SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Clinton: Terrorism in Iraq worse than Saddam
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Swift Vets and POWs for Truth
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 4:14 pm    Post subject: Clinton: Terrorism in Iraq worse than Saddam Reply with quote

NEW YORK (June 20) - Terrorism festering in Iraq could make the lives of Iraqis worse than they had been under Saddam Hussein, former President Bill Clinton said in a "60 Minutes" interview to be broadcast Sunday.

Well, Billy Boy, guess hundreds of thousands of people "disappeared" into mass graves after the tortures outlined previously in Iraq's concentration camp gulags is worse than terrorism. I guess the Israelis then have it worse in Israel than they did in Auschwitz due to the terrorists. Maybe they should move back to the camps. Duh....

Don't you just LOVE the moral jugments of presidents who received blowjobs in the Oval Office "Because they could" ?????


Asked whether he agrees with President Bush that removing Saddam from power has made the world safer from terrorism, Clinton said, "I think the Iraqis are better off with Saddam gone, if they can have a stable government.

"There have been more terrorists move into Iraq in the aftermath of the conflict. I still believe, as I always have, that the biggest terrorist threat by far is al-Qaida and the al-Qaida network," Clinton said in the CBS interview.

Clinton also said it was a mistake for the Bush administration to invade Iraq before United Nations weapons inspectors finished their work.

U.N. inspectors were pulled from Iraq just before the war began in March 2003, as senior U.S. officials offered assurances Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Months later, retired chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay concluded Saddam did not have stockpiles of forbidden weapons, although he was conducting programs related to producing such weapons.

In an interview to be published in Time magazine, Clinton said that even though he didn't agree with the timing of the attack, he wants the Iraq invasion "to have been worth it."

"I think if you have a pluralistic, secure, stable Iraq, the people of Iraq will be better off, and it might help the process of internal reform in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere," Clinton said.

Clinton gave the interviews in advance of Tuesday's release of his memoir, "My Life."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ironic that only 2% of Iraqis responded that they consider the United States to be "liberators."

We must be doing something wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scott
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 1603
Location: Massachusetts

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

More poll results from Iraq, via Reuters: www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=5450158

Quote:
The poll, conducted in May and obtained by Reuters on Thursday, found only 10 percent of Iraqis had confidence in U.S.-led forces -- down from 28 percent in January. Fifty-five percent would feel safer if those troops left Iraq immediately.


A bit optimistic, perhaps, but not unbelievable.

Quote:
With security topping the list of concerns for Iraqis, 67 percent of those polled blamed an increase in violent attacks around the country on a loss of faith in U.S.-led forces.

But the poll suggested Iraqis were generally optimistic about their future. Of the 1,093 Iraqis interviewed face-to-face in six Iraqi cities, more than 60 percent thought having an interim government in place would improve the situation in Iraq.


Given that:

1. We're about to transfer sovereignity to that interim government.

2. That it was chosen by the former Governing Council (which disbanded itself - when was the last time anyone in an Arab country voluntarily relinquished power?)

3. Are not planning a permanent occupation.

It seems that the case could be made that we're doing exactly what the poll results show the Iraqi people want.

You're right - we must be doing something wrong. But it's working, nevertheless.

Quote:
If it's dumb, and it works; it's not dumb.

_________________
Bye bye, Boston Straggler!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LewWaters
Admin


Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Ironic that only 2% of Iraqis responded that they consider the United States to be "liberators."


I wonder how German and Japanese citizens would have responded to similar polls in 1946? And still, 60 years later, we still have troops in those countries.

I find it oddly amusing that polls earlier showing Iraqi support were scoffed at and labeled unreliable, but this one is pure gospel. Even more odd is that the same people polled don't want a return to Saddams regime days or don't want Sadr in control. I guess that part of the poll doesn't matter as much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I wonder how German and Japanese citizens would have responded to similar polls in 1946? And still, 60 years later, we still have troops in those countries.


Presumably, Saddam didn't have the support of his people. Can't say the same about Hitler and Hirohito. Bad analogy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky wrote:
Quote:
I wonder how German and Japanese citizens would have responded to similar polls in 1946? And still, 60 years later, we still have troops in those countries.


Presumably, Saddam didn't have the support of his people. Can't say the same about Hitler and Hirohito. Bad analogy.


Reading a little history wll tell you that neither Hitler or Hirohito had the support of their populations "after" the war ended either.

Do a search on NY Times Germany 1945 and read some of what was being reported back then about German attitudes on the occupation.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for reading a little bit of history, I was going to ask the same of you. Presumably, we had to drop the two bombs in Japan because so many Japanese considered Hirohito an avatar and until he surrendered, the invasion would have been very difficult.

Nobody said we'd be greeted as liberators in Japan or Germany. Can't say the same thing about Iraq.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680

PostPosted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky wrote:
As for reading a little bit of history, I was going to ask the same of you. Presumably, we had to drop the two bombs in Japan because so many Japanese considered Hirohito an avatar and until he surrendered, the invasion would have been very difficult.

Nobody said we'd be greeted as liberators in Japan or Germany. Can't say the same thing about Iraq.


No we dropped two nukes on Japan because of the Japanese commitment, not to the warlords, but to their Emperor and their culture but, most importantly, to save an estimated 1 million Japanese lives and, more importantly, to save an estimated 500,000 American casualties.

