Selective Memories

Master spinners Bill Clinton and Karl Rove try to rewrite the roles they played in the run-up to war.

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: thinkgra @ 12/03/2007 6:35:37 PM

    Fact check from Huffington Post.com:
    Clinton Splits With Bush on Iraq," The Washington Post March 13, 2003
    "Former president Bill Clinton, who has generally supported the Bush administration's Iraq policy in recent remarks, called on his successor yesterday to accept a more relaxed timeline in exchange for support from a majority of the United Nations Security Council members. ..[T]he former president has publicly espoused an approach substantially different from the administration's public stance."

    "Deadline for war - Give the inspectors more time, urges Clinton" The Daily Telegraph March 13, 2003 "Bill Clinton yesterday urged the Bush administration to give Hans Blix as much time as he wants to complete weapons inspections in Iraq. The former president broke ranks with his successor...Mr Clinton said war might yet be avoided if Saddam Hussein were given more time to disarm. "

    "Clinton recommends U.S. patience on Iraq," Reuters, February 11, 2003. "Former U.S. President Bill Clinton said in an interview broadcast on Tuesday the United States should exercise patience in its standoff with Iraq to help build allied support for a potential strike."

    Hardball, February 12, 2003,when Chris Matthews asks "Christopher Hitchens, are you upset that President Clinton has emerged as a critic and perhaps a mild-mannered critic of the policy of this administration on the eve of war?"

    Let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't get it. If you say the country should not go to war until certain conditions are met, or if you say there is insufficient basis for going to war, then you are against going to war. (Nobody is ever indifferent). This concept holds true if you're referring to war with Iraq, Iran or Mexico. Bill Clinton's position, which was identical to that of Hans Blix, was that we should exhaust all opportunities for inspections prior to any military action. And if, five days before the invasion, Clinton said that we should proceed with inspections and diplomacy instead of artillery fire, then he was against the war from "the beginning."

  • Posted By: thinkgra @ 12/03/2007 6:34:33 PM

    FROM HUFFINGTON POST:
    I sure do. A few minutes on a fee-based search engine jogged my memory. Here are few clippings:

    "Clinton Splits With Bush on Iraq," The Washington Post March 13, 2003
    "Former president Bill Clinton, who has generally supported the Bush administration's Iraq policy in recent remarks, called on his successor yesterday to accept a more relaxed timeline in exchange for support from a majority of the United Nations Security Council members. ..[T]he former president has publicly espoused an approach substantially different from the administration's public stance."

    "Deadline for war - Give the inspectors more time, urges Clinton" The Daily Telegraph March 13, 2003 "Bill Clinton yesterday urged the Bush administration to give Hans Blix as much time as he wants to complete weapons inspections in Iraq. The former president broke ranks with his successor...Mr Clinton said war might yet be avoided if Saddam Hussein were given more time to disarm. "

    "Clinton recommends U.S. patience on Iraq," Reuters, February 11, 2003. "Former U.S. President Bill Clinton said in an interview broadcast on Tuesday the United States should exercise patience in its standoff with Iraq to help build allied support for a potential strike."

    Hardball, February 12, 2003,when Chris Matthews asks "Christopher Hitchens, are you upset that President Clinton has emerged as a critic and perhaps a mild-mannered critic of the policy of this administration on the eve of war?"

    Let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't get it. If you say the country should not go to war until certain conditions are met, or if you say there is insufficient basis for going to war, then you are against going to war. (Nobody is ever indifferent). This concept holds true if you're referring to war with Iraq, Iran or Mexico. Bill Clinton's position, which was identical to that of Hans Blix, was that we should exhaust all opportunities for inspections prior to any military action. And if, five days before the invasion, Clinton said that we should proceed with inspections and diplomacy instead of artillery fire, then he was against the war from "the beginning."

  • Posted By: nawawimohamad @ 12/03/2007 8:18:18 AM

    When G.W.Bush lied about the WMD, the Americans believed him.Does it matter that Bill Clinton lied?Let's face it ,Americans are easily manipulated by their politicians, with the help of the media of course.

  • Posted By: ABRAMCO @ 12/02/2007 8:03:36 PM

    ALL yANKEE PRESIDENTS SINCE THE INCEPTION OF AMERICA,THEIR WIVES ,AIDES,MILITARY ARE CRONIC NEFARIOUS LIARS .iT IS WHAT MADE AMERICA WHAT IT IS.sO MUCH SO THAT YOUR CURRENCY IS DEVALUING EVERY DAY CIVIL LIBERTIES ARE TAKEN AWAY.AND KNOW BEING REGELATED TO THIRD WORLD STATUS.tHANKS TO OSAMA BIN LADEN.

  • Posted By: psyteam @ 12/02/2007 7:08:47 AM

    Rove is a porcine-eyed, fascist pig. Clinton isn't.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse