Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nitram

(22,791 posts)
4. I'd suggest looking at a timeline before accusing anyone of "selective memory"
Thu Dec 3, 2015, 03:03 PM
Dec 2015

In October 2002, a few days before the United States Senate voted on the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, about 75 senators were told in closed session that Iraq had the means of attacking the Eastern Seaboard of the U.S. with biological or chemical weapons delivered by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs.)* Clinton made her speech based on that briefing and the limitations Iraq had imposed on inspectors. After the vote Iraq gave inspectors free reign to inspect facilities with little advance notice.

In March 2003, Hans Blix reported that "No evidence of proscribed activities have so far been found" in Iraq, saying that progress was made in inspections, which would continue. He estimated the time remaining for disarmament being verified through inspections to be "months". Shortly afterwards the US warned inspectors to leave Iraq and "...on 20 March 2003 (9:34 p.m., 19 March EST) the military invasion of Iraq began.*

So, you see, Clinton's vote, and the aye votes by other liberals in Congress, were based on a deceptive briefing by the administration which was supposed to be based on the best and the latest intelligence. Saddam Hussein, probably spurred by the vote, subsequently U.N. gave inspectors free access. His bluff had been called, and it was wiser to let the world know Iraq had no WMD. Bush ignored the evidence and invaded Iraq anyway.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»2002 Bush is enraged that...»Reply #4