Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who changes positions about Iraq?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who changes positions about Iraq?

    I found this interesting text about changing positions about Iraq:

    "Mr. Bush and His 10 Ever-Changing Different Positions on Iraq: "A flip and a flop and now just a flop."


    9/22/04

    Dear Mr. Bush,

    I am so confused. Where exactly do you stand on the issue of Iraq? You, your Dad, Rummy, Condi, Colin, and Wolfie -- you have all changed your minds so many times, I am out of breath just trying to keep up with you!

    Which of these 10 positions that you, your family and your cabinet have taken over the years represents your CURRENT thinking:

    1983-88: WE LOVE SADDAM. On December 19, 1983, Donald Rumsfeld was sent by your dad and Mr. Reagan to go and have a friendly meeting with Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq. Rummy looked so happy in the picture. Just twelve days after this visit, Saddam gassed thousands of Iranian troops. Your dad and Rummy seemed pretty happy with the results because ‘The Donald R.’ went back to have another chummy hang-out with Saddam’s right-hand man, Tariq Aziz, just four months later. All of this resulted in the U.S. providing credits and loans to Iraq that enabled Saddam to buy billions of dollars worth of weapons and chemical agents. The Washington Post reported that your dad and Reagan let it be known to their Arab allies that the Reagan/Bush administration wanted Iraq to win its war with Iran and anyone who helped Saddam accomplish this was a friend of ours.

    1990: WE HATE SADDAM. In 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait, your dad and his defense secretary, Dick Cheney, decided they didn't like Saddam anymore so they attacked Iraq and returned Kuwait to its rightful dictators.

    1991: WE WANT SADDAM TO LIVE. After the war, your dad and Cheney and Colin Powell told the Shiites to rise up against Saddam and we would support them. So they rose up. But then we changed our minds. When the Shiites rose up against Saddam, the Bush inner circle changed its mind and decided NOT to help the Shiites. Thus, they were massacred by Saddam.

    1998: WE WANT SADDAM TO DIE. In 1998, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others, as part of the Project for the New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Clinton insisting he invade and topple Saddam Hussein.

    2000: WE DON'T BELIEVE IN WAR AND NATION BUILDING. Just three years later, during your debate with Al Gore in the 2000 election, when asked by the moderator Jim Lehrer where you stood when it came to using force for regime change, you turned out to be a downright pacifist:


    “I--I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president [Al Gore] and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I--I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. And so I take my--I take my--my responsibility seriously.” --October 3, 2000

    2001 (early): WE DON'T BELIEVE SADDAM IS A THREAT. When you took office in 2001, you sent your Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and your National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, in front of the cameras to assure the American people they need not worry about Saddam Hussein. Here is what they said:


    Powell: “We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they have directed that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was 10 years ago when we began it. And frankly, they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.” --February 24, 2001


    Rice: “But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.” --July 29, 2001

    2001 (late): WE BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US! Just a few months later, in the hours and days after the 9/11 tragedy, you had no interest in going after Osama bin Laden. You wanted only to bomb Iraq and kill Saddam and you then told all of America we were under imminent threat because weapons of mass destruction were coming our way. You led the American people to believe that Saddam had something to do with Osama and 9/11. Without the UN's sanction, you broke international law and invaded Iraq.

    2003: WE DON’T BELIEVE SADDAM IS GOING TO KILL US. After no WMDs were found, you changed your mind about why you said we needed to invade, coming up with a brand new after-the-fact reason -- we started this war so we could have regime change, liberate Iraq and give the Iraqis democracy!

    2003: “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!” Yes, everyone saw you say it -- in costume, no less!

    2004: OOPS. MISSION NOT ACCOMPLISHED! Now you call the Iraq invasion a "catastrophic success." That's what you called it this month. Over a thousand U.S. soldiers have died, Iraq is in a state of total chaos where no one is safe, and you have no clue how to get us out of there.

    Mr. Bush, please tell us -- when will you change your mind again?

    I know you hate the words "flip" and "flop," so I won't use them both on you. In fact, I'll use just one: Flop. That is what you are. A huge, colossal flop. The war is a flop, your advisors and the "intelligence" they gave you is a flop, and now we are all a flop to the rest of the world. Flop. Flop. Flop.

    And you have the audacity to criticize John Kerry with what you call the "many positions" he has taken on Iraq. By my count, he has taken only one: He believed you. That was his position. You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs. So he -- and the vast majority of Americans, even those who didn't vote for you -- believed you. You see, Americans, like John Kerry, want to live in a country where they can believe their president.

    That was the one, single position John Kerry took. He didn't support the war, he supported YOU. And YOU let him and this great country down. And that is why tens of millions can't wait to get to the polls on Election Day -- to remove a major, catastrophic flop from our dear, beloved White House -- to stop all the flipping you and your men have done, flipping us and the rest of the world off.