Truman's decision was, first and foremost, a humantarian decision whether you believe it or not. He's been quoted many times as saying exactly that.
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB


Last edited by ASPB on Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:26 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Scott
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 1603
Location: Massachusetts

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

With all due respect,

the estimate I have read time and time again is 1,000,000 American casualties.

I have not yet found an historian who was willing to estimate the probable Japanese casualties resulting from an Allied invasion of the home islands of Japan.

Speculation exists, but nothing is as low as the catastrophic casualties that resulted from the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Needless to say, based on previous Pacific War battles, Japanes casualties would have exceeded Allied casualties by a factor of (oh, about) ten. More or less.

Truman's decision, whether humanitarian or not, saved an awful lot of American lives. In addition, it also saved an even more awful lot of Japanese lives.

They aren't grateful for that. That's okay. They're alive to be ungrateful. I'll be satisfied with that, if I may.
_________________
Bye bye, Boston Straggler!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott wrote:
With all due respect,

the estimate I have read time and time again is 1,000,000 American casualties.

I have not yet found an historian who was willing to estimate the probable Japanese casualties resulting from an Allied invasion of the home islands of Japan.

Speculation exists, but nothing is as low as the catastrophic casualties that resulted from the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Needless to say, based on previous Pacific War battles, Japanes casualties would have exceeded Allied casualties by a factor of (oh, about) ten. More or less.

Truman's decision, whether humanitarian or not, saved an awful lot of American lives. In addition, it also saved an even more awful lot of Japanese lives.

They aren't grateful for that. That's okay. They're alive to be ungrateful. I'll be satisfied with that, if I may.


Looks like we agree on all points but US casualties. I was quoting my 45-50 year old foggy memory rather than trusting revisionary historians. If you can find "liberal" historic data that supports a higher (more conservative) number it sure as hell wouldn't surprise me. Wink
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mtboone
Founder


Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 470
Location: Kansas City, MO.

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:24 am    Post subject: Clinton: Terrorism in Iraq worse than Saddam Reply with quote

Why do you all bother with Sparky, he does not spark debate, he justs puts the fire under your burners and you react? Ignore the person and he will fade away. This site is about what jfk did and not Bush. Democrats always try to bring Bush into the mixture, we Swift Boat Sailors are against kerry, have him taken off the democrats agenda and we will shut up. Sparky will not because he is for the Traitor pure and simple. And if you believe this guy is from Texas, I want to sell you land out in California where this fruit and nut is from, IMHO. Go to the DU site and you cannot post, they just want to play with their selfs on that site, how informative and interactive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ASPB
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 1680

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:37 am    Post subject: Re: Clinton: Terrorism in Iraq worse than Saddam Reply with quote

mtboone wrote:
Why do you all bother with Sparky, he does not spark debate, he justs puts the fire under your burners and you react? Ignore the person and he will fade away. This site is about what jfk did and not Bush. Democrats always try to bring Bush into the mixture, we Swift Boat Sailors are against kerry, have him taken off the democrats agenda and we will shut up. Sparky will not because he is for the Traitor pure and simple. And if you believe this guy is from Texas, I want to sell you land out in California where this fruit and nut is from, IMHO. Go to the DU site and you cannot post, they just want to play with their selfs on that site, how informative and interactive.


MT,

I agree with what you're saying but, as long they are reasonable, the debate strengthens our position because we have to state it more clearly and we may even get lucky and change a few minds. Laughing

It's all about "Uncle Joe's" old maxim regarding "useful idiots".
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
nakona
Lieutenant


Joined: 04 Jun 2004
Posts: 242

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sparky -

Actually, we did get greeted as liberators when we went in, and are still looked at that way by many Iraqis.
_________________
13F20P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy


Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2004 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sparky wrote:
Ironic that only 2% of Iraqis responded that they consider the United States to be "liberators."

We must be doing something wrong.


And what do you know of Arab culture? Obviously little. In fact, I would venture to guess you have no clue about what I'm talking about, or why Arab culture would be relevant towards polls at this point in time.

FDL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wshhml
Ensign


Joined: 25 May 2004
Posts: 52

PostPosted: Tue Jun 22, 2004 8:31 pm    Post subject: Saddam vs. no Saddam Reply with quote

Think of all the torture and murder that happened in Iraq prior to the war and removal of the regime. Yes, they are ratcheting it up. But the Saddam regime had a hold of the nation's finances to finance it's evil intentions. I'm sick of people acting as if this administration just fabricated the WMD threat with Iraq. All of the world's intelligence services said what a threat Iraq was with WMD. We have taken away the regime that caused so much trouble. Saddam Hussein had made numerous threats and calls for America's destruction during the last decade. They celebrated 9/11. Iraq was a threat. We need to get a government we can trust that is not going to be the threat that regime was and make a change to that region. This is hard, deadly work. After 9/11 it should be evident to everyone what we are in for, but people are unfortunately forgetting. 9/11 deals with the Middle East and the evil that comes from the region. We need to clean up for any chance whatsoever. I am not happy with the media in encouraging our vicious enemies and creating panic. And here we have a disgraceful former president attempting to undermine it too. They just do not stop and Clinton is in no position to talk since he allowed al Qaeda to continue on and DID NOTHING.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Swift Vets and POWs for Truth All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group