Guess who said the following about going to war with Iraq:
“They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us. Before the Gulf War of 1991, Saddam had built up a terrible arsenal, and he had used it. Not once, but many times in a decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical weapons against combatants, against civilians, against a foreign adversary and even against his own people.”
No, it wasn’t President Bush.
President Bill Clinton spoke these words in 1998 on the steps of the Pentagon, explaining to the American public why war with Iraq was necessary. President Clinton called Iraq and the Saddam Hussein regime a “lethal and unholy axis” of international terrorists and outlaw states.
Throughout Clinton’s years in office, he and his advisors firmly believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One of the main reasons they believed this to be true is because they not only had proof that Saddam Hussein used WMD’s against Iran in the mid-1980s, but Saddam later used WMD’s on his own people, “killing more than 5,000 civilians in the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja in March 1988”. Years were spent playing footsies with weapons inspectors as Iraq’s mad dictator Saddam Hussein more than likely moved the WMD’s from place to place.
From the Weekly Standard, the following is a list of known WMD’s in 1998 based on Iraq’s own admissions:
* In the years immediately prior to the first Gulf War, Iraq produced at least 3.9 tons of VX, a deadly nerve gas, and acquired 805 tons of precursor ingredients for the production of more VX.
* Iraq had produced or imported some 4,000 tons of ingredients to produce other types of poison gas.
* Iraq had produced 8,500 liters of anthrax.
* Iraq had produced 500 bombs fitted with parachutes for the purpose of delivering poison gas or germ payloads.
* Iraq had produced 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas.
* Iraq had produced or imported 107,500 casings for chemical weapons.
* Iraq had produced at least 157 aerial bombs filled with germ agents.
* Iraq had produced 25 missile warheads containing germ agents (anthrax, aflatoxin, and botulinum).
In July 2003, Clinton talked about his frustrations with Iraq:
“When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what he had. We knew what was destroyed in all the inspection processes and that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998. We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn’t know. So I thought it was prudent for the president to go to the U.N. and for the U.N. to say you got to let these inspectors in, and this time if you don’t cooperate the penalty could be regime change, not just continued sanctions.”
After the 9/11/01 attacks, President Bush once again sent weapons inspectors into Iraq and, once again, they were told when and where they could (or could not) search. Unfortunately for Saddam, after 9/11 America wasn’t in any position to play his dangerous games any longer and we needed to take any and all threats seriously. As British Prime Minister Tony Blair said, “9/11 altered the balance of risk”.
After many years—and two presidencies– dealing with weapons’ inspections and Saddam Hussein’s constant threats, we went to war with Iraq. Protesters were out in the streets every day proclaiming President Bush a ‘war monger’ and isolated him as the ‘one and only reason’ we were toppling Saddam’s regime.
While campaigning in 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama said the following about the Iraq War:
“War is sometimes necessary, but it has grave consequences, and the judgment to go to war can never be undone.
Five years ago today, President George W. Bush addressed the nation. Bombs had started to rain down on Baghdad. War was necessary, the President said, because the United States could not, ‘live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.’ Recalling the pain of 9/11, he said the price of inaction in Iraq was to meet the threat with “armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities.
At the time the President uttered those words, there was no hard evidence that Iraq had those stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction… By launching a war based on faulty premises and bad intelligence, President Bush failed [Woodrow] Wilson’s test. So did Congress when it voted to give him the authority to wage war.”
Flash forward to 2013 and the potential war Obama is waging against Syria.
Forget years—there haven’t even been any days of weapons inspectors searching for WMD’s in Syria. There is no “hard evidence” of WMD’s in Syria, as Obama said about Iraq.
Unlike the pre-Iraq war, there have been no debates and/or votes put before Congress about waging war with Syria.
We have no “allies” supporting us if we go to war with Syria.
There haven’t been any talks with the U.N. to gain international support and in fact it is quite the opposite. Russia and China are threatening us and Iran is threatening to attack Israel if we go to war with Syria.
Newt Gingrich says: (emphasis mine)
“Both sides in Syria are bad. One side is a brutal dictator, and the other includes Islamists and terrorists who are dangerous already and who would be brutal in power if given the chance.
We will not spend the time, money and blood to create a desirable side in Syria. There is no victory to be had there.
Syria is not the greatest threat in the Middle East to U.S. or world security. The Iranian regime is working every day to get a nuclear weapon. It poses a direct threat to Israel’s survival and a long-term threat to America.”
The main argument people use about President Bush declaring war on Iraq is that Iraq never directly attacked America.
Neither has Syria.
Sometimes war is the answer but in this case we have no idea who we’re even planning to attack—and according to all the international chatter, the consequences could be deadly for America.
I’m expecting to see those anti-war protesters out in the streets any moment now…