Good and Bad, Just so you know!

[araine901]

Chet's got an interesting list of comparative statements. Here are a few:

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good...
Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good...
Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad...

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists - good...
Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad...

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good....
Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad....

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good...
Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad...

Clinton says mass graves in Serbia - good...
Entire world says WMD in Iraq - bad...

There's more. Oh, and Chet, Bush didn't award Halliburton the Iraq oil contract. I believe that was an independent bidding process in which five competing companies vied for the contract. Bush had nothing to do with it. I'm not sure how much Clinton was involved in Halliburton's Yugoslavia contract


http://www.fringeblog.com/archives/2004/07/26/goodbad

[A Quiet Boom]

Sorry that's a pretty poor distortion of the facts, and I'm a conservative voting for Bush. Haliburton WAS a no-bid contract. The war in Iraq has cost substantially more that $87 billion etc.

I get the idea and it's right on target but it would be better if supported by the actual facts and not distortions.

[white87911]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by araine901

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good...
Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

BUT GEORGE TOLD US WE WERE GOING TO WAR TO GET THE WMD'S AND TO PROTECT OUR NATION, ONLY WHEN THE BOMBS WERE NOT FOUND, DID HE CHANGE HIS SPEECH TO REFLECT "REGIME CHANGE"

Clinton says mass graves in Serbia - good...
Entire world says WMD in Iraq - bad...

"ENTIRE WORLD" WELL ONLY THE COUNRIES THAT WE BULLIED INTO AGREEING WITH US. THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD, INCLUDING THE INSPECTORS WHO WERE ON THE GROUND, SAID "NO WMD'S"

[A Quiet Boom]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by white87911

Originally posted by araine901

"ENTIRE WORLD" WELL ONLY THE COUNRIES THAT WE BULLIED INTO AGREEING WITH US. THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD, INCLUDING THE INSPECTORS WHO WERE ON THE GROUND, SAID "NO WMD'S"

Bush did say he wanted to remove Saddam before we even dropped the first bomb. He gave Saddam something like 48 hours to leave the country, I believe I'll call that regime change.

As far as the entire world, Russia, France and Germany who did not support us reported that Saddam had WMD (probably because they had the sales receipts to prove it LOL). No one stood up in the UN and suggested Saddam didn't have weapons, the talk was all about giving him more time to conform.

I don't like facts skewn in either direction.

[ubiquity0]

'Chet' missed this one from the internet copy & paste text:
No mass graves found in Serbia - good... No WMD found Iraq - bad...

[Westy]

If I had a year to ship my stuff to Syria while the USA was amassing troops for a pending invasion, I think I could do it. Come on, guys.....regardless of which side of the fence you're on, Saddam had to go. And is everyone forgetting the statements by the inspectors? How they were continuously held up for hours, even days, and that's after they were allowed to enter the country?

Am I the only one that saw the video where they were stopped from entering that huge building while 18 wheeler after 18 wheeler hauled stuff out the back? The same building they speculated was a Centrifuge center, later determined to have been sold to Saddam by France.

IMHO, one nuke is a whole lotta WMD!

[araine901]

I think History will show that the WMD's went to Syria. There is a book out that chronicals the movments of WMD's before the war. It is not a pro Bush book. In fact just the opposite. "The secret history of the war with Iraq" by Yossef Bodansky

[techweenie]

There were no WMDs.

There was no 'weapons grade' uranium.

There was no way to convert ore or yellowcake to weapons grade (enriched).

There were no missles capable of delivering (non-existant) nukes farther than 700 miles.

There was no biological or toxic weapons capability.

There are a handful of leftover chemical weapons from the late 1980s that have deteriorated into non-lethal compounds.

Saddam was not the worst of the world's dicatators and he had nothing to do with 9/11 or al Quaeda. He posed no threat to the US. But he was hurting us economically, and was an easy target for the friends of the oil industry now running the country.

[cmccuist]

Saddam didn't have any chemical weapons.

Sincerely, the Kurds

[Westy]

We can agree to disagree,,,BUT

Mine is opinion. I believe they went to Syria. Not fact, only conjecture. You can say we didn't find WMD"s, or you can say you don't think he had WMD's, but you CANNOT say he did not have them. No one can say that because the statement represents a fact, and none of us have that absolute knowledge.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

Originally posted by Westy
No one can say that because the statement represents a fact, and none of us have that absolute knowledge.

Sure he can, because..... BUSH LIED.