Cheney on Invading Iraq - 9/14/1992
Uploaded by: DemRapidResponse
Video Description:
Then-SecDef Dick Cheney explaining why *not* to invade Iraq.
But let's assume for the moment that we would have been able to do it — ... Then the question comes [of] putting a government in place of the one you've just gotten rid of; you can't just sort of turn around and walk away — you have now accepted the responsibility for what happens in Iraq. What kind of government do you want us to create in place of the old Saddam Hussein government? Do you want a Sunni government, or a Shi'a government or maybe it ought to be a Kurdish government, or maybe one based on the Ba'ath Party or maybe some combination of all of those? How long is that government likely to survive without U.S. military forces there to keep it propped up?
If you get into the business of committing U.S. forces on the ground in Iraq, to occupy the place, my guess is I'd probably still have people there today instead of having been able to bring them home. ... The bottom line question for me was: How many additional American lives is Saddam Hussein worth? The answer: not very damn many.
Related Videos| Dick Cheney vs. Nancy Pelosi: The Blink-Off | If Dick Cheney was Scarface | Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11 |
 |  |  |
| KEITH OLBERMANN SPECIAL COMMENT *BUSH & CHENEY RESIGN NOW!* | Iraqi Resistance | Generation Kill - Iraq |
 |  |  |
Comments for this video: Show ||
Hide
Have you seen the donations coming in today (Nov 30'th) to RonPAUL2008. com
Its at $10.1 million this quarter. Averaging $500/Min = $30,000/Hr
Google: CNN REP DEBATE 11-28-07
Google: David Rockefeller Fears Ron Paul
Concerning war-related deaths (civilian and non-civilian), and deaths from criminal gangs, Iraq's Health Minister Ali al-Shemari said that since the March 2003 invasion between 100,000-150,000 Iraqis had been killed."
The soldiers knew the potential risk of their job, though the gov. is still to blame. But a thing you rarely hear in the media is the numbers of total deaths, especially civilians.
This is near 10 times the 2,974 casualties of 9/11.
And this is just
I'm completely disillusioned with our government...particularly this administration. I'm honestly ashamed, embarassed, and filled with rage over the past two terms of Mr. George Dub-yah...he is a disgrace to our nation and I cannot wait until he is replaced and cause no further damage to our country...hopefully then we'll be able to salvage what is left of our image abroad.
So what ifd Saddam had squat to do with 9-11, it was an opportunity to remove a dangerous murderous dictator repsonsible for millions of deaths and fight al queda in the sand instead of New York. Dont you knumbskulls get it by now?
How stupid can the left be, so mentally deranged that you think all this conspiratorial crap could even be planned like this. Ridiculous dribble.
Here's to hoping natural selection catches up to you and yours! Cheers!
Saddam didn't tolerate terrorist organizations when he was in charge, because he perceived them to be a threat to his power, which is what he valued above all else.
He was an asshole, for sure, but Iraq was not a terrorist state with him there. Now it is and we can thank the current administration for that one.
Oh yeah and ummm... In case you forgot we helped put Saddam in power during the Iran Iraq war.
:)
The knowledge of "good/bad" exists..and those fuckers have chosen to be evil ...
This is just a game..and they are making the rules on the game...
New "bank" puppet Obama ..will atach some new rules...
Better for the People?