Koppel and Brokaw Agree: Clinton Would Have Gone Into Iraq, Too

[sabra]

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001738416

Koppel and Brokaw Agree: Clinton Would Have Gone Into Iraq, Too

NEW YORK Appearing on "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert this week, two broadcast veterans, Tom Brokaw of NBC and Ted Koppel, agreed that the press shouldn't be faulted too harshly for not questioning more deeply the claims of WMD in Iraq--and declared that Bill Clinton would have gone into Iraq just like George Bush if were still president in 2003.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the transcript.
*

KOPPEL: Do we have a right to ask critical-- not just a right; do we have an obligation to ask critical questions? And did we fall short of that prior to the Iraq War? That's a perfectly legitimate point, and I think we all have to plead guilty, to one degree or another, to having been, you know, a little bit soft on the administration beforehand.

But in large measure, when the president and his top people tell you, as they did, "Here's our perception of what exists. Here's our perception of the danger to the United States. Here's our perception of a relationship between this guy who has weapons of mass destruction and the group that just blew up the Pentagon and the World Trade Center," I don't know that reporters as a whole can sit there and say, "Oh, hokum. You know, it's just not true." We can raise questions, and I...

BROKAW: Given the absence of hard evidence.

KOPPEL: Hard evidence. Right.

...

KOPPEL: If 9/11 had happened on Bill Clinton's watch, he would have gone into Iraq.

BROKAW: Yeah. Yeah.

[Oversea Visitor]

1. Cause they say so

:rofl: Hmm they must be the voices telling Bill Clinton what to do :rofl:

[tsuki]

2. President Clinton would have cooked the intelligence to go

into Iraq. Not with this Congress. They would have been oversighting him and investigating him and Ken Starring him. Can't you hear them now?

What a pair of liars.

[okieinpain]

7. shit he would never have gotten pass the investigations into

why 9/11 happened while he was president. he would have been labeled a failure and not to be trusted because he is weak on crime.

[UpInArms]

20. the GOPpiggies would have impeached him again - for letting 9/11

happen.

The investigations and castigations would still be going on today.

[tsuki]

22. Oh, I thought they still were.

[okieinpain]

23. You are absolutely correct.

[ixion]

47. 911 wouldn't have happened if Clinton had been prez

and we would have neither the unPATRIOTic Act, nor the War on Terror, nor the illegal invasion of Iraq on our collective consciences.

Also, we wouldn't be a trillion in the hole.

We would still be a respected country world wide.

Tens of thousands of people would still be alive.


That's what I see if Clinton or Gore had been prez.

[stepnw1f]

84. Bill Was almost Obsessed with A possible Terror Strike

It was his administration that tried to warn Dumb-ass of a possible strike in the US. But then again asshole and his Neo-Cons World Domination Nazi club wanted it to happen. They even stated that they needed a Pearl Harbor for an excuse to invade Iraq.

Bush still doesn't seem to be that concern with the real threat, but sure talks the talk. His actions say otherwise. And instead of doing job, he chooses to use terror as a way to install a corporate fascist dictatorship.

[BikeWriter]

3. Clinton did not go into Iraq, pure and simple.

[raccoon]

80. Amen! And for these to Major MSM hoes

to be even DISCUSSING this is nauseating.

[tuvor]

4. Oh, hokum. Besides...

...bush's mantra isn't supposed to be "What Would Clinton Do?"

[napi21]

5. I supppose it's possible, but I think Clinton would have done it

very differently. His phylosophy6 was not to deploy 100,000 troops, but to use air bombardments and very specific targets. Look at how he handled Bosnia.

Clinton was NOT trying to RULE THE WORLD! Shrub IS!

[KittyWampus]

74. Excellent Point! From What Clinton's Said So Far, I'd Find It Possible

he might have pursued SOME kind of military force... but a very different kind.

Then we need to focus on WHY he would have considered military action. He would probably have been fed lies from the the fucking NeoConservaties in the Pentagon, State, CIA, NSA etc. as well as the Enron and Energy Fascists who were desperate for Iraqi oil fields.

And since Clinton was a Democrat and one without Military credentials of any kind, he'd be more likely to buckle under.

