So sorry, I almost didn't see this post at all...
joefromchicago wrote: OCCOM BILL wrote:joefromchicago wrote:It is true that Bill Clinton, for instance, suspected that the Iraqis had WMDs in 1998. It is equally true, however, that he didn't launch a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq in 1998 based upon that suspicion.
A decision that's been hotly debated ever since.
Really? By whom? I don't see a lot of people (or, to put it more accurately, a lot of
sane people) criticizing Clinton for failing to make the same mistake in 1998 that Bush made in 2003.
I suppose that well has dried up, now that you mention it.
joefromchicago wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:It is also true that no one could have a high degree of certainty, one way or another, in part because Bill Clinton essentially allowed Iraq to go unchecked for years, contrary to his obligations. From a legal standpoint; how does one's repudiation, public or otherwise, absolve him of complicity, in any way?
Bill Clinton is not complicit in the same way that, for instance, Hillary Clinton is for the very simple reason that he never authorized or voted for a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. Whether he did or did not do his job regarding inspections is a worthwhile discussion topic, but it's not a topic that has a lot of relevance to this thread, which, after all, is focused on two main points: (1) the GOP video regarding the pre-war statements made by Democrats regarding WMDs, and (2) calling each other names.
Did I forget, you idiot? I wouldn't disagree that Hillary was more instrumental, obviously, but we can't know if Saddam wouldn't have caved in to the same degree in 1998... and I'll bet you believe that unlike George; Bill would have stopped when the new wave of inspectors yelled stop (assuming they still would have). We'll never know because Bill fired a couple shots over the bow and then got busy ignoring the situation.
