just a reminder- facts are terrible things

The Iraq Liberation Act
October 31, 1998

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

October 31, 1998

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.” This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are: The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq’s history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else. The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council’s efforts to keep the current regime’s behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participa–tory political system that will include all of Iraq’s diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq’s current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq’s weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well. Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 31, 1998.

library.cornell.edu/colldev/ … libera.htm

damn… the democRATS wanted saddam gone AND a democratic, american friendly government established in iraq…

2 years before bush

-Imp

Everyone wanted Saddam gone, what everyone didn’t want, was for Saddam to be ousted by an appeal to false information, and in a way that hurts the U.S.'s international relationships and leaves the U.S. in a vietnam like situation.

as did bush

-Imp

You’re link doesn’t work, nor would it change the fact that the President decided to go to war based on false information.

I don’t know what this means, how do you hurt your relationship with people who have vowed to destroy you?

As for it hurting our international relationships, this is obvious. The European parliament passed a resolution opposing pre-emptive strike, Russian, France, and Germany opposed it at all levels, and millions protested prior to and after the invasion in countries all over the world. Not to mention opposition to occupation.

and millions more cheered.

-Imp

You are not responding to my points, and instead giving one line sound bites, as such I will no longer participate in this discussion.

as you like.

but germany and france both responded to your “points” by getting rid of their anti-bush governments.

-Imp

I post this for people who may be led astray by your comments.

worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/ … 2&lb=hmpg1

85% in germany say it increased…4% say decreased

67% in France say it increased…3% say it decreased

led astray? LOL… who did they elect? more lefties? nope…

-Imp

Clinton’s position clearly had a different flavor than the position our current administration advocates. Clinton refers repeatedly to empowering opposition, presumably meaning local opposition in favor of a democratic government. The previous tactic was not a full scale invasion of a sovereign nation, but rather supporting factions inside the country to help them shape their own destiny.
So, while Clinton wanted much of what Bush wants in Iraq, the comparisson is sort of irrelevant, because I think the tactics are more criticized than the aims.