Meanwhile, the inconsistent
Color me confused (my, what a lovely shade), but I read this bit from Billy:
Former President Bill Clinton urged the Bush administration Thursday to finish the job with Osama bin Laden before taking on Iraq....so I felt the urge to surf (as I'm sure so many others already have) and find from the Google cache, there's the Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq - February 17, 1998:
"Saddam Hussein didn't kill 3,100 people on Sept. 11," Clinton said. "Osama bin Laden did, and as far as we know he's still alive."
[...]
"I also believe we might do more good for American security in the short run at far less cost by beefing up our efforts in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere to [flush] out the entire network," Clinton said.
Clinton said he supported President Bush's efforts in Afghanistan, including military actions and support of the Afghan government.
--ex-President Bill Clinton, 2002
We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century. They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information and ideas.The actual text/article should be at CNN All Politics but it wasn't responding when I clicked the link. Meanwhile, you might also read:
And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.
There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us.
[...]
Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?
Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.
And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too.
[...]
Now, let me say to all of you here as all of you know the weightiest decision any president ever has to make is to send our troops into harm's way. And force can never be the first answer. But sometimes, it's the only answer.
You are the best prepared, best equipped, best trained fighting force in the world. And should it prove necessary for me to exercise the option of force, your commanders will do everything they can to protect the safety of all the men and women under their command.
No military action, however, is risk-free. I know that the people we may call upon in uniform are ready. The American people have to be ready as well.
[...]
In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.
If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.
But if we act as one, we can safeguard our interests and send a clear message to every would-be tyrant and terrorist that the international community does have the wisdom and the will and the way to protect peace and security in a new era. That is the future I ask you all to imagine. That is the future I ask our allies to imagine.
If we look at the past and imagine that future, we will act as one together. And we still have, God willing, a chance to find a diplomatic resolution to this, and if not, God willing, the chance to do the right thing for our children and grandchildren.
Thank you very much.
--ex-President Bill Clinton, February 1998
Iraq Special Report
"A failure to respond could embolden Saddam to act recklessly, signaling to him that he can, with impunity, develop these weapons of mass destruction or threaten his neighbors," the president said. ". . . And it would permanently damage the credibility of the United Nations Security Council to act as a force for promoting international peace and security.(All emphasis mine.)
--ex-President Bill Clinton, 11/12/1998
So I'm compelled to ask, aside from Bill no longer being president, what's changed? Saddam, without complying to a single UN demand, is suddenly no longer a threat? To anyone?
And for what it's worth, there were also a lot of people rabidly opposed to Clinton doing anything about Iraq.
Comments