    We can't take another minute of it."
    No matter how the next war ends, the following one will be fought with sticks and stones.
    (Albert Einstein)

  • #2
    John Kerry has changed his position on Iraq something like 18 times, remember the "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it"?

    Comment


    • #3
      "That was the one, single position John Kerry took. He didn't support the war, he supported YOU. And YOU let him and this great country down. And that is why tens of millions can't wait to get to the polls on Election Day -- to remove a major, catastrophic flop from our dear, beloved White House..."

      ... in order to put in yet another catostraphic flop.

      Comment


      • #4
        Wow, I think I'm dumber for having read that!
        No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
        I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
        even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
        He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

        Comment


        • #5
          When someone flip flops, THEY actually have to take both sides.

          You dumbasses wrote something that Bush said, and then showed rice and powell contradicting him.

          Thats not a flip flop.

          And some of those dates were from 1983. John Kerry flip flops 4 times in the same week...not in 2 decades.

          And the banner sign "mission accomplished" was for the boat who had been on extended tour and had accomplished THEIR mission.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TruthSpeak
            When someone flip flops, THEY actually have to take both sides.
            Here is the example of some of the Bush flip-flop.

            (i) In 2000 election Governor Bush said when he becomes President he will not employ US troops and money in nation building abroad.

            Now he is engaged in nation buildng in not one but two places, Afghanistan & Iraq!

            (ii) After 9/11 he said no to the homeland security dept., but then changed his mind and agreed to it!

            (iii) Said no to contistuting 9/11 enquiry commisson, then later on changed his mind and said yes!

            (iv) Was adamant about Condoleeza Rice wouldn't testify in front of the 9/11 commission, but later on changed his mind and allowed Rice to testify before the 9/11 commission!

            (v) He first said that neither he nor chenney would testify before the 9/11 commission, then later on changed his mind and both he and Chenney did testify in front of 9/11 commission!

            (vi) Promised to conduct Iraq war for less than $2 billion and finance it by selling Iraqi oil, but now Iraq is costing US $200 billion.
            Why is he not selling Iraqi oil to conduct the war which was said before the war?
            In this case his flip-flop is costing the tax payer $200 billion.

            (vii) Remember his promise of "No child left behind"?, well he cut the budget of many of education programs!

            Want more Bush's flip-flops?
            And the banner sign "mission accomplished" was for the boat who had been on extended tour and had accomplished THEIR mission.
            You are insulting the intelligence of the people on this forum.

            Comment


            • #7
              turnagainarm, I dont belive Bush had a foreshadowing of 9/11 and the whole WoT and Iraq conflicts. He dident take office knowing this would happen, hence he dident plan on nationbuilding.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by turnagainarm
                You are insulting the intelligence of the people on this forum.
                Actually that was the plan. The mission to depose Saddam's government was complete. It was the end of "major" combat, i.e. no more tank columns or troop divisions.
                No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
                I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
                even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
                He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TruthSpeak
                  When someone flip flops, THEY actually have to take both sides.

                  And some of those dates were from 1983. John Kerry flip flops 4 times in the same week...not in 2 decades.
                  "And you have the audacity to criticize John Kerry with what you call the "many positions" he has taken on Iraq. By my count, he has taken only one: He believed you. That was his position. You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs. So he -- and the vast majority of Americans, even those who didn't vote for you -- believed you. You see, Americans, like John Kerry, want to live in a country where they can believe their president."
                  No matter how the next war ends, the following one will be fought with sticks and stones.
                  (Albert Einstein)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by xxxxx
                    You told him and the rest of congress that Saddam had WMDs
                    They knew he had WMD allready. The WMD argument wasn't for congress, they were sold on it long before Bush came around.
                    No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
                    I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
                    even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
                    He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ChrisF202
                      turnagainarm, I dont belive Bush had a foreshadowing of 9/11 and the whole WoT and Iraq conflicts. He dident take office knowing this would happen, hence he dident plan on nationbuilding.

                      Point is he promised to not indulge in nation building and that is what he is doing now, he flip-flopped and broke his promiose to his voters.
                      Do you think it was necessary to do nation building in Afghanistan?
                      Couldn't USA just leave after winning the war?

                      If he has himself flipp-flopped so many times then what moral ground he has to criticize Kerry?

                      Now if you are saying that Bush had to changed his stance because of changed circumstances, then the same argument should also apply to Kerry, right?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Confed999
                        Actually that was the plan. The mission to depose Saddam's government was complete. It was the end of "major" combat, i.e. no more tank columns or troop divisions.
                        Only problem was that mission was not accomplished at that time, in fact 1-1/2 years later the mission is still not accomplished.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by turnagainarm
                          Only problem was that mission was not accomplished at that time, in fact 1-1/2 years later the mission is still not accomplished.
                          Ummmm, a war is not 1 mission, it is many. The sign did not say "war complete". Or are you saying the Baath are still in power and commanding divisions against us?
                          No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
                          I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
                          even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
                          He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X