Dick Cheney 1991

Some­times there is really noth­ing more to say:

The notion that we ought to now go to Bagh­dad and some­how take con­trol of the coun­try strikes me as an extremely seri­ous one in terms of what we’d have to do once we got there. You’d prob­a­bly have to put some new gov­ern­ment in place. It’s not clear what kind of gov­ern­ment that would be, how long you’d have to stay. For the U.S. to get involved mil­i­tar­ily in deter­min­ing the out­come of the strug­gle over who’s going to gov­ern in Iraq strikes me as a clas­sic def­i­n­i­tion of a quagmire.

Sec­re­tary of Defense Dick Cheney speak­ing on NPR in 1991

Lis­ten to what he said in 1991 on NPR.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

122 Responses to Dick Cheney 1991

  1. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    This needs to be said many times.

    The rul­ing par­ties in the Iraqi gov­ern­ment one of their aims in the elec­tions was to demand the occu­pa­tion troops to leave Iraq and start­ing with a set date. That made a lot of peo­ple vote for them.

    But Jaa­fari et al are not ful­fill­ing their elec­tion promise; they are doing exactly the opposite.

    The future of Iraq; 18 stu­dent unions statement/petition for the occu­pa­tion troops to leave Iraq was pre­sented to the par­la­ment which had peo­ple who fully agreed with them but the gov­ern­ment did not lis­ten. Ama­rah the town I lived in once, a month or so ago had 1 mil­lion sig­na­tures ask­ing for the occu­pa­tion troops to leave and set a date now; nobody listens.

  2. DaKruser says:

    My point being, Georgy,
    That cities that resist an invader are always flat­tened. It has been that way since the begin­ning of recorded his­tory. There is no “Kinder, Gen­tler War”. Fal­lu­jah was a cen­ter of anti-Coalition Resis­tance, so harsh mea­sures were taken to root out the Cock­roaches. Cologne was a French city, not Ger­man *since I seem to have to make these dis­tinc­tions for you*, yet it was bombed nearly to non-existence.
    I’ll tell you what. Check out the IP of my posts. You’ll find them to sent from Ft Huachuca, Ari­zona. Guess what is located there? I’ll give you a hint: Its not that poor sap you THINK I am.

  3. Michael says:

    Well of course my point is that both the cities in France and Iraq were destroyed by an evil fas­cist invader under­tak­ing a war sim­ply for greed.
    And I’m not inter­ested in the place you have found, no doubt after much Google search­ing, in AZ. I’m quite used to your silly lit­tle games.

  4. moron99 says:

    The pop­u­la­tion of Ama­rah is 350,000. If you had a peti­tion signed by “1 mil­lion” res­i­dents then I doubt any­one would take you seriously.

    The future of Iraq; 18 stu­dent unions statement/petition for the occu­pa­tion troops to leave Iraq was pre­sented to the par­la­ment which had peo­ple who fully agreed with them but the gov­ern­ment did not lis­ten. Ama­rah the town I lived in once, a month or so ago had 1 mil­lion sig­na­tures ask­ing for the occu­pa­tion troops to leave and set a date now; nobody listens”

    If the major­ity of Iraqs share your opin­ion and feel more deeply about it than other issues, then it will be reflected in elec­tions. Good politi­cians are like pros­titues. They do what­ever the cus­tomer tells them to do as long as they get paid. In this case the cos­tomer is Iraqi cit­i­zens and the pay­ment is get­ting enough votes to be elected. A good politi­cian would sell his own mother if the peo­ple demand it. Such is democ­racy. I am sorry if you picked the wrong pros­ti­tute. Bet­ter luck next time.

  5. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    Ha ha ha, you are really some­thing who do you think you are fool­ing, I use Ama­rah since that is the town I come from and that is in the Mis­san dis­trict. Most Iraqis just say Ama­rah. Fool. Dont try get smart with me.

  6. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    If the major­ity of Iraqs share your opin­ion and feel more deeply about it than other issues, then it will be reflected in elections.”

