Question:
If GWB hadn't invaded Iraq, would Kerry have campaigned on saying he failed to act on WMD?
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:33:39 UTC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH93UlGHBfk
John Kerry saying he found WMD in Iraq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEIOtn1wk5g&NR=1
WMD AND THE "LIARS" WHO SAID SADDAM HAD THEM

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Kerry, Pelosi, Biden, and Berger insisted that Saddam had WMD.

If Bush hadn't attacked Iraq, would Kerry's presidential election campaign have said Bush failed to act on Saddam's WMD, and call it a failure of presidential leadership?
Twelve answers:
Tom W
2010-07-19 07:48:33 UTC
Yeah probably. When all of this happened there was a totally Dem Congress and there was no opposition to the war (except for the Exalted Cyclops Robert Byrd) and in fact Dems were the greatest saber rattlers, not wanting to appear to be weak on terrorism. I am a Dem, I voted for Obama, but I know that to buy into the thing that the Dems were against the war in Iraq is just plain stupid. HIllary was the greatest saber rattler of all being the Sen from NYC who thought that Juliani would be running against her. She was screaming for blood and Saddam's head. Now though Dems simply hope that people forget that, and for so many, they have. That the Dems opposed the war fronts is just plain politics and you have to be pretty dumb to buy into that. Why can people get all worked up against someone like Bush when the Dems are exactly the same? How does that work for my fellow Dems who often think that just being a Dem means that you are so much more intelligent than anyone else? Again, it is just political spinning and I am amused by those who swallow the images and live the lie.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:50:29 UTC
No. Clinton had the exact same information that Bush had, and knew that it wasn't ENOUGH to justify a full scale invasion.



It wasn't until Bush lied and twisted the facts, that it became "sellable".......and 9-11 "sealed the deal" for him.......because he knew he could use that shock and fear to his advantage, to ramrod all his lies and BS thru. It worked.....in all the confusion , the scared sheep bought it.......



but there were a brave, intelligent few, who were standing up and screaming about what a mistake it all was. Obama was one of them.......Ted Kennedy another. And they were right.



Not that anyone was interested in the "truth" after 9-11..........all Americans wanted was cold, hard revenge.



Too bad we took it out on someone who DIDN'T attack us......but then, even among liberals, no one cried any TEARS that Saddam swung..........just that he swung for a bullshit reason.......but he deserved to swing none the less.



a rare case of many wrongs, actually making some sort of right. A despot dictator finally got his, thru massive injustice.



Worked for me.............wrong as it was.
libs, almost as smart as lint
2010-07-19 07:50:19 UTC
Of course. But Saddam refused to abide by the terms of the surrender by dening access to UN inspectors. What dems avoid talking about is that Bush was doing his job, not taking any chances when it comes to the safety of America.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:35:06 UTC
*IF* frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their as$ every time they hopped.



OK, first of all, none of those people you posted provided cherry-picked intelligence to Congress or fabricated intelligence about yellowcake and went on national television and lied to the American public about it. Secondly, none of those people held secret Energy Task Force meetings with all the major Big Oil representatives, with maps of Iraqi Oil Fields spread out all over the conference tables, like Dick Cheney did -- in MARCH of 2001. Well before 9/11.



And lastly, none of those people manufactured a national catastrophe like 9/11 to dupe the American people into laying down like sheep and allowing our Constitutional rights to be sabatoged in the name of "National Security" like Cheney and Dubya did.



Talking is one thing, pal. Declaring an illegal war is quite another.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:37:03 UTC
Doubtful, if Bush hadn't made all the big propoganda over Iraq it would have been an out of sight out of mind issue.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:36:19 UTC
Probably John Kerry is one of the poorest choices for a politician that could be made.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:35:56 UTC
Absolutely! Best question of the day!

I can even imagine therapist rapist Al Gore ranting on about how "He betrayed this country!! He ignored our fears!"
rayven
2010-07-19 07:44:29 UTC
I don't know. I lack access to a time machine.



Kerry might have campaigned on that claim. He might not have. There is no way to know.
anonymous
2010-07-19 07:37:59 UTC
OMG! I can't believe what I just heard in those videos.



Democrats make me really really REALLY grouchy.



I need to lie down.
Action H
2010-07-19 07:40:24 UTC
quit clouding the issues with facts
Samboski
2010-07-19 07:36:29 UTC
Yes, that would have been the liberal campaign.
Gun Runner
2010-07-19 07:42:07 UTC
Libs have to whine, it is all they have.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...