Clinton: Iraq war not helping Mideast peace efforts

[Secret Squirrel]

CNN) -- Although the Bush administration believes former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was an inherent threat to the Mideast, going to war in Iraq has not aided the Middle East peace process, former President Clinton told CNN in a recent interview.

The road to peace in the Mideast does not go through Baghdad, but rather "through resolving the differences between the Palestinians and the Israelis," he said.

The Bush administration, Clinton said, "thought if we could have a representative, pluralistic government in Iraq it would destabilize and force change in other autocratic regimes in the Middle East and it might even help us make peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians."

However, brokering peace between Israelis and Palestinians depends on "giving the Israelis a rock-solid guarantee of security and normal relations with its neighbors, and giving the Palestinians their own country on the West Bank ... with their capital in the eastern part of Jerusalem," Clinton told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in an interview that will air in its entirety this weekend.

"I think that that will do more than anything else to reduce the impulse of terror around the world, and especially in the region, and give the Middle East a peaceful future."

Clinton said at the end of his presidency he met with President Bush and advised him that his biggest security issue would be Osama bin Laden and his terror network, al Qaeda.

The second issue, Clinton predicted, would be the absence of a peace process in the Middle East, because it was a major underlying cause of Mideast terror.

Clinton, whose administration spent his term as president trying to forge a peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians, said he could understand why Bush would not want to make such a commitment of time and resources.

"On the other hand, there's one rule we know. I don't think that when you're dealing with the Middle East or with any thorny, long-simmering problem, you can hold yourself to a standard that says the only success is a complete agreement.

"Because if that's your standard, then your success or failure totally depends upon what other people decide to do and how they read their own interests," Clinton said.

Just before leaving office, Clinton proposed that Israel allow Palestinians sovereignty over a site in the Old City in Jerusalem that is holy to both Muslims and Jews. The site is known to Jews as Temple Mount and to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary.

In exchange for the Israeli compromise, the Clinton proposal asked the Palestinian Authority to abandon its claim to the so-called right of return.

Neither side agreed with the terms.

"You know, we can't impose a peace, we shouldn't impose a peace. It won't work if we do. But we can help get the politics right, and if they want a security guarantee, we ought to give it to them."

Discussing the war in Iraq, Clinton said he believed the United States should have allowed U.N. weapons inspectors to finish their work there before launching an attack.

Clinton also said he believes the United States should have moved more quickly to "internationalize" the war.

"And that would have required us early on letting the United Nations have a say in the political decisions, opening the contracts up to people other than Americans and their allies and just basically trying to say 'OK, Saddam's gone we need everybody's help to make it right.' "

According to Clinton, the Bush administration squandered a chance to lead other nations in a "united front against terror" by waging a unilateral war on Iraq and building on the impression that America cooperates only when it must.

However, he said he expects the United States will now receive more help from NATO allies.

"I say again, whether I agree with everything that's been done or not, all Americans and just about everybody in the world has a stake now in the success of this Iraqi enterprise."

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/07/09/clinton.amanpour/index.html

[SeanAshi]

Bill Clinton was convinced that Iraq had wmd in 1998 and was prepared to goto war over it, and it was his indecisivness that allowed bin Laden to get away.

[Pooga]

Who's this Clinton guy?

[n4292936]

Bill Clinton was convinced that Iraq had wmd in 1998 and was prepared to goto war over it, and it was his indecisivness that allowed bin Laden to get away.
hmmm I dont hear you suggesting that it was Bush's indecisivness that let Bin Laden get away. Indecisivness had nothing to do with it. History is replete with example of both Republican and Democratic presidents offering innefectual methods to combat terrorism. What made invasion of A-stan a politically viable option was nothing less than 9-11. The hunt for BL has been going on for some time now, and no one could have forseen just how tragic the consequences of not making his hunt an absolute priority were going to be, not even W as is evidenced by his pre-911 stance on the issue. Prior to 9-11 terrorism did not figure prominently as a threat to national security. It's threat was more a political one than one where largescale loss of life wasn't envisaged by planners. Only in 2001 did the province of fictional-horror novels become reality, and only then did we fully wake up to how deadly the intentions and capability of AQ could be. Their terrorism is a "new" kind of terrorim - one defined more by religious zealostry and mass casualty attacks for their own sake rather than the narrowly defined and ussually local poltical goals that characterised terrorism in the past. I guess you dont know what your facing until it forces you to fully confront it.

[Snake Eater Wannabe]

I can care less what he has to say. I blame him for somalia and for leaving our military in ruins. He shouldnt even be aloud to talk about this stuff.