    Will be?!! It was reflected in the elec­tions. Peo­ple voted for par­ties who said they were for occu­pa­tion troops to leave and/or set a date for it. They did that and now Jaa­fari et al are not ful­fill­ing their elec­tion promise; they are doing exactly the oppo­site. And the mes­sage was clear who was set­ting the rules it was BUSH, when Jaa­fari was vis­it­ing him live on a tv inter­view, Bush was not ready to with­draw troops Bush was not ready to set a date. .

  7. Michael says:

    No, It is a pretty good gig in many ways. For one thing there are all kinds of untaxed income: hous­ing allowances, sub­sis­tence allowances, jump pay, sea pay, flight pay… And where else can you retire with a pen­sion after 20 years?
    I never went active duty (other than for train­ing) because I just don’t like the lifestyle enough to do it full time. Get­ting up at 0500 for PT or hav­ing some­one inspect your lawn to ensure you are keep­ing it up to stan­dards grows tire­some pretty quickly.

  8. moron99 says:

    Nadia, if you put forth a peti­tion of 1 mil­lion sig­na­tures from a town with 100,000 vot­ers no one is going to take you seri­ously. If the peo­ple you fol­low are that polit­i­cally inept, then you need to find some­one new to follow.

  9. Michael says:

    Nadia, if you put forth a peti­tion of 1 mil­lion sig­na­tures from a town with 100,000 vot­ers no one is going to take you seriously.

    Well that kind of thing hap­pened in the Amer­i­can elec­tions, more votes than peo­ple on the register.

  10. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    moron99,

    You say you want free­dom to Iraqis yet when faced with infor­ma­tion what Iraqis want and that is for the occu­pa­tion troops to leave and set a date of depar­ture you are not inter­ested in defend­ing their rights against Bush. What a hyp­o­crit­i­cal devi­ous liar you are.

  11. DaKruser says:

    Actu­ally, Nadia,
    Many of us felt the Pres­i­dent made a big mis­take by not sign­ing on when Con­gress wanted to pass a bill to do just that. I would have been easy to tie draw-down to lesson­ing of vio­lence. How­ever, there is an argue­ment that any kind of agree­ment with the “Resis­tance” val­i­dates them and their exis­tence. That one obvi­ously won-out. Sadly.

  12. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    DaKruser, so you too are defend­ing your pres­i­dent for not lis­ten­ing to the wishes of the Iraqis. And you say you want free­dom to Iraqis? You just took it away from them, what a hyp­o­crit­i­cal devi­ous liar you are too.

  13. DaKruser says:

    No, Nadia,
    I am NOT defend­ing him. I think he made a griev­ous mis­take, plain and sim­ple. How­ever, that is the dan­ger of a Democ­racy, some­times the major­ity vote for what we think is not good judgement.

  14. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    So you mean in other words Bush is exactly as Sad­dam. Well said didn’t think it could come from you.

  15. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    It was reflected in the elec­tions. Peo­ple voted for par­ties who said they were for occu­pa­tion troops to leave and/or set a date for it. They did that and now Jaa­fari et al are not ful­fill­ing their elec­tion promise; they are doing exactly the oppo­site. And the mes­sage was clear who was set­ting the rules it was BUSH, when Jaa­fari was vis­it­ing him live on a tv inter­view, Bush was not ready to with­draw troops Bush was not ready to set a date. What a hyp­o­crit­i­cal devi­ous liar Bush is.

