"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 **************
**************
Nustster, is that a yes to my question then? These evil people are just after oil? Try the word flip-flop. The bottom line is the US put Saddam in power. We made a mistake. Now we should clean up our mess. Bush traveled back into time using Haliburton's time machine (developed from all the oil proceeds they were given in Iraq) and duped the Democrats with faked intelligence. He then stopped off at White Castle's for a sack of burgers for the return trip...the fries were still warm and the cola was ice cold. Conspiracy? You tell me. you also forgot Sentors Kerry and Edwards talk on the missing detentors during the presidential run. Over-throwing Saddam was part of the pursuit of OIL but another reason was in retaliation 4 a failed assassination attempt by Saddams henchmen on G Bush Sr, years & years ago...............
part oil, part repatriation of so many asylum-seekers & a huge helping of PAY BACK! they influenced him not for oil but for the ladies in Abu Gareeb prison I see what you're trying to do, but building a wall of citations is not quite the same thing as building a cogent argument. Your presentation is effective only if your readers consider the Democrats you cite to be credible sources, (and this is always the problem with arguing from authority--of which your posting is a variety--the argument is only as good as the "authority's" credibility). The reminder that Bill Clinton made noises about Sadam and WMD in 1998 is only weighty if your audience respects Bill Clinton as someone whose opinion on WMD, Sadam, or the ethics of warfare is authoritative, (and frankly I don't know many people these days, Republican or Democrat, who think of Clinton as an authority on anything except maybe fellatio and weight loss).
The more serious problem with your presentation, however, is that it operates from the assumption that agreement in large numbers equates with accuracy, which of course it does not. Consensus, in other words, doesn't equal truth. Consensus among Washington politicians is particularly suspect, since it is a common perception that Washington politicians are so invested in keeping their lucrative careers alive that they will claim to believe just about anything if they believe it's what voters want to hear.
In short, it's pretty easy to poke holes in a pro-war argument founded in the failure of Democratic politicians to mount an opposition. What your argument does prove, however, inadvertantly, is that Washington Democrats are "ho"s. I'm against Saddam as much as I'm against all dictators.. but what you've quoted are oooooolllllllldddd stuff and if they mean something, they mean that Bush doesn't have a mind on his own.... but anyway, it's more complicated for you to understand. |
