- "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), (10/10/02)
My personal favorite comes from Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), who now says the war was a "fraud." That's not what he said on Sept. 27, 2002: "We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons .."
So, which is it? Was Saddam Hussein obtaining weapons of mass destruction that could have brought violence and death to large numbers of people? Or did the Bush administration overstate the case for political reasons?
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), one of the president's harshest post-war critics, said: "I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in (Saddam Hussein's) hands is a real and grave threat to our security." (10/03/02)
The Democrats' patron saint, Bill Clinton, asserted: "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." (2/4/98)
It appears some Democrats have developed amnesia as the next election gets closer. But how can they be right then and wrong now? They would have to be incompetent, liars or political opportunists. Or career politicians.