombing attacks against Iraq and did not have to ask Congress each time - because the war was already on. His Iraq Liberation Act was merely a continuation of the already Congressionally-approved war. GW Bush's continuation of the war did not need new Congressional approval - but he got it anyway. AT ANY TIME, Congress could have ordered a stop to the war. They have that power. They chose instead to approve continuation of the conflict as well as the budget for it. And yet, Democrats continued to also wage propaganda war against the United States, tried to piss off the Turks to break our vital supply lines, tried to turn the American people against the President fighting a war that they mandated MUST be fought. Never, ever trust a Democrat behind your back with a knife. Live Free |
|||
|
|
||||
|
To those of you who think one party is better than another, you are like a giraffe being attacked by Lions and Hyenas, both bitter enemies. It doesn't make any sense at all to throw in with the Lions in order to combat the Hyenas.
|
||||
|
|
|
I have spent a great deal of time among politicians in both parties. I can say conclusively that the Democrat party is devoted to destruction of America by systematically undermining each and every aspect of this nation that made it strong and independent. They speak openly of this at their meetings - and they fly the banners of our nation's enemies (like Che Guevara) on their campaign office walls.
Republicans, for the most part, are loyal to America's founding principles and fight to protect them. It's pretty easy for me to choose sides. Live Free |
|||
|
I have a high regard for writer like you for you create articles that are truly astonishing for the tackle different issues in our society. It’s really important for us bloggers to be inform on such matters as to be updated with the current situations that can affects ones life. Thanks for the remarkable post and I will continue reading the rest of your post!
<a href="http://www.universityloveconnection.com/unlv-dating/">UNLV Dating</a> |
||||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page First | Previous | Next | Last |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|
© 2008 The Press Democrat