Bushco FLIP FLOPPING ON WMDs?!!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by spillmind, Oct 7, 2004.

  1. spillmind
    Offline

    spillmind Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Messages:
    780
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Palo Alto, Ca.
    Ratings:
    +13
    can't believe it myself

    WASHINGTON - President Bush and his vice president conceded Thursday in the clearest terms yet that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, even as they tried to shift the Iraq war debate to a new issue — whether the invasion was justified because Saddam was abusing a U.N. oil-for-food program.

    Ridiculing the Bush administration's evolving rationale for war, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry shot back: "You don't make up or find reasons to go to war after the fact."

    Vice President Dick Cheney brushed aside the central findings of chief U.S. weapons hunter Charles Duelfer — that Saddam not only had no weapons of mass destruction and had not made any since 1991, but that he had no capability of making any either — while Bush unapologetically defended his decision to invade Iraq.

    "The Duelfer report showed that Saddam was systematically gaming the system, using the U.N. oil-for-food program to try to influence countries and companies in an effort to undermine sanctions," Bush said as he prepared to fly to campaign events in Wisconsin. "He was doing so with the intent of restarting his weapons program once the world looked away."

    Duelfer found no formal plan by Saddam to resume WMD production, but the inspector surmised that Saddam intended to do so if U.N. sanctions were lifted. Bush seized upon that inference, using the word "intent" three times in reference to Saddam's plans to resume making weapons.

    This week marks the first time that the Bush administration has listed abuses in the oil-for-fuel program as an Iraq war rationale. But the strategy holds risks because some of the countries that could be implicated include U.S. allies, such as Poland, Jordan and Egypt. In addition, the United States itself played a significant role in both the creation of the program and how it was operated and overseen.

    For his part, Cheney dismissed the significance of Duelfer's central findings, telling supporters in Miami, "The headlines all say `no weapons of mass destruction stockpiled in Baghdad.' We already knew that."

    The vice president said he found other parts of the report "more intriguing," including the finding that Saddam's main goal was the removal of international sanctions.

    "As soon as the sanctions were lifted, he had every intention of going back" to his weapons program, Cheney said.

    The report underscored that "delay, defer, wait, wasn't an option," Cheney said. And he told a later forum in Fort Myers, Fla., speaking of the oil-for-food program: "The sanctions regime was coming apart at the seams. Saddam perverted that whole thing and generated billions of dollars."

    Yet Bush and Cheney acknowledged more definitively than before that Saddam did not have the banned weapons that both men had asserted he did — and had cited as the major justification before attacking Iraq in March 2003.

    Bush has recently left the question open. For example, when asked in June whether he thought such weapons had existed in Iraq, Bush said he would "wait until Charlie (Duelfer) gets back with the final report."

    In July, Bush said, "We have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction," a sentence construction that kept alive the possibility the weapons might yet be discovered.

    On Thursday, the president used the clearest language to date nailing the question shut:

    "Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there," Bush said. His words placed the blame on U.S. intelligence agencies.

    In recent weeks, Cheney has glossed over the primary justification for the war, most often by simply not mentioning it. But in late January 2004, Cheney told reporters in Rome: "There's still work to be done to ascertain exactly what's there."

    "The jury is still out," he told National Public Radio the same week, when asked whether Iraq had possessed banned weapons.

    Duelfer's report was presented Wednesday to senators and the public with less than four weeks left in a fierce presidential campaign dominated by questions about Iraq and the war on terror.

    In Bayonne, N.J., Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards on Thursday called "amazing" Cheney's assertions that the Duelfer report justified rather than undermined Bush's decision to go to war, and he accused the Republican of using "convoluted logic."

    Kerry, in a campaign appearance in Colorado, said: "The president of the United States and the vice president of the United States may well be the last two people on the planet who won't face the truth about Iraq."

    A short time later, while campaigning in Wisconsin, Bush angrily responded to Kerry's charge he sought to "make up" a reason for war.

    "He's claiming I misled America about weapons when he, himself, cited the very same intelligence about Saddam weapons programs as the reason he voted to go to war," Bush said. Citing a lengthy Kerry quote from two years ago on the menace Saddam could pose, Bush said: "Just who's the one trying to mislead the American people?"


