You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Trump: He was for war in Iraq, before he was against it.
2016-02-19
[Legal Insurrection] In his The America We Deserve Trump noted Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction and targeted Iraq strikes had little impact on their overall capabilities. The Donald said the best course might be against Iraq to "carry the mission to its conclusion."

Wrote Trump:

"Consider Iraq. After each pounding from U.S . warplanes, Iraq has dusted itself off and gone right back to work developing a nuclear arsenal. Six years of tough talk and U.S. fireworks in Baghdad have done little to slow Iraq's crash program to become a nuclear power. They've got missiles capable of flying nine hundred kilometers--more than enough to reach Tel Aviv. They've got enriched uranium. All they need is the material for nuclear fission to complete the job, and, according to the Rumsfeld report, we don't even know for sure if they've laid their hands on that yet. That's what our last aerial assault on Iraq in 1999 was about. Saddam Hussein wouldn't let UN weapons inspectors examine certain sites where that material might be stored. The result when our bombing was over? We still don't know what Iraq is up to or whether it has the material to build nuclear weapons. I'm no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us."
Posted by:Besoeker

#5  I think Oblahblah did that _because_ Qadafi was cooperating with us against Iran and its allies.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2016-02-19 13:38  

#4  The sad thing is the world believes Iraq had no WMD because the press has been repeating that over and over to make W look bad.

Then you have Libya that turned over their WMD stockpile after Saddam was pulled out of the Spider hole, which is what we wanted, but he was bombed out of power.

So the lesson the world got was if you get WMD you are safe.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2016-02-19 11:23  

#3  Despite what Bernie now says, he voted for it twice.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2016-02-19 10:42  

#2  Ditto P2k. The continuing liberal mantra that there 'was no WND' in Iraq is utter and complete bullshi*.
Posted by: Besoeker   2016-02-19 09:14  

#1  Given the fickle and bungling handling of the situation by both American and Iraqi 'leadership', I'd say a lot of Americans now feel the same way. One does not toss aside the sacrifice and resources of those who had to do the dirty work only to abandon it all like a bad cheap lottery ticket and not feel betrayal.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2016-02-19 09:11  

00:00