Crank up the way back machine Mr. Peabody and let’s go back to December 16, 1998. William Jefferson Clinton is in office in the middle of a scandal about sex with an intern. Clinton has been caught lying about an inappropriate (read sexual) relationship with a woman that was not his wife. He is facing an impeachment. It is time for a speech to the country so here are the major points of said speech:
- “Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons,”
- “Earlier today I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces,”
- “Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors,”
- “Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning,”
- “Instead of inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors,”
- “If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will,” said Clinton. “He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction.”
- “The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government — a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people,”
Well now, what have we learned from history, the real history not that revisionist stuff the moonbats try to pass as the real thing? We learned that Saddam Hussein was a threat. We learned that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We learned that the US President launched a strike without having been attacked first (I think they call it preemptive). We learned that inspectors were not being allowed to do their jobs. We learned that Hussein was manipulating the inspectors. We learned that if we failed to act it would be seen as a sign of weakness. And we learned that the best way to end the threat was regime change.
We also learned that these are the truths when a Democrat is in the White House. When a Republican is in there then there are no WMD, Hussein was not a threat , preemptive strikes are illegal, a show of weakness is will not embolden the enemy, that inspectors just needed more time, and that regime change is bad policy.
It is really strange that when a donk President wants to take focus off his personal problems he gives these reasons and bang he is off to launch. When a Republican President uses the very same reasons to protect us from terrorist attacks in the wake of 9/11, he is wrong.
You know how it works. Link to this site and trackback with your favorite post. Topic does not matter (so long as content is not inappropriate) and you may send as many trackbacks as you wish.
Trackback To:
Don Surber | The Political Teen | Basil’s Blog | Choose Life | Jo’s Cafe | California Conservative | Euphoric Reality | NIF bRight and Early | Stop The ACLU | Adam’s Blog | Conservative Cat | GM’s Corner | Stuck On Stupid The Tar Pit | third world county | TMH’s Bacon Bits | Cao’s Blog