Kerry Voted for Iraq War, Blasts Netanyahu for Supporting Iraq War

[rangerrebew]

- FrontPage Magazine - http://www.frontpagemag.com -



Kerry Voted for Iraq War, Blasts Netanyahu for Supporting Iraq War

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On February 25, 2015 @ 5:31 pm In The Point | 16 Comments




Rising from the deep, Flipper returns again.


Amid a barrage of criticism from Obama administration officials at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over his upcoming speech before Congress, Secretary of State John Kerry attacked Netanyahu’s judgment by implying Wednesday that he publicly advocated for the US invasion of Iraq in 2003

“The prime minister was profoundly forward-leaning and outspoken about the importance of invading Iraq,” Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee, in an apparent attempt to delegitimatize Netanyahu’s evaluation of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program.

“His judgement might just not be correct here,” Kerry said.

In 2002, as a private citizen, Netanyahu sounded the alarm on Iraqi WMDs during a talk to a Congressional committee.

Kerry, then a senator, voted in favor of the US invasion of Iraq on October 11, 2002.

So Kerry is claiming that Netanyahu has bad judgement for supporting a war that Kerry supported. Is this Kerry’s roundabout way of accusing himself of bad judgement? Or he is just insane?

Here’s what Kerry was saying months before Netanyahu.


Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a Foreign Relations Committee member, said plotting the best way to remove Saddam poses a daunting challenge for Bush. “There’s no question in my mind that Saddam Hussein has to be toppled one way or another, but the question is how,” he told the Herald.

Kerry noted that Saddam has failed to respond to past U.S. warnings about permitting United Nations arms inspectors to do their job in Iraq.

“It’s clear that Saddam Hussein continues to be a major threat . . . in part because some in this country were slow-footed and didn’t have the stomach to hold Saddam accountable,” said Kerry.

But he was for it before he was against it before he went waterskiing. Or something.

The Netanyahu/Iraq meme has become a big thing on the left which is desperately trying to justify letting Iran go nuclear. The differences are obvious.

 

1. No one is denying Iran’s nuclear program. There isn’t a serious argument about that. The Obama camp insists that Iran can be trusted to have nuclear capability without using it for weapons. Everyone else thinks that it can’t.

2. Netanyahu was testifying as a private citizen, not the head of a government with access to classified information. His testimony repeated what everyone, including Kerry, believed at the time. He wasn’t saying anything that Bill Clinton hadn’t said.

 

During his testimony, Netanyahu offered a straightforward argument, not intelligence. He wasn’t coming to offer proof of anything. He was arguing that a nuclear armed Saddam would be a disaster for the world. Which was obviously true. He stated that he had not had access to classified intelligence on Iraq in three years.

Kerry however did have access.

Finally, here is what Bill Clinton had to say around the same time that Netanyahu still had access to classified information.


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.

And here’s what John Kerry had to say far later than that.


“There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop nuclear weapons.”

Senator John Kerry, October 9, 2002.

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”

Senator John Kerry , Oct. 9, 2002.

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…”

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

I sometimes wonder if Kerry is the dumbest or the most cynical guy in politics.


Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://www.frontpagemag.com

URL to article: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dgreenfield/kerry-voted-for-iraq-war-blasts-netanyahu-for-supporting-iraq-war/

[Right_in_Virginia]

Netanyahu did not just "support" the US war with Iraq.  He campaigned for it.  On US soil.  In Congressional hearings.  Before every television camera he could commandeer.

In 2002 Netanyahu testified in a televised Congressional hearing with (absolute) assurances that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, was a threat to the region--and the world, and that we, the USA, would be greeted with shouts of joy from around the Mideast if we eliminated this threat. 

EVERYONE believed Netanyahu at the time. He was a very powerful, persuasive. and omnipresent voice on the need for and the righteousness of a US war with Iraq. Both President Bush and Sec. Rumsfeld even quoted Netanyahu's testimony during the buildup of war.   

The questions at hand are:  How right were Netanyahu's assurances -- and how'd that war work out?   

[ArneFufkin]

Netanyahu did not just "support" the US war with Iraq.  He campaigned for it.  On US soil.  In Congressional hearings.  Before every television camera he could commandeer.

In 2002 Netanyahu testified in a televised Congressional hearing with (absolute) assurances that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, was a threat to the region--and the world, and that we, the USA, would be greeted with shouts of joy from around the Mideast if we eliminated this threat. 

EVERYONE believed Netanyahu at the time. He was a very powerful, persuasive. and omnipresent voice on the need for and the righteousness of a US war with Iraq. Both President Bush and Sec. Rumsfeld even quoted Netanyahu's testimony during the buildup of war.   

The questions at hand are:  How right were Netanyahu's assurances -- and how'd that war work out?   

Every intelligence agency -  Ours, the Brits, French, Russians, Israel and the Gulf States - believed that Saddam had legacy WMDs and was building new programs.    All the Democrats in power during the Clinton Administration repeatedly stated Saddam had WMDs and was building new delivery vehicles:  http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

Saddam's own generals believed he had WMD programs in active development.    The problem we faced then was that Iraq was an insular police state and known financer and supporter of terror who had used WMDs on its own population - and there was no way to definitively KNOW unless his regime was obliterated.    That's what we did.

So if I am a known felon who has committed crimes in the past with guns and I am indicating to a policeman that I am armed by keeping my hands in my pockets after repeated orders to show them -  it's the cops fault if they shoot me when I make a move?   Does it matter if I am armed or not if it appears to any rational observer that I am? 

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead.

[Bigun]

Every intelligence agency -  Ours, the Brits, French, Russians, Israel and the Gulf States - believed that Saddam had legacy WMDs and was building new programs.    All the Democrats in power during the Clinton Administration repeatedly stated Saddam had WMDs and was building new delivery vehicles:  http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

Saddam's own generals believed he had WMD programs in active development.    The problem we faced then was that Iraq was an insular police state and known financer and supporter of terror who had used WMDs on its own population - and there was no way to definitively KNOW unless his regime was obliterated.    That's what we did.

So if I am a known felon who has committed crimes in the past with guns and I am indicating to a policeman that I am armed by keeping my hands in my pockets after repeated orders to show them -  it's the cops fault if they shoot me when I make a move?   Does it matter if I am armed or not if it appears to any rational observer that I am? 

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead.

  

[DCPatriot]

Every intelligence agency -  Ours, the Brits, French, Russians, Israel and the Gulf States - believed that Saddam had legacy WMDs and was building new programs.    All the Democrats in power during the Clinton Administration repeatedly stated Saddam had WMDs and was building new delivery vehicles:  http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

Saddam's own generals believed he had WMD programs in active development.    The problem we faced then was that Iraq was an insular police state and known financer and supporter of terror who had used WMDs on its own population - and there was no way to definitively KNOW unless his regime was obliterated.    That's what we did.

So if I am a known felon who has committed crimes in the past with guns and I am indicating to a policeman that I am armed by keeping my hands in my pockets after repeated orders to show them -  it's the cops fault if they shoot me when I make a move?   Does it matter if I am armed or not if it appears to any rational observer that I am? 

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead.

 

[musiclady]

Every intelligence agency -  Ours, the Brits, French, Russians, Israel and the Gulf States - believed that Saddam had legacy WMDs and was building new programs.    All the Democrats in power during the Clinton Administration repeatedly stated Saddam had WMDs and was building new delivery vehicles:  http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

Saddam's own generals believed he had WMD programs in active development.    The problem we faced then was that Iraq was an insular police state and known financer and supporter of terror who had used WMDs on its own population - and there was no way to definitively KNOW unless his regime was obliterated.    That's what we did.

So if I am a known felon who has committed crimes in the past with guns and I am indicating to a policeman that I am armed by keeping my hands in my pockets after repeated orders to show them -  it's the cops fault if they shoot me when I make a move?   Does it matter if I am armed or not if it appears to any rational observer that I am? 

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead.

I'm going to third that  !

The War in Iraq had its flaws, but in the end, with the Surge, we had it under control.

When Bush/Cheney left office Iraq was in an OK state (which in the ME, is a remarkable thing).

We lost control AFTER Obama took office, and BECAUSE Obama is an anti-American idiot.

[Lando Lincoln]

Every intelligence agency -  Ours, the Brits, French, Russians, Israel and the Gulf States - believed that Saddam had legacy WMDs and was building new programs.    All the Democrats in power during the Clinton Administration repeatedly stated Saddam had WMDs and was building new delivery vehicles:  http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

Saddam's own generals believed he had WMD programs in active development.    The problem we faced then was that Iraq was an insular police state and known financer and supporter of terror who had used WMDs on its own population - and there was no way to definitively KNOW unless his regime was obliterated.    That's what we did.

So if I am a known felon who has committed crimes in the past with guns and I am indicating to a policeman that I am armed by keeping my hands in my pockets after repeated orders to show them -  it's the cops fault if they shoot me when I make a move?   Does it matter if I am armed or not if it appears to any rational observer that I am? 

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead.

Spot-on correct.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Quit living in a revisionist history.  Quit being a "blame Israel first" knucklehead. 