[Snake Eater Wannabe]

I can care less what he has to say. I blame him for somalia and for leaving our military in ruins. He shouldnt even be aloud to talk about this stuff.

[Moledet]

Oslo criminals don't have the right to talk about peace.

[n4292936]

Pulling out of Somalia was hardly the display resolve that I think the US should be known for - espcially in relation to supporting the type of humanitarian missions that Somalia was supposed to typify. On the other hand, the very same sort of casualty-shy spinelessness was displayed by Reagan after the Barracks were bombed in Lebenon-83. Decisions like that are political rather than military, are made irrespective of party affiliation, and are ussually made out of consideration for domestic opinion rather than military necessity. It is simply how the American political machine works unfortunately. While I do not agree that we should have gone to Iraq, I will at least give W credit for resolve. Pulling the troops out of Iraq at this stage would be extremely counterproductive - there is, however, the counter-argument that this "resolve" is no less a political calculation than Clinton's move was.

[Truthsayer]

Oslo criminals don't have the right to talk about peace.

And here you are refering to Mossad and their assasination of the wrong guy in Norway? No? Oh... ^^

[Moledet]

Oslo criminals don't have the right to talk about peace.

And here you are refering to Mossad and their assasination of the wrong guy in Norway? No? Oh... ^^
Dunno what you are talking about.

I was refering to all the people that signed the Oslo accords in 1993. Clinton, Rabbin and Abu Amar (Araffat).

[Truthsayer]

Dunno what you are talking about.

I was refering to all the people that signed the Oslo accords in 1993. Clinton, Rabbin and Abu Amar (Araffat).

Sooo...those three (Clinton, Rabbin and Abu Amar) are all criminals in your eyes?

(Just determining your political view.)

[Moledet]

Dunno what you are talking about.

I was refering to all the people that signed the Oslo accords in 1993. Clinton, Rabbin and Abu Amar (Araffat).

Sooo...those three (Clinton, Rabbin and Abu Amar) are all criminals in your eyes?

(Just determining your political view.)
Yes, they are responssible for the killing of Israelis by terrorists since 1993.

Just to help you determine my political view, I support transfer by will to the Palestinians (offering money, job and appartment so they would move to Jordan, the real Palestinian state) and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).

[Truthsayer]

Yes, they are responssible for the killing of Israelis by terrorists since 1993.

Just to help you determine my political view, I support transfer by will to the Palestinians (offering money, job and appartment so they would move to Jordan, the real Palestinian state) and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).

So...do you supported the murder of Rabbin too?

Um, have to ask, since it's late and I don't want to misunderstand you:

and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).
You want to see these areas, not currently under Israels full 'control' (or legal land) cleansed of 'palestinians'?

[Moledet]

Yes, they are responssible for the killing of Israelis by terrorists since 1993.

Just to help you determine my political view, I support transfer by will to the Palestinians (offering money, job and appartment so they would move to Jordan, the real Palestinian state) and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).

So...do you supported the murder of Rabbin too?

Um, have to ask, since it's late and I don't want to misunderstand you:

and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).
You want to see these areas, not currently under Israels full 'control' (or legal land) cleansed of 'palestinians'?
No, I don't support the murder of Rabbin because it was an illegal act, he should have had the right to protect himself in court and I'm against executions so I think that he should have sit in jail for his mistake.

I believe that the conflict will never be solved as long as the peace will need to be done with the Palestinians, if they will move to Jordan (a state that 75% of its citizens are Palesitnians) we will get peace and they will stop being refugees.
Wanna read more, enter this link:
http://www.therightroadtopeace.com/eng/DefaultEng.html

And PM me if you want to know more, that's not the place to talk about my political views.

[aartamen]

Clinton did so much to make the situation worse, that the only reason why I think he can still think he can yap about it is that he's a deluded ego-maniac.

Nice run-on.

[BlackRain]

Who's this Clinton guy?

I think he is that guy who was in that ****o that was filmed in the White House.



Clinton Speaking. Credibility meter shows zero.

[seruriermarshal]

Clinton is a sh*t !

[Innoxx]

I think Clinton would've been an awesome leader if it weren't for that blow job fiasco. Just imagine how much time and resources the government wasted trying to impeach him for a harmless act that is really insignificant in the long run.

[Kilgor]

Its not the blow job that got him into trouble.

Its the fact that he lied under oath, and directly into the eyes of the american people.

[rodin_hsu]

Its not the blow job that got him into trouble.

Its the fact that he lied under oath, and directly into the eyes of the american people.

Hmm... I think it is this faith to make Americans run their country so well.
You are so serious to take a leader's honesty.
You cannot imagine how we take our President's words like a ****.
I disdain him, Pre. Chen, because he is a real politico.

