BUSH: Kerry Would Have Left Saddam in Power

[liberalpragmatist]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5963411/

PORTSMOUTH, Ohio - In a harsh new attack on rival John Kerry, President Bush said Friday that if the Democratic presidential candidate “had his way,” Saddam Hussein’s regime would be running Iraq and threatening the safety of other nations.

In response to what it described as “George Bush’s distortions,” the Kerry campaign said, “Dick Cheney crossed the line earlier this week, so it’s no shock that George Bush is following his lead today.” Cheney had remarked that “the wrong choice” by voters could lead to another attack by terrorists.

In his own Friday salvo at Bush, Kerry linked U.S. assault weapon sales to worries about terrorism and said the president was bowing to the National Rifle Association by not pushing to keep alive an expiring ban.

***

Kerry needs to face this charge - Bush will use it in the debates. Kerry can't try to nuance this and say "well, I would have done it in the right way - building a coalition," etc. What he needs to say is this:

"The issue here is what are the costs? If Saddam Hussein were effectively neutralized by a vigorous inspections regime and the threat of military force, there would have been no need to invade: he would not have been a danger. You rushed to war to impose a regime change when there were still other options for dealing with Saddam Hussein. Now we're facing the costs of your wrong choice."

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Saddam is a $5000 ice cream cone

nice to have, yummy in fact, but not worth the cost(s).

[NC_Nurse]

2. So what?

Saddam was not an imminent threat and his atrocities happened years ago, back around the first Gulf War. There was no reason for his removal at such cost to us in lives and money.

And we're not ANY safer, dammit! :mad:

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. Saddam was not an imminent threat and his atrocities happened years ago

Atrocities that may be no worse than the ones that would happen here if Ohio up and decided that it was going to overthrow D.C. by force. Same shit, different dictators.

[AuntPatsy]

3. They sure are getting desperate by being so open these

days with their hate filled rhetoric, corner a animal and it will always go into it's defense position, this admin. is clearly baring it's claws..

Definately being backed into that corner...

[nyhuskyfan]

4. And Cheney could have kept doing business with him...

And everyone would be happy

[necso]

5. Sounds like a good plan to me!

And it was the Republican plan back in the first Gulf War. Of course the neos didn't like it even then and they turned on the then President Bush.

But it was a realistic, thoughtful and thought out plan... then, and particularly later, as Saddam was weakened over the intervening years! After all, what capacity for harm did Saddam have in 2003? And if we could live with him for a decade (or so), what changed all of a sudden? --- Except, of course, for the neos coming to power.

[creeksneakers2]

6. There are still many terrorists on the loose

I'd rather we had spent the time and money catching them instead of Saddam, who wasn't a threat.

[gulliver]

7. And Saddam would be under a continuing inspections regime...

... and 1,000+ American troops would still be alive, and we would not be out $160+ billion and counting.

And all of our allies would have been on our side, and Osama Bin Laden would have been caught.

We traded all that for Bush's little personal vendetta with Saddam. With Bush it is always Saddam, Saddam, Saddam. Bush is telling us what we already knew. This whole goddamned thing was because Bush is obsessed with Saddam Hussein.

[Gold Metal Flake]

8. Bush would have ignored terrorists until they attacked.

And he did!

[Catfight]

9. But it's okay to LEAVE Bin Laden IN POWER? OH I SEE....LOL

[johnnie]

10. And today..

Over 1000 Americans might still be alive, and according to their "3000 a year Hussein killings" over 8,000 Iraqis would still be alive. Billions of American taxpayers money wouldn't be wasted, the rest of the world wouldn't hate Americans, the deficit wouldn't be at a record low....
Shit...I can go on, but John Kerry wasn't in shrub's shoes...that's the fucking point.

I have to say this...
Fuck George W Bush.

[tedoll78]

11. response: Bush would've led thousands to their deaths.

:)

[gulliver]

12. Saddam, Saddam, Saddam. Bush admits his obsession.

So this WAS all about Bush's personal obsession with Saddam. Just how bad was Saddam anyway? No WMDs, no ties to terrorists, tiny ineffectual military... WTF?? Why this war? Oh, yeah, Bush told us Saddam tried to kill his dad.

Bush's last refuge. We just had to get Saddam. But Bush doesn't even try to remind us why we had to get Saddam. The "why" is all in Bush's and Cheney's pea brains.

[PA Democrat]

14. Psst! Dubya, uh... your daddy actually DID leave Saddam in power

TWICE, when he had the opportunity to remove him. Once in the first Gulf War, and once again when he let the Shi'ites revolt fail after promising them US assistance to overthrow Saddam.

[A_Possum]

15. Kerry to Bush:

"Are you trying to blame me for giving you enough rope to hang yourself? You've created a dangerous mess in Iraq all by yourself, with or without Saddam."

[Mr_Spock]

16. So did your dad - MORON.

And you did prove IN SPADES that your dad was RIGHT (even I didn't believe him at the time).

[PA Democrat]

17. Dubya doesn't even know anything about RECENT history

like when his DAD was president. I'd laugh if I didn't know that this moron has the nuclear football.