  16. DaKruser says:

    Well, Nadia,
    I’m not sure I would say that my Pres­i­dent is exactly like Sad­dam. He was elected by the Major­ity, like Sad­dam, but there were many more of us who voted against him than Sad­dam, which makes his elec­tion more legit­i­mate. My point here, is, that when a Demo­c­ra­t­i­cally elected leader makes a deci­sion, and he is backed by the major­ity, then the rest of us must go along. Some­times we go along qui­etly, and some­times NOT so qui­etly. When all this was hap­pen­ing, I spoke out against the deci­sion — check back on LadyBird’s site/archive to those dates.
    How­ever, I would not put Bush in the same league as Sad­dam. He may at itmes be mis­guided, but I don’t see him as mani­a­cal or will­ing to kill off his oppo­nents in the Gov’t because they don’t agree with him. Sad­dam was both.
    Because I agree with you, ie that it was a bad deci­sion, doesn’t mean I agree with your base premise. Some might say that makes me hyp­ocrite, but in truth it makes me honest.

  17. Michael says:

    So you mean in other words Bush is exactly as Sad­dam. Well said didn’t think it could come from you.

    David can have the occa­sional but rare moment of lucidity.

  18. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    DaKruser wrote “My point here, is, that when a Demo­c­ra­t­i­cally elected leader makes a deci­sion, and he is backed by the major­ity, then the rest of us must go along.”

    You seem to not know what you are say­ing. You say MAJORITY rule. Yet here you are not sup­port­ing the MAJORITY. So which way is it; are you for major­ity rule or Bush’s rule?

    The major­ity voted for par­ties that were for occu­pa­tion troops to be with­drawn now and set a date for it. The MAJORITY that you keep writ­ing about wanted that and the cur­rent gov­ern­ment par­ties were for this with­drawal. Now Jaa­fari and the rest are not ful­fill­ing this promise they gave. He is doing the oppo­site. And it is Bush who is say­ing no, Bush is not with­draw­ing troops and Bush will not set a date for it either. So it is Bush who is oppos­ing the wishes of the MAJORITY that voted. He is act­ing as a dictator.

    He is tak­ing way our rights here; Bush is tak­ing away the majori­ties vote here. He is set­ting stop for what the Iraqi gov­ern­ment said they would do to the Iraqi peo­ple in the elections.

    So yes Bush is exactly as Sad­dam here. He is act­ing as a dic­ta­tor. He does as he wishes with the Iraqi soci­ety and Iraqis.

    This is Bush caught in his full hyp­o­crit­i­cal devi­ously ling act against the Iraqi gov­ern­ment and the major­ity that voted for them.

  19. DaKruser says:

    We have a mis-communication here, Nadia.
    When I stated that I should fol­low the major­ity, I was speak­ing of the Amer­i­can peo­ple. We (that mean­ing many of us who spoke out for his sign­ing of the bill for dated with­drawl) did our best to con­vince him. We sent let­ters, made phone calls, con­tacted our Rep­re­sen­ta­tives and Sen­a­tors, etc. How­ever, when the deci­sion was made there were more who agreed with the President’s pol­icy than dis­agreed, so we fol­low this path, hop­ing for the next chance to make Iraq a bet­ter place.
    As far as Bush pulling the strings in the Iraqi Leg­is­la­ture, I don’t agree that that is what is hap­pen­ing since we in the US CERTAINLY don’t want another Iran on our hands and that is LadyBird’s biggest fear right now. Mine as well.
    It is not for Bush to fol­low the votes of the Iraqi peo­ple. It is for Bush to fol­low the dic­tates of the Iraqi Peo­ples’ rep­re­sen­ta­tives, so.…
    If they are not doing what they promised, vote them out. That is Democ­racy in action. I cer­tainly does not make him another Saddam.

  20. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    DaKruser, the interview/press inter­view between Bush and Jaa­fari said it all. That is NOT Jaa­fari and the Iraqi gov­ern­ment that are rul­ing Iraq it IS Bush. We are under full occu­pa­tion of the U.S.

    By the way the U.S is per­fectly happy and sup­port­ive to the reli­gious dic­ta­tor­ship in Saudi Ara­bia. This is the dou­ble moral and hypocrisy of the U.S for­eign pol­icy and those who sup­port it.

  21. Pingback: RADAMISTO: CHENEY WAS CORRECT

  22. Pingback: Sources | TucsonsNews