Kathianne
02-15-2016, 10:07 AM
I don't remember the context or topic, but someone was talking about sounding/walking like a duck:
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/226742/
FEBRUARY 15, 2016
DONALD TRUMP’S PIVOT ON IRAQ (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/trump-on-there-being-zero-proof-he-opposed-iraq-before-the-w#.wtQY5r62r):
his 2000 book, [I]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.
In August 2004 Trump turned loud and vocally against the war in an interview with Esquire, more than a year after it started and it was clear after the initial successes an insurgency was developing.
Huh — Trump’s for-gainst it pivot on Iraq from 2000 to 2004 is a 180° performed very much like those of many prominent Democrats during that period (http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/218998/):
Or as Tennessee state Senator Frank Niceley tweets (https://twitter.com/SenFrankNiceley/status/699083457151045632): “So, the question for Mr. Trump would be: was George Bush lying about WMD or following Trump’s advice?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwqh4wQPoQk
Not to mention Bill Clinton’s advice, Al Gore’s advice (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/12/algore-video-bush-41-lied-people-died-1992-edition/), Joe Biden’s advice, Hillary’s advice (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/), Howard Dean’s advice,Madeleine Albright’s advice (http://1997-2001.state.gov/www/statements/1998/980218.html), etc.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/226742/
FEBRUARY 15, 2016
DONALD TRUMP’S PIVOT ON IRAQ (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/trump-on-there-being-zero-proof-he-opposed-iraq-before-the-w#.wtQY5r62r):
his 2000 book, [I]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.
In August 2004 Trump turned loud and vocally against the war in an interview with Esquire, more than a year after it started and it was clear after the initial successes an insurgency was developing.
Huh — Trump’s for-gainst it pivot on Iraq from 2000 to 2004 is a 180° performed very much like those of many prominent Democrats during that period (http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/218998/):
Or as Tennessee state Senator Frank Niceley tweets (https://twitter.com/SenFrankNiceley/status/699083457151045632): “So, the question for Mr. Trump would be: was George Bush lying about WMD or following Trump’s advice?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwqh4wQPoQk
Not to mention Bill Clinton’s advice, Al Gore’s advice (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/12/algore-video-bush-41-lied-people-died-1992-edition/), Joe Biden’s advice, Hillary’s advice (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/), Howard Dean’s advice,Madeleine Albright’s advice (http://1997-2001.state.gov/www/statements/1998/980218.html), etc.