Bill Clinton: U.S. Invaded Iraq Too Soon

CBS:

Former President Clinton, seeking to clarify a recent assertion that he was against the Iraq war "from the beginning," said Monday he's maintained all along that United Nations weapons should have been given more time to complete their work in Iraq prior to the United States-led 2003 invasion.

Had the inspectors been given that time, Mr. Clinton told Early Show co-anchor Harry Smith Monday, "There would have been no war."

Read the whole story: CBS

Comments

[eaglecapri]

09:01 AM on 12/11/2007

This ranks up there with, 'I did not have sex with that woman...Ms. Lewinsky.' same, same, same....

[RedRooster]

08:59 AM on 12/11/2007

Early in Hillary's campaign, people began to ask,
"At what point could President Clinton do harm...?

It seems he just did...and I love the guy.

As if Hillary's position on Iraq weren't difficult enough for anti-war liberal Democrats, Bill has just managed to interject "I was against it before I was for it" into the debate for all the other Democrats...

[MRb1000]

01:12 AM on 12/11/2007

The more Bill opens his mouth Hillary is bombing.

[RAMHaiti]

12:04 AM on 12/11/2007

Bill Clinton always did all he could to avoid war and promote dialogue, period, and he did quite a job with the economy, including getting rid of our deficit.
Hillary is, by far, the best qualified candidate out there.

[Dantheman99]

11:08 PM on 12/10/2007

The problem with Hillary is that no one really wants to go back to the 1990's. While after 8 years of Bush, idiot, man-child of a President who lied the nation into war, a President who lied about sex is almost quaint by comparison. While Hillary would have more experience than many of the others because she would have Bill's experience added to hers, the fact is many Democrats don't remember Bill all THAT reverentially. He wasn't JFK, that's for sure. Because of him refusing to stand up to conservatives, I have "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and "DOMA". We had welfare "reform" and triangulation.

Democrats really don't want to be triangulated against again.

They idea of going in a totally new direction rather than back to the 1990s is still appealing.

While not rooting for Hillary, she needs to reinvent herself as someone who will be a candidate of the future, not the past.

Obama's marketing is very effective. It reminds me of Gary Hart in 1984, a Democrat for those who wanted to look forward, not back.

Everyone needs to keep in mind that Hillary is still ahead in the National polls and Iowa is only one state. Also, a win in Iowa does not necessarily translate into sealing the nomination. And quite frankly, a small, non-representative state with an inflated sense of entitlement shouldn't.

Obama could win Iowa and then lose to Clinton in New Hampshire. Bush I in 1980, Bot Dole in 1988 and 1996, Dick Gephardt in 1988 and Tom Harkin in 1992 are all cases of the Iowa winner not winning New Hampshire. Not that this will happen.

There is all to play for.

I wish the media would ignore Iowa and New Hampshire (like it ignores truly progressive candidates) and treat February 5 as a defacto National primary.

The time has come to do nothing less than rip this sense of entitlement from Iowa and New Hampshire's undeserving bosom.

[nolalily]

10:53 PM on 12/10/2007

Finger to mouth. Isn't that the classic "I'm lying" pose?

[outnow]

09:14 PM on 12/10/2007

Bill Clinton embraced globalization as the grand strategy to minimally regulate markets as part of the "New Economy." The establishment of the World Trade Organization in 1995 legalized the "neoliberal" policies of the "free traders" or transnational class alliance as the key pillars of the system of global governance of the neoliberal global order. NAFTA, The IMF and the World Bank freed commodity markets and capital. It was all about Wall Street and global capitalism - finance capital. Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan's dreams come true.

This eliminated the wall between investment banking and commercial banking in the US opening up a consolidation in the US financial services. Massive consumer credit appeared to fuel consumpsion. A gap developed between consumer's debt and their income. Enron traded on futures in several unrelated markets. "Stock Market Keynsianism" created "virtual capitalism" based on expectation of future profitability. These policies brought us the Internet dot.com bubble.

The Asian crisis, the Mexico peso crisis, the Russia crisis, now the real estate crisis.

Now real wages for the rank-and-file wage earners have grown only by one cent, as controlled by inflation during the past four years.

There was a boom because the bust was coming. Hillary Clinton, too, will not support labor in this country. She is all about Wall Street. They both wanted the war in Iraq. She wants the war in Iran because it will pull us out of the mess created by globalization and cement her support in the MIC and Wall Street.

[realitytrumpsbull]

08:04 PM on 12/10/2007

He's another forgainster, sailing the seas of
cheese, looking for favorable winds...of course
they ALL are...there IS a school of thought
that basically runs 'don't vote, it only
encourages them'...the war's a multi-trillion-
dollar cover to drill oil wells.
I'm looking at Paul, or Kucinich as reformers,
but not Queen Hillary...

[smokeystover39]

07:54 PM on 12/10/2007

Monika - "what's her name" must have drained you brain cells Willy. How about if you STFU and stick with the charity work you do really well. Leave this election to the adults.

[ctbutte]

06:38 PM on 12/10/2007

Poor Bill. He sees his fucking hag wife is losing it and even the Big He can't stop it.

Bill knows his irreleavance is inevitable

[THEUNHEARDVOICE]

05:42 PM on 12/10/2007

No fly zone was continued during the Clinton years!He President Clinton knew the movement of sam sites because of nitely news report's of our planes being fired on and how many sites were destoryed.Building anything in the desert without us seeing comeon!

[meese]

03:40 PM on 12/10/2007

It all depends on what the definition of is, is.

[LibsRHilarious]

03:05 PM on 12/10/2007

Bill Clarifies: "How dare you question my lie?!"

[Doofus]

02:42 PM on 12/10/2007

The 'Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of
US Armed Forces Against Iraq' probably *did* say
something to the effect that 'after the UN Inspectors
have done their thing', the time for Regime Change
would be at hand. Probably.

The question would be, did anyone in the White
House actually bother to read it. And if so, why?

What part of 'authorize(d) to use force' needs
further clarification? There is really no point
to putting a lot of 'excess verbiage' into a
Resolution when all the Important Stuff is
right there in the title.

Like, who was supposed to read it?

[TheHandyman]

01:56 PM on 12/10/2007

Sorry Bill, I don't mind anyone getting a BJ as long as it is between consenting adults. What I do mind is lieing about it when you should have just admitted it and moved on. You showed a definite lack of character. I my mind you are doing the same thing all over again. It is time for the US to move away from liars and cheats running this country and your wife showed a lack of character by not divorcing your sorry ass for all your screwing around. If you can't keep your wedding vows, how can you or your wife expect the country to trust you? Go back to playing golf!