Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[brainlessone]

why dont you look at the articles i posted?

here is some facts

SO DID HE LIE AND KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE??
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9812/15/un.iraq/
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler claims in a report to the U.N. Security Council that Iraq has failed to cooperate fully with his team of arms experts.
In the report, delivered to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan late Tuesday, Butler said Baghdad has not lived up to its promise to give unconditional access to U.N. inspectors trying to determine if Iraq has abandoned its biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programs.
WHAT IS THIS BEFORE BUSH??
HOW SOON THEY FORGET!!
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9812/16/iraq.05/index.html
Rubin also denied that the White House had any political motivation in the military mobilization against Iraq in order to deflect media coverage of impeachment proceedings against Clinton.
Rubin said Baghdad had created "the timetable for the ... grave situation we're in today."
SO ARE THE DEMOCRATS SAYING NOW IT WAS ALL ABOUT SEX??? AND LINEING THE POCKETS OF THE UN WITH MONEY??

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9812/10/iraq.02/
Cohen called Iraq's refusal to allow U.N. inspectors access to a disputed site a "serious matter," and replied with a "yes" when asked if the United States could attack Iraq at any time.
IT’S ALL ABOUT FOLLOW THROUGH ASK ANY WOMAN??
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter040104.asp
How 9-11 happened
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/iraq/9802/weapons.effects/
OF COURSE THIS WAS LINKED FROM 1998??
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike
CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

WAIT A MIN. DID HE HAVE OKAY FROM THE UN OR DID HE HAVE AN OKAY FROM CONGRESS AND THE SENATE??

WE KNOW DEMOCRAT FROM W.VA. WENT TO THE ENEMY AND GAVE WARNING 1 YEAR AHEAD IN 2002 SO HE SAID ON TV??

BACK TO CLINTON??

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.
The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
The United States has patiently worked to preserve UNSCOM as Iraq has sought to avoid its obligation to cooperate with the inspectors. On occasion, we've had to threaten military force, and Saddam has backed down.
Faced with Saddam's latest act of defiance in late October, we built intensive diplomatic pressure on Iraq backed by overwhelming military force in the region. The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance.
Eight Arab nations -- Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman -- warned that Iraq alone would bear responsibility for the consequences of defying the UN.
When Saddam still failed to comply, we prepared to act militarily. It was only then at the last possible moment that Iraq backed down. It pledged to the UN that it had made, and I quote, a clear and unconditional decision to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.
I decided then to call off the attack with our airplanes already in the air because Saddam had given in to our demands. I concluded then that the right thing to do was to use restraint and give Saddam one last chance to prove his willingness to cooperate.
I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments. And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning.
Now over the past three weeks, the UN weapons inspectors have carried out their plan for testing Iraq's cooperation. The testing period ended this weekend, and last night, UNSCOM's chairman, Richard Butler, reported the results to UN Secretary-General Annan.
The conclusions are stark, sobering and profoundly disturbing.
In four out of the five categories set forth, Iraq has failed to cooperate. Indeed, it actually has placed new restrictions on the inspectors. Here are some of the particulars.
Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites. For example, it shut off access to the headquarters of its ruling party and said it will deny access to the party's other offices, even though UN resolutions make no exception for them and UNSCOM has inspected them in the past.
Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence. For example, Iraq obstructed UNSCOM's effort to photograph bombs related to its chemical weapons program.
It tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.

lifted from somewhere else