Saddam’s Multiple Acts of Aggression Against the U.S.

Again, you all are forgetting it wasn't just our intelligence. It was the worlds. Egypt, Jordon, France and the UN all said it. He was not abiding by the ceasefire and was hindering the inspections. Such short memories, even Hans Blix said they couldn't interview scientists without minders. Then, of course, he said "we are making progress". How is that progress? Like I said before, nothing about the countries that were on the take from Saddam is considered. How could you not figure all that into the reasons the UN were so agaisnt the war? In your hatred for Bush, you ignore the facts.

Sorry, the UN are a bunch of thieves and traitors. Even Clinton who wrote the Irag Liberation Act of 1998, which called for regime change. Only and ONLY after the stockpiles were not found, "yet", did everyone go on about Bush "misleading" the country. If you can't see it was all just a political ploy on the Dems side, I really feel sad for you. You are not taking into consideration ANY of the other issues in the lead up to the war. Putin gave Bush this info:

Russia 'warned U.S. about Saddam'
Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 12:46 PM EDT (1646 GMT)

MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian intelligence services warned Washington several times that Saddam Hussein's regime planned terrorist attacks against the United States, President Vladimir Putin has said.

The warnings were provided after September 11, 2001 and before the start of the Iraqi war, Putin said Friday.

The planned attacks were targeted both inside and outside the United States, said Putin, who made the remarks during a visit to Kazakhstan.
in any terrorist attacks.

"I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received ... information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations," Putin said.

He said the information was given to U.S. intelligence officers and that U.S. President George W. Bush expressed his gratitude to a top Russian intelligence official.

"This information was indeed passed on through our partner channels to our American colleagues and, moreover, President Bush had an opportunity and used this opportunity to personally thank the leader of one of the Russian special services for this information, which he considered to be very important," Putin said.

========================
As a former voting Dem, it is unforgivable what the Dems did to turn the war in Iraq against the Administration. Anyone who can't see that Saddam was an enemy of the US and would stop at nothing to hurt us, is blind.

Here are the "reasons" Clintons Admin listed. This is called historical evidence. Something that cannot be dismissed in regards to Saddams Iraq.

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate) --H.R.4655-- H.R.4655
One Hundred Fifth Congress of the United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the twenty-seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-eight
An Act To establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Iraq Liberation Act of 1998'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress makes the following findings:

(1) On September 22, 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, starting an 8 year war in which Iraq employed chemical weapons against Iranian troops and ballistic missiles against Iranian cities.

(2) In February 1988, Iraq forcibly relocated Kurdish civilians from their home villages in the Anfal campaign, killing an estimated 50,000 to 180,000 Kurds.

(3) On March 16, 1988, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurdish civilian opponents in the town of Halabja, killing an estimated 5,000 Kurds and causing numerous birth defects that affect the town today.

(4) On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and began a 7 month occupation of Kuwait, killing and committing numerous abuses against Kuwaiti civilians, and setting Kuwait's oil wells ablaze upon retreat.

(5) Hostilities in Operation Desert Storm ended on February 28, 1991, and Iraq subsequently accepted the ceasefire conditions specified in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (April 3, 1991) requiring Iraq, among other things, to disclose fully and permit the dismantlement of its weapons of mass destruction programs and submit to long-term monitoring and verification of such dismantlement.

(6) In April 1993, Iraq orchestrated a failed plot to assassinate former President George Bush during his April 14-16, 1993, visit to Kuwait.

(7) In October 1994, Iraq moved 80,000 troops to areas near the border with Kuwait, posing an imminent threat of a renewed invasion of or attack against Kuwait.

( On August 31, 1996, Iraq suppressed many of its opponents by helping one Kurdish faction capture Irbil, the seat of the Kurdish regional government.

(9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.

(10) On August 5, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and subsequently threatened to end long-term monitoring activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNSCOM.

(11) On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-235, which declared that `the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.'.

(12) On May 1, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-174, which made $5,000,000 available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition for such activities as organization, training, communication and dissemination of information, developing and implementing agreements among opposition groups, compiling information to support the indictment of Iraqi officials for war crimes, and for related purposes.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ.

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

SEC. 4. ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT A TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ.