But I am curious about why some of you so hate Clinton. From my point of view, when Pre. Clinton was in power, US's economy was so prosperity, and you didn't really suffer a security threaten in homeland. Look back on the last four years, I don't see Americans have lived in happy.

[chauncy republicans]

I believe that the conflict will never be solved as long as the peace will need to be done with the Palestinians, if they will move to Jordan (a state that 75% of its citizens are Palesitnians) we will get peace and they will stop being refugees.

You cant be serious.... :cantbeli:

[Truthsayer]

Yes, they are responssible for the killing of Israelis by terrorists since 1993.

Just to help you determine my political view, I support transfer by will to the Palestinians (offering money, job and appartment so they would move to Jordan, the real Palestinian state) and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).

So...do you supported the murder of Rabbin too?

Um, have to ask, since it's late and I don't want to misunderstand you:

and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).
You want to see these areas, not currently under Israels full 'control' (or legal land) cleansed of 'palestinians'?
No, I don't support the murder of Rabbin because it was an illegal act, he should have had the right to protect himself in court and I'm against executions so I think that he should have sit in jail for his mistake.

I believe that the conflict will never be solved as long as the peace will need to be done with the Palestinians, if they will move to Jordan (a state that 75% of its citizens are Palesitnians) we will get peace and they will stop being refugees.
Wanna read more, enter this link:
http://www.therightroadtopeace.com/eng/DefaultEng.html

And PM me if you want to know more, that's not the place to talk about my political views.

No, it's alright, I udnerstand you know.

In my country we have small groups of people that blame jews and immigrants for everything, and you know what the problem is here: they use the same retoric that you do.


"I'm moving to a country that won't accept immigrants!" ;)

[ROY H]

I guess it is ok that he cheated on his wife with a 21 year old woman , and than lied to the american people with out breakin a sweat.

Cheating on your spouse is wrong. He is a leader of a country , and people look to him for support and good decsions , he falied in both of these area's. Clinton conducted himslef in a manor that was of poor charcter and very disapointing.

I don't think i can give credence to what this man says on any issues.
His opion is irrelavant to any current issues that we face , or in the future.
Last time i checked my connander in chief with the "football" lanuch codes
is President George W. Bush.

As for the peace process in the middle east , it is very grim and we can only hope that people will come to terms with the posiablity that we may not be able to achieve this great feat because this is a "holy war" and there will never be this perfect peacefull "utopia" that some people believe can be achieved.

War and destruction are the tools of the trade for our society , we must come to terms with this and learn that "war" is a way that we vent our human emotions. We are "flawed" beings this is a given , but for a man to comment on issues way above his head is pure stupidity.

BUT i can comment because iam kool like that! don't flame me or i might have to become a e-thug k thxs.

[chauncy republicans]

Cheating on your spouse is wrong. He is a leader of a country , and people look to him for support and good decsions , he falied in both of these area's. Clinton conducted himslef in a manor that was of poor charcter and very disapointing.

and we can only hope that people will come to terms with the posiablity that we may not be able to achieve this great feat because this is a "holy war"

War and destruction are the tools of the trade for our society , we must come to terms with this and learn that "war" is a way that we vent our human emotions. We are "flawed" beings this is a given , but for a man to comment on issues way above his head is pure stupidity.


You sound like a bible-banging evangelical extremist! :fork:

[Beowulf]

Cheating on your spouse is wrong. He is a leader of a country , and people look to him for support and good decsions , he falied in both of these area's. Clinton conducted himslef in a manor that was of poor charcter and very disapointing.

and we can only hope that people will come to terms with the posiablity that we may not be able to achieve this great feat because this is a "holy war"

War and destruction are the tools of the trade for our society , we must come to terms with this and learn that "war" is a way that we vent our human emotions. We are "flawed" beings this is a given , but for a man to comment on issues way above his head is pure stupidity.


You sound like a bible-banging evangelical extremist! :fork:

So, the notion that cheating on your wife is wrong, is to you, an extremist notion?

[SeanAshi]

As for the peace process in the middle east , it is very grim and we can only hope that people will come to terms with the posiablity that we may not be able to achieve this great feat because this is a "holy war" and there will never be this perfect peacefull "utopia" that some people believe can be achieved.
Israel make peace with Palestinian terrorist groups who's only goal is the destruction of Israel? that makes sense :cantbeli:

[chauncy republicans]

Cheating on your spouse is wrong. He is a leader of a country , and people look to him for support and good decsions , he falied in both of these area's. Clinton conducted himslef in a manor that was of poor charcter and very disapointing.

and we can only hope that people will come to terms with the posiablity that we may not be able to achieve this great feat because this is a "holy war"

War and destruction are the tools of the trade for our society , we must come to terms with this and learn that "war" is a way that we vent our human emotions. We are "flawed" beings this is a given , but for a man to comment on issues way above his head is pure stupidity.


