The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush

[Philobeado]

WikiLeaks' newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). ... Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict -- and may have brewed up their own deadly agents."

In 2008, our military shipped out of Iraq -- on 37 flights in 3,500 barrels -- what even The Associated Press called "the last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program": 550 metric tons of the supposedly nonexistent yellowcake. The New York Sun editorialized: "The uranium issue is not a trivial one, because Iraq, sitting on vast oil reserves, has no peaceful need for nuclear power. ... To leave this nuclear material sitting around the Middle East in the hands of Saddam ... would have been too big a risk."


The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative

 

[Misty]

Where are the leaks that prove bush planned 9-11?
Where are the documents tha prove Bush knew about 9-11?
where are the documents that prove the war was for oil?

Looks like democrats lied and their party died. Lol

 

[Wry Catcher]

Where are the leaks that prove bush planned 9-11?
Where are the documents tha prove Bush knew about 9-11?
where are the documents that prove the war was for oil?

Looks like democrats lied and their party died. Lol

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm edited down and linked, can't post entire article.
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

Looks like the invasion of Iraq was planned for way before Sept. 11, 2001. And look who signed this "Statement of Principles"!

BTW, why didn't Bush take our nations security seriously and protect us on Sept 11th? Seems even his brother and members of his administration knew in 1997 we were at risk. So, why did they "shirk" their responsibilities?

Edited down my ass. The purpose of the post was to demonstrate who signed the document, and that was removed.

 

[Agit8r]

Yes. but none of the facilities were operable. And we did not get our intelligence from the sources that the PNAC-run Bush Administration stated. They only knew that Saddam had ever possessed WMD's, because we GAVE them to him along with the cowboy boots and pistols

Iraq got germs for weapons program from U.S. in '80s

 

[Sallow]

There is no "vindication" even if weapons were found..which they have not been.

This notion of attacking a country that "might" attack us hopefully dies with the Bush administration.

 

[Meister]

Where are the leaks that prove bush planned 9-11?
Where are the documents tha prove Bush knew about 9-11?
where are the documents that prove the war was for oil?

Looks like democrats lied and their party died. Lol

Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

Looks like the invasion of Iraq was planned for way before Sept. 11, 2001. And look who signed this "Statement of Principles"!

BTW, why didn't Bush take our nations security seriously and protect us on Sept 11th? Seems even his brother and members of his administration knew in 1997 we were at risk. So, why did they "shirk" their responsibilities?

That isn't proof of anything she was asking for.

 

[Agit8r]

Where are the leaks that prove bush planned 9-11?
Where are the documents tha prove Bush knew about 9-11?
where are the documents that prove the war was for oil?

Looks like democrats lied and their party died. Lol

Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

Looks like the invasion of Iraq was planned for way before Sept. 11, 2001. And look who signed this "Statement of Principles"!

BTW, why didn't Bush take our nations security seriously and protect us on Sept 11th? Seems even his brother and members of his administration knew in 1997 we were at risk. So, why did they "shirk" their responsibilities?

That isn't proof of anything she was asking for.

None of those people ever worked as Defense Secretary, undersecretary, or any ambassadorships under Bush.... oh, wait...

 

[uscitizen]

Yellowcake? We knew that was there all along and was noted by inspectors before the invasion.

 

[rightwinger]

Ancient dried up chemical weapons that were not a threat and not worth the deaths of 4000 American servicemen

"The Smoking Gun will be a mushroom cloud" Condi Rice

 

[Wry Catcher]

Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle,

Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz,

Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen,

Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz

Look who signed the document, notice any names of those who were influential in the Bush Administration?
One final thought, how many of those who signed the document and supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq - which casued thousands of Americans to die and many thousands more to suffer serious life-long debilitating wounds -served in our Armed Forces in harms way?

 

[Meister]

Statement of Principles
June 3, 1997
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

Looks like the invasion of Iraq was planned for way before Sept. 11, 2001. And look who signed this "Statement of Principles"!

BTW, why didn't Bush take our nations security seriously and protect us on Sept 11th? Seems even his brother and members of his administration knew in 1997 we were at risk. So, why did they "shirk" their responsibilities?

That isn't proof of anything she was asking for.

None of those people ever worked as Defense Secretary, undersecretary, or any ambassadorships under Bush.... oh, wait...