(a) AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE- The President may provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations designated in accordance with section 5 the following assistance:

(1) BROADCASTING ASSISTANCE- (A) Grant assistance to such organizations for radio and television broadcasting by such organizations to Iraq.

(B) There is authorized to be appropriated to the United States Information Agency $2,000,000 for fiscal year 1999 to carry out this paragraph.

(2) MILITARY ASSISTANCE- (A) The President is authorized to direct the drawdown of defense articles from the stocks of the Department of Defense, defense services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training for such organizations.

(B) The aggregate value (as defined in section 644(m) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961) of assistance provided under this paragraph may not exceed $97,000,000.

(b) HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE- The Congress urges the President to use existing authorities under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide humanitarian assistance to individuals living in areas of Iraq controlled by organizations designated in accordance with section 5, with emphasis on addressing the needs of individuals who have fled to such areas from areas under the control of the Saddam Hussein regime.

(c) RESTRICTION ON ASSISTANCE- No assistance under this section shall be provided to any group within an organization designated in accordance with section 5 which group is, at the time the assistance is to be provided, engaged in military cooperation with the Saddam Hussein regime.

(d) NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT- The President shall notify the congressional committees specified in section 634A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 at least 15 days in advance of each obligation of assistance under this section in accordance with the procedures applicable to reprogramming notifications under section 634A.

(b) DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL ORGANIZATIONS- At any time subsequent to the initial designation pursuant to subsection (a), the President may designate one or more additional Iraqi democratic opposition organizations that the President determines satisfy the criteria set forth in subsection (c) as eligible to receive assistance under section 4.

(c) CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION- In designating an organization pursuant to this section, the President shall consider only organizations that--

(1) include a broad spectrum of Iraqi individuals, groups, or both, opposed to the Saddam Hussein regime; and

(2) are committed to democratic values, to respect for human rights, to peaceful relations with Iraq's neighbors, to maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity, and to fostering cooperation among democratic opponents of the Saddam Hussein regime.

(d) NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT- At least 15 days in advance of designating an Iraqi democratic opposition organization pursuant to this section, the President shall notify the congressional committees specified in section 634A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 of his proposed designation in accordance with the procedures applicable to reprogramming notifications under section 634A.

SEC. 6. WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL FOR IRAQ.

Consistent with section 301 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 102-138), House Concurrent Resolution 137, 105th Congress (approved by the House of Representatives on November 13, 1997), and Senate Concurrent Resolution 78, 105th Congress (approved by the Senate on March 13, 1998), the Congress urges the President to call upon the United Nations to establish an international criminal tribunal for the purpose of indicting, prosecuting, and imprisoning Saddam Hussein and other Iraqi officials who are responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, and other criminal violations of international law.

SEC. 7. ASSISTANCE FOR IRAQ UPON REPLACEMENT OF SADDAM HUSSEIN REGIME.

It is the sense of the Congress that once the Saddam Hussein regime is removed from power in Iraq, the United States should support Iraq's transition to democracy by providing immediate and substantial humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, by providing democracy transition assistance to Iraqi parties and movements with democratic goals, and by convening Iraq's foreign creditors to develop a multilateral response to Iraq's foreign debt incurred by Saddam Hussein's regime.
++++

Who looks like the moron? Bush never said immediate threat, you should get your statements right before you go ahead and make an ass of yourself.. If Bush lied all your buddies, including Kerry and Edwards lied. So, that argument is a Democrat talking point that smells of hypocracy.

P.S. The only person who said "imminent" threat regarding Saddam was Edwards..

CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER

Shelby, Edwards Discuss War in Afghanistan; Taylor Talks About Pearl Murder; Robertson Defends His Comments Against Islam
Aired February 24, 2002 - 12:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

EDWARDS: Well, I don't think we're focused on military options right now, John.

I think it was important, in answer to your last question, it was important for the president to go to the region. I think he did help alleviate some of the concerns that people in that area had about this "axis of evil" comment.

But I do think that the more serious question going forward is, what are we going to do? I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country


"[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


"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

"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[/quote]

------------------

Xena, a word of appreciation. For this and your other posts I am deeply grateful. You are extremely intelligent and also rational (traits not always found in combination.) In addition, you are extremely well-informed. I learned a great deal from your posts on this topic. It is too bad that there are not more posters like yourself. You redeem the others.

