Hillary Clinton: For the war, before she was against it

2007-01-29 11:42:44

#1

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

Skip the lame song at the beginning and get right to the good stuff at 6:34. . . she completely contradicts her current mantra.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

Fav quotes:
"I have no belief Saddam Hussein will not disarm . . . this is something I've followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming . .. For nearly 20 years the principal reason that women and children in Iraq have suffered is because of his leadership."

She further states that she looked over the intelligence she had access to in detail and supported the action against Saddam because of his "obsession with weapons of mass destrution". Now she says she was deceived. Wait a sec . .. the "smartest woman in the US" deceived?

2007-01-29 11:45:14

#2

golgoj4: Member; +51|7200|North Hollywood

better than having the blood of all those servicemen on your hands because your a fucking idiot who actually propelled this country into war with lies and subterfuge.

jeebus..

2007-01-29 11:45:38

#3

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6820|The Gem Saloon

she scares me.....im gonna get all of my firearms bought LONG before january of 09.
and remember shes in it to win....lol
i have complete faith that she will completely fuck up the democratic party just so she can try for president.......its already happening.

2007-01-29 11:47:08

#4

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

golgoj4 wrote:
better than having the blood of all those servicemen on your hands because your a fucking idiot who actually propelled this country into war with lies and subterfuge.

jeebus..

You must have fast forwarded over the part where she describes that the read the intelligence in detail and supported action against Saddam. She supported going into Iraq and voted for it.

2007-01-29 11:47:11

#5

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6820|The Gem Saloon

golgoj4 wrote:
better than having the blood of all those servicemen on your hands because your a fucking idiot who actually propelled this country into war with lies and subterfuge.

jeebus..

lol like bush and the evil people sat around and thought of ways to kill americans....but do it an have them support it......i love people like you.

2007-01-29 11:51:39

#6

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|7075

I think this forum is starting to affect me. I already hate her, however I have no idea why, other than that she looks like Satan...

2007-01-29 11:59:36

#7

adam1503: Member; +85|6814|Manchester, UK

Stingray24 wrote:
Now she says she was deceived. Wait a sec . .. the "smartest woman in the US" deceived?

Just because she's smart, doesn't mean she can't be deceived. The intelligence reports that were used to support the war were "sexed up"; Bush and Blair basically lied to everyone. If people (including Hilary Clinton) have no other source to go by, who will they believe? We were all deceived by those two leaders who we were supposed to be able to trust. Personally, I see no reason why she cant say that if she knew then what she knows now, she would have voted against the war.

2007-01-29 12:05:29

#8

mcgid1: Meh...; +129|7142|Austin, TX/San Antonio, TX

Kinda reminds me of one of Kerry's speeches during the last presidential campaign. You know the one where he said "[he] was for the bill before he was against it" (referring to a bill that would have sent more body armor to Iraq and some other stuff along the lines of offering our soldiers better protection.)

2007-01-29 12:14:49

#9

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

adam1503 wrote:
Stingray24 wrote:
Now she says she was deceived. Wait a sec . .. the "smartest woman in the US" deceived?
Just because she's smart, doesn't mean she can't be deceived. The intelligence reports that were used to support the war were "sexed up"; Bush and Blair basically lied to everyone. If people (including Hilary Clinton) have no other source to go by, who will they believe? We were all deceived by those two leaders who we were supposed to be able to trust. Personally, I see no reason why she cant say that if she knew then what she knows now, she would have voted against the war.

Kool Aid tastes good, huh. Hillary said in that clip that she’d followed this situation for more than a decade. That puts us at 1993. Hmm, who was in office then? Was Clinton lying, too?

2007-01-29 12:19:34

#10

rawls2: Mr. Bigglesworth; +89|6986

mcgid1 wrote:
Kinda reminds me of one of Kerry's speeches during the last presidential campaign. You know the one where he said "[he] was for the bill before he was against it" (referring to a bill that would have sent more body armor to Iraq and some other stuff along the lines of offering our soldiers better protection.)

What I wonder is why they were sent in so under prepared in the first place. The war was just but Bush should be court marsheled for the way it was ran.

2007-01-29 12:27:55

#11

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,072|7198|PNW

Yeah! Let's resurrect all that Clinton goodness!

https://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/unnamednewbie13/hillary_intern.jpg

2007-01-29 12:29:14

#12

l41e: Member; +677|7074

"Better to flip-flop than to refuse to flip when your policy is a flop."

-Washington Post editorial

2007-01-29 13:47:09

#13

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

Oh, so that's the back door.
1 - Study intelligence that existed in the previous administration
2 - Study more recent intelligence provided by one of our trusted allies that supports the previous intelligence
3 - After that review, throw one's support fully behind the war.
4 - In addition, cite 10 years of observation, eight of which includes one Democratic party administration.
5 - Then, when one needs to pander to one's anti-war base, disavow the previous position one held for over a decade and claim you didn't have enough info.
6 - When you get elected based on opposition to the war and are thoroughly convinced it’s wrong, immediately sponsor a bill to de-fund the war effort to atone for your mistake.

Oh wait, step 6 is strangely absent. If the Dems truly believed the bs they blurted out to get elected, they'd step up and de-fund the war. How far are we into the first 100 days . . . . tick, tock.

2007-01-29 14:29:14

#14

UON: Junglist Massive; +223|7079

That first sentence has a double negative.... sure it's not intended, but just thought I'd point it out.

I have no belief Saddam Hussein will not disarm . . .

I have no belief [that] Saddam Hussein will not disarm . . .

2007-01-29 14:51:38

#15

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

Meh, typing quickly on lunch and I missed one word.