You sound like a bible-banging evangelical extremist! :fork:

So, the notion that cheating on your wife is wrong, is to you, an extremist notion?
No. The notion that everybody must share the same morality as him is.

[Kilgor]

I dont have a problem people going out and cheating with anyone they desire.

I have a problem with presidents going on national tv and saying " i did not have ****** relations with that woman".

And also lying under oath.

the lie under oath was far worse than a 1000 blow jobs ...

[chauncy republicans]

I dont have a problem people going out and cheating with anyone they desire.

I have a problem with presidents going on national tv and saying " i did not have ****** relations with that woman".

And also lying under oath.

the lie under oath was far worse than a 1000 blow jobs ...
I could give a **** who sucked him off, the fact that he lied under oath to the nation was what pissed me off.

[chauncy republicans]

Double post.

[Innoxx]

Many politicians lie, it's in their job description. No oath can prevent that. I give props to Hilary though, she stuck by her man. Personally, I don't care if Clinton boned farm animals on the White House lawn while hopped up on crank and poppers, if he can do his job as president, you won't hear any objection from me.

[Kilgor]

Their "job" is to be accountable to the people, and not to lie.

The democrats use it as a excuse, 'so long as it didnt effect how he did his job, then whats the problem '

[Innoxx]

There's the problem though, the blow job thing did affect his performance as president; a lot of it was also beyond his control. He was a highly regarded leader before that, even some repubs can attest to that. He got impeached, that's a big deal; lots of time and effort is needed to stand up for yourself. Plus, he had to later admit that he cheated on his wife on national television.

[Truthsayer]

Let's play: "WHAT IF?"



What If: Clinton WOULD NOT have lied under oath.


Seeing how Clinton was CLEARED of all the other charges, the 70 MILLION ($) investigation would have been for nothing - but to smear a man for doing something that isn't a crime.

Their only hope seem to have been to gain some points of his reputation (win some if he lies, win some if he tells the truth).


Since I'm a man that loves my wife I have a hard time understanding why anyone would cheat - IF their marrige is good. But, then again, I might just have answered myself why he did it.

[SpazzMunky]

The Clinton thing was blown way out of proportion, IMO. The only people he was hurting through this was his own family, not the country.

Now for an annoying analogy, :)

Bush went to war against Iraq over pitiful evidence that turned out to be wrong, causing the needless deaths of thousands of people and destabalizing the region. No one is calling for his impeachment, however. How is a few blowjobs worse than that??

[BlackRain]

Bush went to war against Iraq over pitiful evidence that turned out to be wrong, causing the needless deaths of thousands of people and destabalizing the region.

So says you.


Destabalizing the region? Like it was stable before we got there.
rofl
The Sunni and Shia and Kurds and Iranians and Baathist have been duking it out for a long time before we set foot in that country.

[Moledet]

Yes, they are responssible for the killing of Israelis by terrorists since 1993.

Just to help you determine my political view, I support transfer by will to the Palestinians (offering money, job and appartment so they would move to Jordan, the real Palestinian state) and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).

So...do you supported the murder of Rabbin too?

Um, have to ask, since it's late and I don't want to misunderstand you:

and the inhabitation of all the Jewish state (that includes Gaza, Samaria and Judaha).
You want to see these areas, not currently under Israels full 'control' (or legal land) cleansed of 'palestinians'?
No, I don't support the murder of Rabbin because it was an illegal act, he should have had the right to protect himself in court and I'm against executions so I think that he should have sit in jail for his mistake.

I believe that the conflict will never be solved as long as the peace will need to be done with the Palestinians, if they will move to Jordan (a state that 75% of its citizens are Palesitnians) we will get peace and they will stop being refugees.
Wanna read more, enter this link:
http://www.therightroadtopeace.com/eng/DefaultEng.html

And PM me if you want to know more, that's not the place to talk about my political views.

No, it's alright, I udnerstand you know.

In my country we have small groups of people that blame jews and immigrants for everything, and you know what the problem is here: they use the same retoric that you do.


"I'm moving to a country that won't accept immigrants!" ;)
No, you don't understand me.

I'm not against immigrants, i'm against terrorists and terror supporters.

P.S. blame them for what?
I blame the Palestinians and Araffat for intentional murder of 1000 Israelis.