I hope that you don't mind if I use some of your information in future posts, on an "as-needed" basis.

dhudlud37

I too am glad Xena caught Frank and Magus engaging in a favorite game of the lefties - "Misconstruing Reality."

As was pointed out by ican711nm on another thread, the liberal media in the US loves to "summarize" the statements made by the Bush Administration into sound bites that mischaracterize what was really said. Then, folks like Frank Apisa and Magus hear it repeated over, and over, by their favorit liberal newscaster, and they begin to believe it to be fact. Bush NEVER called Saddam and "immediate" or "imminent" threat. He called Iraq a "grave and gathering' threat." Check your sources.

There's a reason some of us don't just swallow the "bare facts" that are thrown at us. They're frequently incorrect.

---



What typical spin from the left:

*Bush believed something based on the best intelligence at the time, that later turned out to be false -- Bush lied to the American people.

*Kerry believed the very same thing based on the very same intelligence -- Kerry was mislead.

Holy sh-t. The common person on the street in most cities of the world knew Bush was rushing into war against a helpless country. There were millions upon millions of protesting voices all over the whole world telling him to use a little common sense. Many American politicians who voted to allow Bush to do his deed were stampeded by the emotion of the moment, a paranoia nurtured by the administration. They felt the fear of a misguided public pushing them. It would have been political suicide for some to vote against unthinking fears. Politicians' spines bend with the votes of the people.

edgar, doncha love the elaborately orchestrated tagteam at A2K that's currently attempting to re-write it all to fit THEIR personal illusions?

The Soviet Union had guys like that always working overtime... tirelessly obscuring and concealing their Leaders' constant failures and inadequacies, constantly beating the drums of conflict, nationalism and xenophobia...
It's a damned shame that our nation's leadership is so deficient as to feel a need to resort to similar underhanded tactics:
propagating and promoting Fear to keep a captive populace under wraps.

A substantial segment of the population is well aware of the Dis-information and Agitprop Ops;
the Orwellian double-speak has as many foes as it has fans.

The paradigm at A2K indicates how the Dogs of War and the Merchants of War really loathe it when those of the public who truly value LIBERTY reject their spiel... and their shackles.

The most dangerous cult of all is the enslaving Cult of the Sword.

This is such a joke, Ti, I cannot get over the fact that you actually posted it.

Before he had other people invade Iraq for him, our moron in Chief was obviously telling all of us that we had to invade because of the great thread Saddam posed for us.

There is no doubt about where Bush was on this issue...and where he was leading the American people.

Now you kneejerk conservatives want to do a revisionist job on the issue because the moron was shown to be wrong...or a lying sack of shyt. (You choose!)

Well it's certainly gathering graves....

There is a last minute influx of far right wing smear threads from newbies I think is orchestrated to throw the site into confusion as they boost Bush in a tight race.

**Bonus point for PF reference**
**But lost bonus point for using the word "paradigm"**

I have a sense of humor, Frank, but where's the joke here? But if you mean my post is "ridiculous," are you saying Bush in fact called Saddam an "immediate" or "imminent" threat? --- are you saying I was incorrect?

There was no doubt where Bush was, nor was there any doubt where each of the Senators were that voted to authorize armed conflict with Iraq. (Nor was there any doubt in the minds of the "slam-dunking" intelligence-gatherers out there who stated the WMD currently existed in Iraq.)

If, however, you have been able to keep up with Kerry's ever-vacillating positions with regard to the Iraq War since that vote (or prior to his casting that vote), you are doing better than I. I have heard him state that he would not have changed his vote, even knowing there were no WMD in Iraq. He just would have done it "better." He voted against funding for the troops on the ground in Iraq, yet he complains they aren't adequately supplied. He complains there are not enough troops on the ground, yet he now says he would not advocate increasing the number. Isn't your head spinning? Or is your ABB attitude keeping you grounded?

What is the joke is the prevailing attitude of the left that I posted at the end of my prior post.

Yes!

I'm glad we agree.

And I hope you're over the fact that I actually posted that.

No!