2007-01-29 15:42:01

#16

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6955|Global Command

golgoj4 wrote:
better than having the blood of all those servicemen on your hands because your a fucking idiot who actually propelled this country into war with lies and subterfuge.

jeebus..

It's Jebus dumbass.

2007-01-29 15:52:52

#17

UON: Junglist Massive; +223|7079

Stingray24 wrote:
Meh, typing quickly on lunch and I missed one word.

The extra "[that]" may or may not have been in the original speech, probably wasn't ... I couldn't be bothered to listen to it... but since I was just being a grammar Nazi about the double negative I thought I may as well add it too

2007-01-29 17:31:40

#18

san4: The Mas; +311|7114|NYC, a place to live

I'm not crazy about Hillary, but I don't think it's fair to say that everyone had all the information they needed to make a decision about the Iraq war. The problem wasn't having enough information, the problem was that the information everyone had was biased.

Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld made it biased by creating their own intelligence analysis network and pressuring all the analysts to support the Administration's views.

The Boston Globe wrote:
'Dark Side' sheds light on Cheney
By Sam Allis, Globe Staff | June 20, 2006
"Frontline" delivers a devastating look tonight at the efforts of Vice President Dick Cheney to gain control of the war on terror after 9/11. In doing so, the show purports, he compromised the integrity of America's intelligence system....

Cheney didn't trust the CIA after it missed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Iranian revolution, and Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, so he created through Rumsfeld's Pentagon his own intelligence network to suit his agenda....

The program is dominated by legions of former CIA officers, some of whom left over the agency's treatment by the White House, and they detail what they view as Cheney's efforts to find the intelligence to fit the war he wanted against Saddam....

We hear that Powell was not told the truth about the provenance of facts on which he based his disastrous speech at the United Nations, and that Cheney and Libby made 10 trips to the CIA -- unheard of by the White House -- to push analysts on data.

Paul Pillar, a respected former CIA officer, was a principal author of a signal report on WMDs in Iraq that proved so wrong. ``The purpose was to strengthen the case for going to war with the American public," he says. ``Is it proper for the intelligence community to publish papers for that purpose? I don't think so, and I regret having had a role in it."

http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/20 … on_cheney/

2007-01-29 18:44:01

#19

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

topal63:
So you feel the Dems voted for the war because it would have been too tough to vote against it considering the political atmosphere of the time? They don't stand up for what they believe in even now that they're in power. Consequently . . . they're all talk and they'll feed us whatever bs line they need to get elected. Dems mantra was they were going to change the situation in Iraq and get us out . . . so where's the bill to de-fund?

2007-01-29 18:50:36

#20

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7100|Canberra, AUS

Practically the whole Senate + Congress was deceived. What's so special?

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2007-01-29 18:59:47

#21

adam1503: Member; +85|6814|Manchester, UK

Stingray24 wrote:
adam1503 wrote:
Stingray24 wrote:
Now she says she was deceived. Wait a sec . .. the "smartest woman in the US" deceived?
Just because she's smart, doesn't mean she can't be deceived. The intelligence reports that were used to support the war were "sexed up"; Bush and Blair basically lied to everyone. If people (including Hilary Clinton) have no other source to go by, who will they believe? We were all deceived by those two leaders who we were supposed to be able to trust. Personally, I see no reason why she cant say that if she knew then what she knows now, she would have voted against the war.
Kool Aid tastes good, huh. Hillary said in that clip that she’d followed this situation for more than a decade. That puts us at 1993. Hmm, who was in office then? Was Clinton lying, too?

But at the time didn't he have WMDs, and wasn't he in the process of disarming? Fast-foward to 10 years later and heres Bush telling us he hasn't disarmed, even though he has. We werent told that because the two Bs wanted to go to Iraq. And neither was Mrs Clinton. Of course, Saddam would claim to have disarmed, but who would believe such a ruthless dictator? We have always been told he has refused to disarm: where, then, are the weapons of mass destruction, if he didn't disarm?

EDIT: The bottom line is that the voters were deceived and lied to to get the desired outcome. It is entirely fair for all those voters to then say that they wouldn't have supported the decision had they been given truthful information. The war was illegal, and they knew it, which is why they lied.

Last edited by adam1503 (2007-01-29 19:01:30)

2007-01-29 20:33:40

#22

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6871|The Land of Scott Walker

Um, how do you know what Hillary read or didn't read? I know you're a fan, but you didn't have to put a webcam in her office.

Both the UN and the Clinton administration stated that Saddam would not disarm. Where'd the WMDs go? Who knows after Saddam wouldn't let inspectors in for so long. We found a lot of them, but the media doesn't talk about that. The rest of them are likely in Syria or another like-minded neighbor.

Spark wrote:
Practically the whole Senate + Congress was deceived. What's so special?

If Bush is really so dumb, how'd he fool the whole opposition party?

Last edited by Stingray24 (2007-01-29 20:35:21)

2007-01-29 21:05:30

#23

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7100|Canberra, AUS

I wouldn't call them an 'opposition' party, they look like the same thing in a different hat.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2007-01-29 22:23:09

#24

san4: The Mas; +311|7114|NYC, a place to live

Stingray24 wrote:
If Bush is really so dumb, how'd he fool the whole opposition party?

He didn't. Cheney and Rumsfeld did.

2007-01-30 00:45:36

#25

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7027|132 and Bush

What is funny is she says it is irresponsible to leave a mess for the next President when her husband left the brewing threat of a terrorist attack to Bush. When he had opportunities to take care of some of them.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

BF2S Forums Hillary Clinton: For the war, before she was against it

golgoj4 wrote:

golgoj4 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

adam1503 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

mcgid1 wrote:

golgoj4 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

The Boston Globe wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

adam1503 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Spark wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Board footer