    THAT WOULD BE *YOU*, W! :bang3:

    can i suggest a new emoticon? how about one for :spin: ?? :laugh:
     
  2. fuzzykitten99
    Offline

    fuzzykitten99 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,965
    Thanks Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    You'll have to check the Marauder's Map...
    Ratings:
    +199
    Kerry has been busted so many times as being called Flipper, you guys just HAD to say "He's doing it too!"...even though Bush isn't. The first sentence says they "conceded Thursday in the clearest terms yet that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, ..."

    Um, when and where was this? I have yet to hear about it. Not only that, but the WMD issue is getting REAL old. Your lackluster candidate can't stop flip flopping to save his life, and take a stance on something and STICK with it, so this has to be drug up.

    I will post what I have posted before. as I see you need a refresher, That person who wrote the article does too. I highlighted the names I thought you may recognize, to make it easier for you.

    HOW SOON THEY FORGET
    EVERY ONE OF DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED--THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR UNNECESSARILY!

    "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 Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 (well before Bush took office)

    "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 Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 (again, well before Bush took office)


    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

    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton N ational Security Adviser, Feb 18,1998

    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US 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 Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998

    "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

    "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

    "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated 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 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, December 5, 2001

    "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

    "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chem! ical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 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 have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 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

    "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

    "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

    "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

    "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

    "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

    "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

    Refute that.
     
  3. MJDuncan1982
    Offline

    MJDuncan1982 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Ratings:
    +25
    I say we call a stop to all this Flip Flop stuff. Anyone with me? We can attack Kerry on his change of opinion/stance but I'd like something more than the word FlipFlop :halo:
     
  4. fuzzykitten99
    Offline

    fuzzykitten99 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,965
    Thanks Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    You'll have to check the Marauder's Map...
    Ratings:
    +199
    Why? Does the truth hurt that much?
     
  5. MJDuncan1982
    Offline

    MJDuncan1982 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Ratings:
    +25
    No the truth is fine. But that is what I'd like. We can be above calling people general names and actually discuss the what is behind the word.
     
  6. drowe
    Offline

    drowe Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    219
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    79119
    Ratings:
    +35
    John Kerry: "These are my principles. If you don't like them...I have others."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. spillmind
    Offline

    spillmind Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2003
    Messages:
    780
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Palo Alto, Ca.
    Ratings:
    +13
    shout out to sir evil! :rock:

    on to the person who is still missing the POINT.

    'Um, when and where was this? I have yet to hear about it.'

    i made this AP story up.

    thanks for highlighting all those names. you are very determined. :laugh:

    hell, *i* believed bush for about a week or two- and then it came out that the intel was wrong... and this is the first time they've come forth and (almost) said it!

    WHEN WHAT YOU CLAIM TURNS OUT TO BE TOTALLY WRONG, EXPECT PEOPLE TO CHANGE POSITIONS FROM WHERE YOU PREVIOUSLY STOOD.

    to not do so, is just plain ignorance. i can't believe there are people out there that are still holding on to that tired old position. sad.

    i understand this must boggle your mind, so take a couple minutes with it.

    bushies :kiss2: to call the kettle black! kerry is a flip flopper! but bush just changes his mind! :rotflmao:
     
  8. MJDuncan1982
    Offline

    MJDuncan1982 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    506
    Thanks Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Mississippi
    Ratings:
    +25
    Well im against any label i guess. Discussion about what is going on is best
     
  9. drac
    Offline

    drac Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    429
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +22
    Can anyone point me to the speech by Kerry where he "flip-flops"?
    Also, i am kind of slow that way, but please tell me why is changing one's mind in the face of new facts is a bad thing? Is it better to "stay the course" even if one is about to hit the iceberg?

    just trying to learn
     
  10. drowe
    Offline

    drowe Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    219
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    79119
    Ratings:
    +35
    DRAC

    Changing ones mind in response to sound decision-making is a good trait.

    However, frequently changing your mind in a short period of time to align yourself with recent polls, to me, shows poor character.

    shower shoes
    ---------------------------------

    More Positions Than Gumby - Kerry 04
     

Share This Page