Do you have a smoking gun? I didn't think so.
And I wasn't even for the invasion of Iraq....I would have never pulled that trigger.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

WikiLeaks' newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). ... Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict -- and may have brewed up their own deadly agents."

In 2008, our military shipped out of Iraq -- on 37 flights in 3,500 barrels -- what even The Associated Press called "the last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program": 550 metric tons of the supposedly nonexistent yellowcake. The New York Sun editorialized: "The uranium issue is not a trivial one, because Iraq, sitting on vast oil reserves, has no peaceful need for nuclear power. ... To leave this nuclear material sitting around the Middle East in the hands of Saddam ... would have been too big a risk."


The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative

In all fairness, it also vindicates Reid, Pelosi, Kerry, Clinton, Daschle, Gore, Albright, Berger, etc. as they all told us back in the 90's Iraq had WMD's.

 

[Coyote]

Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal (which were not a secret) are not WMD's or an eminent danger to the U.S.

 

[BlindBoo]

WikiLeaks' newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). ... Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict -- and may have brewed up their own deadly agents."

In 2008, our military shipped out of Iraq -- on 37 flights in 3,500 barrels -- what even The Associated Press called "the last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program": 550 metric tons of the supposedly nonexistent yellowcake. The New York Sun editorialized: "The uranium issue is not a trivial one, because Iraq, sitting on vast oil reserves, has no peaceful need for nuclear power. ... To leave this nuclear material sitting around the Middle East in the hands of Saddam ... would have been too big a risk."


The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative

Jesus H Chryst. We didn't need Wikileaks for that.

Again for the umpteenth-time, the problem with what they found was that it was produced before the first Gulf war. You know when the Pseudo-conservative hero "Ronnie Raygun" took Iraq off the Nations who supported terrorist list so they could aquire Western technology. Surely the pseuod-conned are embarrased by the fact that Raygun refused to sanction him for his obvious use of Chemical Weapon against Iranian troops(mostly young conscripts), as well as using them against the Kurds. But my guess is they are not because they don't really care that he used it against other Arabs.

The Yellowcake taken out was known before the invasion and occupation. Saddam was not allowed to use that Yellowcake under the UN sanctions.

The Claims by the Bush administration were that there were facilities producing tons of chemical weapons as well as huge stockpile to the East, West, north well everywhere.....

 

[rightwinger]

Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal (which were not a secret) are not WMD's or an eminent danger to the U.S.

Diverting our war on terror to go chasing remnants of a chemical warfare capability ended up costing 4000 soldiers and 100,000 Iraqis their lives

No other US President would have blundered as much

 

[LibocalypseNow]

WikiLeaks' newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). ... Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict -- and may have brewed up their own deadly agents."

In 2008, our military shipped out of Iraq -- on 37 flights in 3,500 barrels -- what even The Associated Press called "the last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program": 550 metric tons of the supposedly nonexistent yellowcake. The New York Sun editorialized: "The uranium issue is not a trivial one, because Iraq, sitting on vast oil reserves, has no peaceful need for nuclear power. ... To leave this nuclear material sitting around the Middle East in the hands of Saddam ... would have been too big a risk."


The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush - Larry Elder - Townhall Conservative

Interesting. Thanks.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal (which were not a secret) are not WMD's or an eminent danger to the U.S.

Diverting our war on terror to go chasing remnants of a chemical warfare capability ended up costing 4000 soldiers and 100,000 Iraqis their lives

No other US President would have blundered as much

Oh, I think JFK and LBJ still hold the record for dead U.S. Servicemen and failed wars.

 

[rightwinger]

Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal (which were not a secret) are not WMD's or an eminent danger to the U.S.

Diverting our war on terror to go chasing remnants of a chemical warfare capability ended up costing 4000 soldiers and 100,000 Iraqis their lives

No other US President would have blundered as much

Oh, I think JFK and LBJ still hold the record for dead U.S. Servicemen and failed wars.

They were judged for their legacy.
Bush will be judged by his

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction (emphasis added). ... Chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict -- and may have brewed up their own deadly agents."

I already knew this, but further vindication is always welcome.

History will indeed be kind to GWB, this is just a small part of why I'll NEVER regret voting for him.

 

[amrchaos]

Wait a second--is this the 1990's chemical stuff that we destroyed or the 2003 stuff we went to war for.

Larry Elders is not being too specific about which.


PS--We did not go to war over destroyed WMDs from the Gulf war--please make that distinction!!