headermask image

header image

Al Gore taking Richard Perle’s side against Saddam…you have to see it.

Al Gore making the case for Saddam being linked to terror…back in 1992 when it was important. You know when he was bashing Reagan and Bush in the election. My how times change.

Say what you will but the days of being able to make claims like this and hoping that it will disappear into the rabbit hole of history are gone. Hat tip to Powerline and Hot Air…y’all are what keep me going.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Link to Power Line: That Was Then…

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

Stumble It!

One Comment

  1. Of course, there is no big difference between Iraq in 1992 and 2002. Or between the situation where we were fighting Iraq with a degree of international approval and cooperation that dwarfs the “Coalition of the Willing.” Not to mention that Gore is pointing out the degree to which the elder Bush helped to arm Iraq during AND after Iraq’s war with Iran. Also, when opposing younger Bush’s push for war in 2002 and 2003, Gore didn’t base his argument on whether Iraq had or was seeking WMDs, but on the fact that the war was not garnering international support and a unilateral action would most likely damage our credibility around the world as well as increase the danger of further terrorist acts (not to mention that beating Sadam would be the easy part, the hard part being dealing with the ruins and internal conflict afterwards). He also objected to Bush pushing the vote just before midterm election to help pressure Congress into war. What he called for at the time was an open, honest debate. He called for Bush to show us the evidence of WMDs and the implied link between Iraq and 911. Surely you agree that if we, as a nation, had taken the time to look at the situation soberly we would be on better footing now.

    Guess what, Gore was right.

    1. tom on June 13th, 2007 at

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.