Hence, my support of Wesley Clark.

[lumberjack_jeff]

86. Bullshit. Clinton would not have yanked inspectors out to put troops in.

If the war was over WMD, then Clinton would have done some due diligence to verify that it was there.

He would not have gone to war over the objection of El Baradei.

[amerikat]

6. As I recall, PNAC asked him to go into Iraq

and he didn't.

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. Those two nitwits were duped by jr's babble about threats

and wmd. Their opinons on anything are worthless, they are actors reading a script called the "news".

[Binka]

33. A CYA Circle Jerk

Nitwits. Perfect!

[AverageJoe]

37. Actors reading a script

You are absolutely correct. If even I knew that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and Iraq had no weapons of mass distruction, how in the hell can they say that President Clinton would have done the same damn fool thing that baby hitler did? President Clinton had his faults, but being an idiot was not among them.

These guys are tools.

[0007]

53. These guys are halfwits and between the two of them they

could never make one good nitwit. Now the question is, what's a good descriptive adjective for Tim Russert?

[shantipriya]

59. SOB Koeppel & Brokaw

I agree.These guys are losing it in their old age.They are the reason we are in Iraq.

[0007]

89. What's dumber than a dimwit? Howard Zinn is older

than Brokaw and Koeppel and much wiser as he ages.

[raccoon]

81. Right on! nt

[TeflonTalons]

9. No

I don't think Bill Clinton would have gone into Iraq at ALL.

[countmyvote4real]

Oh puh-lease.

Excuses. Excuses. Excuses. These MSM enablers have been spinning themselves silly for * for so long they have completely lost it. Is it any wonder that TDS presents more culpable truth in satire than they can muster in the guise of informed news journalists?

[1monster]

10. I have only one thing to say to that.

[librechik]

11. But Clinton himself has said repeatedly in recent days :NO!

"Iraq was wrong." Do they not watch the news and check out the facts? Not recently, and not very much!

These two idiots are as misinformed as they are arrogant.They invented the news, they didn't report it. All showbiz, almost all the time. I can count on my fingers moments of sincerity from the two of them combined in the last few years.

I'm glad they're gone.

[Wordie]

12. Maybe rather than listening to opinions about what Clinton would have done

someone ought to ask Clinton. I would hope he would say he would not have. He would not have had the same cooked intelligence, perhaps.

[Algorem]

13. why do these old news madams always come back to turn another trick?

[Hyernel]

14. False. Totally false.

The Republicans Congress would have never allowed Clinton to attack Iraq. They would have charged that he was trying to divert attention from his girlfriend problems.

Rush Limbaugh would have shrieked that the poor peaceful Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 and that the Iraqis. And...NO NATION BUILDING!!

What the fuck was Koppel thinking?

[madrchsod]

15. clinton`s enforcement of the no fly zone and the un sanctions

killed alot of people in iraq from 1992-2000. he didn`t need to invade. BUT i have read where he found it politically impossible to back off both policies do to the political situation with the republicans ,saddam`s stupidity , and the bin boys blowing up us property and killing us citizens. these guys are full of shit because clinton knew saddam had nothing

[KittyWampus]

75. I Don't Think Clinton Knew Saddam Had Nothing. And He Would Have

been fed bullshit from the NeoCons from all sides.

And remember, the NeoCons have the Media.

They would have FORCED some kind of action from Clinton.

Even if they had to manufacture MORE evidence (along with Niger)... and since they would've had more cover (not being in WH) they might have done a better job of lying and making shit up.

[ninkasi]

16. Amazing

These two guys who are supposed to be newsmen act as though there was absolutely no evidence to contradict the administration's claims. This supposes that their news organizations could not have followed up on Scott Ritter's claims, or Joseph Wilson's, or Hans Blix, or any of the other people who were denying that Saddam possessed WMDs. They talk about the absence of hard evidence, but wasn't it their jobs to investigate claims made either for or against?

They sit there talking, and acting like the only thing they had to go on was the story spun by Bushco, and that if he got the story wrong, there was absolutely no way to know beforehand that it wasn't true. Is this supposed to be what news organizations do? Don't they feel any obligation at all to investigate claims? I would be humiliated, if I were Koppel or Brokaw, and spouted drivel like that on television.

