But not bewcause of some outdated quotes you give below. But because the Dems who probably smelled something fishy didn't have the guts to question bush prior to the invasion of iraq. They were all supposed to get "intel", "proof" of WMD's. Colin Powell was going tho show all of us irrefutable evidence of WMDs. The proof never came. Why? Because it didn't exist. And the Dems, instead of standing their ground and demanding that they were shown the proof ( a la kennedy with the famous pics of soviet rocket launchers in cuba), folded like a bunch of sissies so they could look "tough on defense". Shame on them.
[ QUOTE ]
Excerpted from
this link.
Jonathan Gurwitz: Opponents say Bush lied; read between the lines
Web Posted: 11/13/2005 12:00 AM CST
San Antonio Express-News
Opponents of President Bush routinely invoke the incantation that he lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to take the nation to war.
"Urges the President to take all necessary and appropriate actions to respond to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
— Text of Senate Concurrent Resolution 71, Jan. 28, 1998, co-sponsored by Democrats Tom Daschle, Patrick Leahy, Max Cleland, John Kerry and Robert Byrd, among others
In doing so, they conveniently overlook the fact that if Bush lied, a long list of liberal icons have also been lying for a very long time, some from before the time he arrived in the Oval Office.
"(Iraq) admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability — notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And might I say, UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production."
— Text of President Clinton's address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff, Feb. 17, 1998
Of course, it's not the continuity of intelligence findings and Bush's reliance on them that his detractors find objectionable. It's what he did in response.
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
— Press release from Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Dec. 16, 1998
Clinton fired cruise missiles and put his faith in what we now know was a corrupt and ineffectual U.N. sanctions regime in a fruitless effort to keep Saddam in a box.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
— From an address by Al Gore to the Commonwealth Club of California, Sept. 23, 2002
In fairness to Clinton, there was no consensus in American politics to initiate major military operations against the Baathist regime or other state sponsors of international terror before Sept. 11, 2001. There was barely such a consensus afterward.
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last four years ... he has continued to build those weapons."
— Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, Oct. 9, 2002
But the central issue of the presidential election one year ago was Iraq: why we are there, how we got there and whether Bush misled the nation.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years."
— Floor statement of Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Oct. 10, 2002
Having lost that election — in effect, a plebiscite on what Bush did about the intelligence information he, his predecessors and Democrats and Republicans in the House and the Senate agreed upon — Bush opponents are left banging their heads against a wall, repeating the meaningless mantra, "Bush lied."
"Under Saddam's rule, Iraq has engaged in far-reaching human rights abuses, been a state sponsor of terrorism and has long sought to obtain and develop weapons of mass destruction."
— Statement from the Web site of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, dated 2002
Only the blindly partisan, the ignorant and the gullible can subscribe to the belief that Bush — and, somehow, Bush alone — lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
"I consider the prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein who can threaten not only his neighbors, but the stability of the region and the world, a very serious threat to the United States."
— Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York at a Jan. 22, 2003, press conference
[/ QUOTE ]