I am not living a revisionist history.  You seem to forget the strong opposition to the claim of weapons of mass destruction.  It was not a slam dunk. 

I am not blaming Israel, period.  My post references one mortal man and highlights the ongoing problems with the veracity and motives of this very seasoned politician:  Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu. 

If one honestly looks at and follows Mr. Netanyahu's twenty-two year political track record-- two questions rise to the surface:  How trustworthy is this man?  What are his true motives?

Before we even consider another war in the middle east--I think these questions deserve a full vetting and an answer--even if it puts a few wrinkles in our neat, smooth and preferred opinions.

Thanks.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Spot-on correct.

See my reply below. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

I'm going to third that  !

The War in Iraq had its flaws, but in the end, with the Surge, we had it under control.

When Bush/Cheney left office Iraq was in an OK state (which in the ME, is a remarkable thing).

We lost control AFTER Obama took office, and BECAUSE Obama is an anti-American idiot.

When during this war did we find weapons of mass destruction? --- Or was there another reason for this loss of blood and treasure?

[Bigun]

When during this war did we find weapons of mass destruction? --- Or was there another reason for this loss of blood and treasure?

We found them all over the place! Tons and tons of them! In drums labeled "Insecticide" !

[musiclady]

When during this war did we find weapons of mass destruction? --- Or was there another reason for this loss of blood and treasure?

If you listened to President Bush before we invaded Iraq, you will know that WMD were only one of many reasons given, and, as Bigun has stated above, we found many WMD there, suspected that some had been removed to Syria, and that some may have been buried in the desert (remember that we found a plane under the sand!)

It is an absolute certainty that terrorists flocked into Iraq and that our troops killed them there, and that by doing so, those terrorists did not have the capability of attacking us here in the USA.

Another factor is that we were still at war with Iraq, and that Saddam was still shooting at our planes, threatening to use the WMD he proudly claimed to have, and was threatening to build nuclear weapons.

Revisionist history says that there was no good that came out of that War, but reality doesn't jibe with the revisers.

It was only when Obama abandoned the country that our blood and treasure became wasted because we had freed an oppressed people, and because of Obama's political ambition and leftist, anti-American views, he refused to fight for leaving forces there.

And in doing so, he created the vacuum that ISIS now fills.

[Right_in_Virginia]

We found them all over the place! Tons and tons of them! In drums labeled "Insecticide" !

When?  Where?

Thanks.

[mystery-ak]

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq
Do Reports of WMD Found in Iraq Vindicate George W. Bush?


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-new-york-times-reports-wmds-found-iraq/
WMDs WERE Found in Iraq!

[mystery-ak]

Rove persuaded W to keep this all secret..instead he made W look like a fool for 8 years...Like I've said..not too sure who Rove worked for.

[Bigun]

When?  Where?

Thanks.

Almost from day one! All over the place! But because it wasn't found in drums labeled "Weapons of Mass Destruction"  the media did not report it!

It's a fact! You can confirm it for yourself very easily with a little research.

[EC]

Take a peek at the NYT from last week. 

Full article on finding WMDs.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Almost from day one! All over the place! But because it wasn't found in drums labeled "Weapons of Mass Destruction"  the media did not report it!

It's a fact! You can confirm it for yourself very easily with a little research.

Wow!  Did you mean to sound so personally offensive?

[Right_in_Virginia]

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/10/16/new-york-times-reports-wmd-found-in-iraq
Do Reports of WMD Found in Iraq Vindicate George W. Bush?


http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-new-york-times-reports-wmds-found-iraq/
WMDs WERE Found in Iraq!

Thanks for the links.

[Bigun]

Wow!  Did you mean to sound so personally offensive?

How is anything I said there "personally" offensive other than the fact that it blows the "No Weapons of Mass destruction were found in Iraq" narrative out of the water?

[DCPatriot]

And that does NOT include the stock piles of nerve gases that were transferred in truck convoys into Syria.

...which have too, been verified.

[Bigun]

And that does NOT include the stock piles of nerve gases that were transferred in truck convoys into Syria.

...which have too, been verified.

Just for the general information of those who might read this, "Nerve Gas" is insecticide that has been subjected to one more, very simple, manufacturing step.

[musiclady]

http://eaglerising.com/10016/new-york-times-blockbuster-report-bush-didnt-lie-wmds-found-iraq/

Another article verifying WMD found in Iraq....

[musiclady]

Rove persuaded W to keep this all secret..instead he made W look like a fool for 8 years...Like I've said..not too sure who Rove worked for.

I'm also not sure why Bush listened to Rove.

He let the leftist lie fester for 8 years by doing so.