[Old and In the Way]

31. Pathetic.......Brokaw and Rather played the story the way the

administration wanted it played. This revisionistic assumption of BC's intent to invade would never have flown with the Republican Congress even if Clinton has designs. And for what purpose? Clinton did not have the same motivations as Bush with regards to invading and occupying Iraq. There was never a compelling case posited by Clinton. I hope Clinton responds to this publicly.

[ninkasi]

32. So do I

It's true, as you said, that Clinton didn't have Bush's motivations. Bush wanted to invade Iraq before he was selected by the Supreme Court. He would have found one excuse or another to do it, but this pitiful conversation is trying to legitimize Bush's illegal war by supposing that Clinton would have done it. The Republican Party needs to put Clinton on their payroll, because he has been their handy excuse for everything they do.

Their obsession with all things to do with Clinton is pathalogical. It seems really strange, considering how much they demonize him, to use the excuse that he would have invaded Iraq too as a reason to make Bush look less criminal.

[ochazuke]

17. I'll take your press passes now, you imposters

Journalists. Humph!

[journalist3072]

18. Pretty scary....

When you think that we were actually getting our news from these 2 idiots.

I normally have tremendous respect for Koppel. I don't know what's up with him.

Maybe he feels like he has to redeem himself to the neo-cons. After all, they just about wanted his blood for running those Nightline specials in which he showed the names of all the troops killed in Iraq.

[savemefromdumbya]

19. Nonsense

[killbotfactory]

21. Why didn't he invade in 1998?

Oh yeah, it was because it was completely unnecessary to stop WMD production and would open pandora's box. Good thing we dodged that bullet, right?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

24. Jeesh. Bombard these idiots with letters

Man, what kind of crazy stuff is this?
It is precisely this inane babel that led me to turn the television off a few years ago for news.
Have not missed it a bit.
Why don't these two imbecilles ... errr, sorry, guys, mental giants run for office and solve all our problems?

[karynnj]

25. The Democrats need to focus on MARCH 2003

By then Blix and Baredai had reported that there were likely no WMD and the Iraqis were DESTROYING their most powerful missiles to avoid war. That is when Bush chose to invade.

This not Oct, when Congress voted - is when the question should be asked. The media did not really take up the calls for peace that came from many people at that point. Part of it is political - because it is an out for people like John Kerry who in both op-ed and a speech at Georgetown in early March 2003 (before the war) demanded that Bush give the inspecters more time.

[longship]

26. Brokaw and Koppel are full of shit.

nt

[MadisonProgressive]

27. BULLCRAP

[niyad]

28. "a LITTLE BIT soft"??? try cottenelle soft, try roll over and play dead

soft, try, "WE DIDN"T do our jobs" soft.

[EFerrari]

29. So, how much did Brokaw sell out for? Bets? n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

30. Until Bill Clinton himself states unequivocally

that that's what he would have done, those two washed up old hacks who pretend to be quality journalists can kiss my ass and fuck off.

I'm just as glad to see both of them move on. Too many people were sucked in by their demeanor into thinking that they were genuine journalists, and I admit to having been sucked in myself. At least people won't make the same mistakes with their replacements.

[deminks]

34. Why do we honor these people as experts?

Of what are they expert? Reading out loud what someone else has written?

[hayu_lol]

35. For eight years, these parasites put words and deeds into Clinton's mouth

and life. Everything he did was under a microscope. Clinton is still alive and well. Why didn't these puffball hacks just have Clinton on the program to answer the question.

No, Clinton would have worked closely with the UN until the matter was resolved diplomatically.

Obviously these two birds pleased their corporate masters.

[EST]

36. On cspan I saw Broikaw telling a questioner that,

on the whole, the newsies did a pretty good job of covering the Boosh criminals over the last four years. I was speechless. With the Brokaw has been and Koppel never was defending the stupidity, the "media" will disappear as serious source in the US. You can't correct the problem if you pretend it's not even there.
Dumbasses are not worth wasting time on.

[buddysmellgood]

38. Fucking newsreaders. Like they know anything more than what's fed to them.

[flordehinojos]

39. DID THEY ASK CLINTON OR ARE THEY GODS JUST LIKE GEORGE WHO ARE

ALL KNOWING?

