Doug Miller wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article
.com,
wrote:
Not only were Clinton's retaliatory attacks against OBL and
Al Queda more than nothing,
Yeah, they accomplished a whole lot, didn't they?
the REPUBLICANS in Congress
considered them to be so excessive they called it 'wag the
dog'.
Not because they were "excessive", but because of their timing.
Regardless, the Republicans were very vocally opposed to action
against AL QUeda.
I don't remember that at all. Can you substantiate it?
Your memory is different from mine. Can you recall the date of
the attack? I'll see what I can find.
My memory is that Republicans were opposed to *useless* actions, like
blowing
up aspirin factories and empty tents.
Can you substantiate that? Not that you remember it this way,
I'll take you on your word on that--rather that your memory
is accurate.
George Will even alleged that becuase of the retaliation
Clinton might be a murderer.
I'm not familiar with that; however, considering that one of
Clinton's targets
was an aspirin factory with no connection at all to AQ, there
might
be some
substance to that idea.
I remind you that the aspirin factory was financed by bin Laden
Was it?
I do not recall anone ever challenging that assertion. Can
you refer me to anyone who does?
and the Clinton administration presented evidence in the form
of chemicl residues in the nearby soils, that the factory was
being used for chemical weapons production. Though that evidence
was weak,
"Weak"?? Try "later proven absolutely, totally false".
Can you substantiate that?
I also remind you that the Bush administration has thus
far failed to present any similar evidence from Iraq.
What about that Sarin shell, Fred? Might not be much... but it's
something.
Since the Sarin shell was produced prior to 1991 and declared to
UMSCOM it is evidence of the truthfulness of the Iraqi
declarations. It was most likely a dud, recovered from a
test range. Iraq was not always open, accurate and truthful,
far from it, but the sarin shell is one example of when they
were. That hasn't changed since the last time I commented on
this in this thread.
See: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0521-06.htm
(Reprinted from the Christian Science Monitor)
The author, Scott Ritter, is a former Marine intelligence officer
and UN weapons inspector. The Christian Science Monitor has the
best reputation for accuracy of any newspaper in the US. Not
that the others set the bar particularly high.
--
FF