here’s an excerpt of what president bush said in his november 11th speech:
While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons programs.
They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction. And many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: “When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security.” That’s why more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate – who had access to the same intelligence – voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
let’s look at what some prominent democrats had said in the past about iraq and WMD’s, shall we? (credit to sister toldjah in this post.) any italics are my addition. 🙂
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” – Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” – Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime Â… He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation Â… And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction Â… So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is realÂ…” – Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
“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 Â… We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” – Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members Â… It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” – Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
what they are saying now:
Sen. Levin:(from the weekly standard blog) “The intel didn’t say that there is a direct connection between al Qaeda and Iraq,” he said in an appearance on Fox News on February 2, 2004. “That was not the intel. That’s what this administration exaggerated to produce.”
also: “But, as a matter of fact, when you look at the statements of the administration prior to the war, over and over and over again the basis that was used is that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction – not programs, not intentions, not hopes – has weapons of mass destruction in his possession and could use them against us at any time and could hand them up to terrorists.” from the original FNC transcript from that february 2nd appearance.
interesting, but i’m confused. didn’t senator levin say something similar to what the administration said in the beginning? let’s look at it again. he says that saddam is building WMDs and the means to deliver them. that sure sounds like an allegation of a program or an intention to me.
in response to a question about why he voted to kick saddam out of kuwait when there was a known threat and why he voted to kick saddam out of iraq when there may not have been a threat, here’s what Sen. Kerry had to say:
Sen. Kerry: (interview with Chris Wallace on FNC quoted here–external link to FNC transcript n/a) “Now, I’m happy to answer that. I did indeed vote the way I voted in 1991. I thought we ought to kick Saddam Hussein out of Iraq. I said so on the floor of the Senate. But with the memories of Vietnam, I also thought we ought to take a couple of months more to build the support in the country.”
“With respect to this time, I voted to give the authority to the president to use force under a set of promises by the president as to how he would do it: build a legitimate international coalition, exhaust the remedies of the United Nations, and go to war as a last resort. He broke every single one of those promises.”
now, i don’t see anything in the previously quoted statement that puts any conditions on his vote. maybe he did put all these conditions on his vote. if he had these conditions for war before he started running for president, then i would be willing to correct the record on this and post it in this space. as to his first point, the international coalition was larger for Bush 43 than Bush 41. saddam thumbed his nose at numerous resolutions. as far as the war as a last resort? well, apparently john kerry doesn’t believe his own statements about saddam. if he did, then he could logically find a legitimate reason to go to war.
just read the above quotes and compare to current rhetoric. make up your own mind about the president is just a flame-thrower at the democrats, or whether what he says about democrats rewriting history has some ring of truth to it.
related:
chris hitchens: believe it or not (from slate)
carol platt liebau asks the question : who is lying about iraq? she comes to a different conclusion than the rest of her fellow bloggers at huffpost would.
thinking right has more, referencing the norman podhoretz post, with background on the history of iraq and WMDs.
Democrats Deny Having Pre-War Intelligence–from scrappleface
and for my progressive/liberal friend in the uk, some unrelated links: 🙂
Liberal groups to step up pressure on Alito nomination–from CNN
and a poll with positive news for democrats –from huffpost.
tags: Democrats, George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Iraq, John Kerry, President Bill Clinton, President Bush