[Raine]

40. NO he would NOT have

because if he had tried to the repukes and the press would have started screeching "WAG THE DOG"!!!

[BooScout]

41. Brokaw & Koppel were supposed to report the news....

....not make up what "may" have happened.....I never had much respect for Brokaw but Koppel surprises me with this bullshit.

They are no more of an expert than anyone else in speculating on what "may" have happened. .....I know one thing..........IF and it's a big IF, Clinton had decided to invade Iraq.......he would NEVER have done it without UN approval.

[oblivious]

42. "I think we all have to plead guilty" War crimes admission?

Nonetheless, in their arguments US prosecutors set forth a democratic legal principle derived from the international experience of a half- century of carnage: that planning and launching an aggressive war constituted a criminal act and that those who helped prepare such a war through their propaganda efforts were as culpable as those who drew up the battle plans or manufactured the munitions.
http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-walsh24303.htm

[depakid]

43. What a couple of old whores

No other way to describe it.

Both of them and all they stand for make physically sick.

History will reflect what kind of men they were- utterly lacking any integrity.

I'm sure their grandkids will be very proud.

[Libby2]

44. I don't want or need their fucking opinions.

Just the facts boys, just the facts.

[fujiyama]

45. And to think I thought it was unfortunate

Kopel was off the air.

Maybe he's getting old. Or maybe he's just as idiot. I pretty much figured that to be the case with Brokaw.

So, what else is new with the media? They're so full of shit, and they're making more of it up to cover their own sorry asses and they're miserable excuse for being journalists the last several years.

Wow, it really stuns me how obsessed they are with Clinton still. A half decade after he's been own of office, presiding over a time when he did NOT invade Iraq, they are speculating that he would have given intelligence that was clearly manipulated by this administration?

I'm sorry, I have seen no evidence of Al Gore going over to the CIA to pressure them to tell him what he wanted to hear. As far as I know, Clinton and Gore actually tried to get the truth (sometimes from uncooperative bastards like Louis Freeh) and make decisions based off it.

[teryang]

46. Goebbels & Heydrich say Weimar Republic would have invaded

...Rhineland, Czechloslavakia, and Poland.

[Vinca]

48. Clinton was too smart to go to war. Heck, even 41 was too smart

to go to Baghdad. King George had a score to settle and it had nothing to do with Iraq and much to do with besting daddy. Someone should have strapped the guy down to a psychiatrist's couch.

[emulatorloo]

49. Let's state the obvious;Clinton/Gore actually listened to Richard A Clarke

When Clarke told Bushies that there was no connection to saddam and 9/11 and the focus needed to be OSAMA, they didn't listen.

[0007]

50. So the media whores have decided that Clinton is the benchmark

for White House standards.

Who thinks up these stupid ideas that have no basis for authenticity?

Clinton knew that Saddam Hussein was contained and no threat, and would not done such a dumb thing. Clinton also knew that Osama wanted the U.S. military out of Saudi. Clinton also knew it was Saudis that were involved in bringing down the World Trade Center and not Saddam. Why would Clinton go after Saddam Hussein?

So now the press is comparing Bush with Clinton!

Dumb

[lakeguy]

51. right, i guess if these two say so then it must be true. nt

[AzDar]

52. Nice try fellas...perhaps they're worried about how this will affect

their 'journalistic legacies'? Not to worry, you (with the exception of Dan Rather)will be remembered as 'catapulters (sic) of the propaganda'. Besides, didn't the Idiot-in-Chief tell ya it doesn't matter how history will view you 'cause "you'll be dead" anyway?

[SidDithers]

54. Those comments say more about Koppel and Brokaw...

than they do about Clinton.

Sid

[mmonk]

55. The neocons were after Clinton to go into Iraq since 1998.

What makes them so sure? He would have gone into Afghanistan but to make this claim, it has to come from Clinton himself. Why does EVERYBODY defend bush by bringing up Clinton? What is the CULT fascination of this dark and evil movement in America?

[Vickers]

56. So, did you boys ASK Clinton, or are you just talking out of your ass?

:shrug:

[CottonBear]

57. I believe that they also said Kerry if elected, would've invaded Iraq.

I need to check the transcript. Mr. CB and & I saw this interview and began screaming at the TV set when the two idiots began babbling on about what Democrats would have done regarding Iraq. :grr: We had to turn off the TV in order to prevent us from becoming more upset.

[lonestarnot]

58. Now there's a couple of ass hats for you... Where have they been? On

another planet I guess. Bought tickets for the citizen space adventure 5 year tour.

[DFWJock]

61. Coulda, shoulda, woulda

This is bullshit. BushCoInc was licking their chops waiting for some
excuse to go into Iraq.

[lonestarnot]

88. Waiting for some excuse? Don't you mean "creating" an excuse?

[Toucano]

60. Bullshit!

What a pointless discussion!

Don't fault the press too harshly? Coming from...gee, I don't know...the PRESS! No CYA effort in those comments, now is there?

[rhett o rick]

62. I asked my magic 8 ball and it said "maybe". Put that in the corp news.

[rhett o rick]

63. Wonder what they think the previous 41 Presidents would do?

If they all would have gone into Iraq, does that justify what Bush did? He needs to be impeached and tried for war crimes. Maybe Koppel and Brokaw and Russert too. They are part of the new plutocracy.

[henslee]

64. Screw these apologist ass clowns.

[area51]

65. "Clinton would've gone into Iraq"

In what alternate universe?

This once again shows how the mainstream press is conservative, not liberal.

[Jim__]

66. And their evidence for this conclusion is? - n/t

[patcox2]

71. The fact the Clinton started an air war against Iraq in 1998?

That would be evidence.

But I doubt that Clinton would have done it, and even if he did, there would have been differences:

1. he would have listened to the generals and used enough men.
2. he would have applied the Powell doctrine and would have had a clearly defined goal and clear plans for reconstruction in place.
3. He would not have turned the country into a corrupt patronage no-bid contract bonanza for republican connected contractors.

[leQ]

67. this is why i don't watch nbc or abc nightly news. they're all bought

and paid for by bushco.

[Akoto]

68. What I find funny is ...

No matter how much the right-wing tries to demean and smear him, while hoisting the flag of *, it still comes down what Clinton would have done. I think that says something about how much their campaign against him has done.

[The Backlash Cometh]

69. 9/11 wouldn't have happened under Clinton.

Richard Clarke was in charge and shaking trees. Remember?

If asshats Koppel and Brokaw are going to make leaps on what Clinton would have done regarding Iraq, then they would also have to ask themselves if 9/11 would have happened under both Clinton or Gore and the answer is no.

[Javaman]

70. Shoulda whoulda coulda...

koppel stopped being a real journalist about 15 years ago. He just revealed himself as being just another media whore.

Hell, if they want to deal in very bizarre imagery, why not ask the question: would moron* gone into Iraq if he had a brain?

"I could while away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head, I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain."

This line of questioning is complete and total buffoonery.

Teddy boy, go take a rest, you have talked to much today.

[Canuckistanian]

72. This shows that the Iraq war is officially a mistake

Going to war in Iraq is bad.
Therefore, accusing Clinton of wanting to go to war in Iraq is now considered an insult.

[tecelote]

73. Clinton would have caught Bin Laden!

[NuttyFluffers]

76. "puff, puff, pass," baby. "puff, puff, pass..."

i'm sure these guys must get ahold of some damn fine medicine. otherwise, how does one explain how they can have such lucid visions?

[DELUSIONAL]

77. Who cares what these "has beens" say or guess

First of all -- Clinton isn't stupid -- he tossed out the Neocos wet dream about invading Iraq.

[The Flaming Red Head]

78. Nahhh Saddam didn’t threaten Clinton’s daddy

And if he would have Clinton would have handled it like a man not like that wimp W.

[spanone]

79. I saw that interview. It was Koppel who said it. It's utter bullshit.

something to the effect 'if Clinton had still been in office, he would have invaded Iraq after 9/11' utter horseshit.

[redqueen]

82. How much longer will any thinking person pay attention to these whores?

Bought and paid for spin... who fuckin needs it?

Talk about the stolen elections, corporate personhood, or war crimes, and then maybe those of us who aren't too stupid to see reality will bother paying attention to you nobs.

[BlueStateGirl]

83. 9/11 wouldn't have happened under Clinton's watch.

Unlike Bush, President Clinton actually had a plan an Al Qeada roll back plan. Clinton would have pursued them for their attack on the USS Cole. Something Bush never did once he took office. In fact he gave the Taliban $43 million dollars in May of 2001. (knowing full well Osama was in Afganistan).

Will these simpering morons ever get over the Clinton presidency? They simply cannot stand the fact that he left office with a 68% apporval rating.

[stepnw1f]

85. They Are Both Corporate GOP Whores

and liars to boot.

[madmark]

87. No way; Clinton would have stayed on Al Quada

[Media_Lies_Daily]

90. I thought those two guys were smarter than that. First, they're.....

...trying to tie Iraq to 911. Sorry, no, there are NO links between 911 and Iraq! Zero! Nada!

Second, there are NO links between Iraq and Al Qaeda! Zero! Nada! Zilch!

Third, Clinton had already rejected a Pentagon NeoCon proposal to attack Iraq in the 1997-1998 time-frame.

Fourth, Clinton would NOT have had to rely on the Pentagon NeoCon cabal for intelligence information, and Gore would NOT have been hanging out at Langley twisting arms to get only the information that he wanted to hear.

This crap from these two guys is just dreadfully wrong. Brokaw's attitude is pretty much expected, but I'm VERY disappointed in Koppel.

[WI_DEM]

91. Gee it's nice to know they know what Clinton would have done

I wonder if Clinton knows?

[WI_DEM]

92. The question isn't what Clinton wouuld have done, but what Gore would have

Clinton wouldn't have been president. Gore would have.

[Dr Fate]

93. Suuure. And Kerry "probably would have" wire tapped w/o warrants...

And Gore or Kerry "would have stole the election too, if he could have."

I love how they impeach us DEMs with things we have not done, but that the Republicans have.

[moondust]

94. Ridiculous.

1. Clinton would have demanded hard evidence of involvement in 9/11 or WMD before knowingly killing thousands of innocent bystanders. Not to forget that Clinton did not take retaliatory action for the USS Cole attack because by January 2001 the investigation had not yet determined who exactly was behind it.

2. It took a heap of desperate lies, clearly impeachable offenses, to convince "enough" gullible Murcans that invasion was somehow warranted. Anybody in their right mind, including Clinton, would have laughed at such a proposition and fired the scoundrel that brought it up.

[elehhhhna]

95. OH FUCKALL NOW I"VE HEARD EVERYTHING

BC's gonna have to answer this one his own self. HA! THIS MSM ploy will definately backfire.

[Tactical Progressive]

98. Yeah, Clinton hasn't commented directly on this

because it isn't considered proper to second-guess your successor.

But now that he's been accused of what he would have done by two leading lights in modern American 'journalism', he'll pretty much have to refute it publically in some way.

[warrior1]

96. saying it, don't make it so

[ProfessorGAC]

97. Yes It Does

Of course, EVERYONE knows that neither of these guys have EVER been wrong about anything. So when they throw out a worthless hypothetical, their conclusions just HAVE to be correct.
The Professor

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. But, but, but ... but CLINTON

how fucking predictable...

[FlaGranny]

100. I wonder why everything is always

measured by a Clinton yardstick. They hated Clinton, yet he is the justification for everything they do. He did, he would have, he didn't, etc., etc. Even if he would have (he wouldn't) what justification is that?

[dpbrown]

101. Bullshit

First off, 9-11 wouldn't have happened to a President who got a PDB that said "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" and actually read it.

Secondly, Clinton didn't go into Iraq, despite the PNAC nutballs pushing him during his entire Presidency to go in.

This is just more Clenis-blaming from the nutball fringe.

[KansDem]

102. Brokaw and Koppel Agree: Bush Would Have Gotten Blowjob, Too*

Except there is no self-respecting woman who would lower herself to be "intimate" with the sleazy, halfwit SOB.





________
* Subject title "made up" with no regard for facts, just like what B&K did.