Why did so many Dems vote for Iraq War

[nat4900]

Clinton's response to the success of the Reagan Revolution was to move the party to the Right. Eisenhower and Nixon made the exact same compromises by capitulating w/the postwar New Deal model: high taxes, government projects and support for demand-side fiscal policies. Nixon created the EPA and Eisenhower supported a top tax rate in the 90 percentile (Ike actually believed in paying for the shit he did)

The OP has nothing to worry about on Iraq. There is no exploitable daylight between Jeb and Hillary on this. Hillary and Bill supported the intervention.

Maybe the war wasn't a disaster. The goal was to create the largest base in history near the world's most important asset. If you don't like the unfortunate bloodshed and the death of over a million innocent Iraqis, than fuel your car with hackie-sacks.

I actually agree with most of what you stated.....Perhaps a better "base" in the region might have been within Saudi Arabia? (we're already in Turkey.....well, sort of.)

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Londo 11390423

The OP has nothing to worry about on Iraq. There is no exploitable daylight between Jeb and Hillary on this. Hillary and Bill supported the intervention.

There is a huge amount of daylight between HRC and Bush43 and his brother. HRC was promised by the Bush Administration that if UN inspectors went in Bush43 would let them do their work. HRC was for war as last resort only if inspections failed. Inspections did not fail.

Jeb has made no comment about preferring the UN inspection route to disarming Saddam Hussein. He can't. Doing so puts the entire blame on his dimwitted older brother. Jeb has said he would have invaded even knowing now that inspections would have reached the same conclusion as invading. No WMD were there.

It's a huge difference when you consider UN inspections as a factor. That is why those on the Bush side go silent on inspections and UN Resolution 1441.

I supported the intervention and threat of military force to get inspections restarted and to turn the 2002 summer drive for war back with a damn good peaceful option - disarming Iraq peacefully through UN inspections.

When Jeb Bush attacks his brother for not allowing the inspectors to finish their work then Bush has moved to a correct position on the matter and similar to both Clinton's. But until he does he's got plenty of daylight between him and Hillary and that is what matters.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

kaz 11388892

I opposed the invasion, stupid bitch

But you don't recognize the fact that only one man is solely responsible for the invasion you claim to oppose. It was not Saddam Hussein who forced the UN inspectors to leave Iraq on March 17 2003. The decision to bomb, invade, kill and destroy his way to disarming Iraq instead of the peaceful option still available was made solely by none other than President George W Bush and not one other person on the planet.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

aster 11389480

The UNSC cannot force anyone to do anything.

The UNSC and all its member states in November 2002 unanimously forced the Baathist Regime in Iraq to allow the return of UN inspectors within a month of passage of UNSC Resolution 1441. It was a huge success for the UN as a body until Bush and his lapdog named Blair forced an end to the lawful path toward verification that Iraq was disarmed of any WMD threat.

It is not the UNSC's fault that two permanent member states decided to defy international law and disarm Iraq by invasion, death chaos and needless destruction and waste of resources,

 

[nat4900]

The decision to bomb, invade, kill and destroy his way to disarming Iraq instead of the peaceful option still available was made solely by none other than President George W Bush and not one other person on the planet.

Well, please don't neglect to include our "beloved," murderous Cheney.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

11389609

Wow, you keep saying to someone who opposes the invasion the invasion is my fault

I am not saying the invasion is your fault. The invasion is the fault of GWBush and no one else. But you can't seem to find a valid argument against that.

Your fault lies in swallowing the post- invasion pro-invasion propaganda that the fault is shared by politicians who voted a certain way five months prior to the actual decision to invade, and two months before UN inspectors returned to Iraq after four years of absence.

You act as if nothing happened between October 2002 and March 2003 that significantly reduced the threat from a Iraq and negated such an urgent need to invade and start a war.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is why ^^ so many dems voted against the invasion.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Well, please don't neglect to include our "beloved," murderous Cheney.

Bush was the decider. On the matter of giving SH a final chance to be disarmed peacefully through the UN Cheney's 'war now and no UN BS' was vetoed by Bush in September 2002 and the 'peaceful option - under the threat of military action' gained traction.

We should never forget the vile role that Cheney played in hyping and lying about the urgent need for war after the inspectors went back in. But Cheney never wanted inspectors in and within the topic of this thread it was Bush that promoted the idea that he preferred to avoid war and would allow the UN to disarm Iraq if he was given the authority to use military force if inspections were not resumed in the wake of the 911 attacks.

We know now that Cheney's push for war eventually prevailed but the point is that means there was going to be war whether inspectors went back in or not.

The final analysis should always be that there was going to be a Cheney invasion and no Bush peaceful disarmament which means the October vote to key Bush decide was just an added part of the fraud and a no vote by every Democrat was not going to stop the war.

My point is the stupidest decision made was to invade after three months of inspections were working better than ever before. And Bush is the one and only man that made that call.

 

[nat4900]

My point is the stupidest decision made was to invade after three months of inspections were working better than ever before. And Bush is the one and only man that made that call.

Although I tend to agree......my "defense" of Bush is that he wasn't smart enough to be as evil as the smarter and much more nefarious, Cheney.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

JS 11392083

That is why ^^ so many dems voted against the invasion.

Voting against giving Bush the authority to decide if an invasion was necessary would not have stopped the invasion. Voting yes at least gave a pause to the push for invasion and provide at least a chance for Iraq to be disarmed peacefully.

HRC explains her reasoning for her vote quite well and I posted her speech in full. No one is interested in reviewing it in the context of that moment in time.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In the moment of the time, no "yea" vote's hands are clean.

They are blood drenched. No HRC, not JEB.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

In the moment of the time, no "yea" vote's hands are clean. .

The Bush clan can appreciate your opinion that is not based in any way upon consideration of that moment in time.

No "no" vote was going to stop a war that actually started to intensify at least six months prior to the vote that you must believe would have somehow stopped it.

If it makes you feel better saying HRC has blood on her hands just like the man who kicked the UN inspectors out, so be it. But lets not pretend that you have thought that opinion through and with full consideration of all that happened under Bush's first two years in office.

 

[nat4900]

I STARTED THIS THREAD TO REMIND ALL OTHER POSTERS THAT (paraphrasing Shakespeare) THE EVIL THAT MEN DO SHOULD LIVE AFTER THEM.

 

[kaz]

Here you are, in love with being a slave guy

Uh huh, it's all about the Freeeedum with you dipshits. Brought 'Freedom' to the Iraqis by way of killing thousands & thousands of their children. How bout that Freedom? Nice job greedy fat ass American.

Wow, you keep saying to someone who opposes the invasion the invasion is my fault. That's just rhetorical genius. How do you come up with that stuff? Your local playground?

You opposed it, yet still defend it. Are you lying to us, or just yourself? Earlier you boasted about how the Iraqis should thank you for brutally slaughtering thousands of their children in the name of 'Freedom.' Maybe you're just confused. Whatever.

Strawman. I never defended the invasion. I'm criticizing you for your hyperbole. If I say a shoplifter isn't a murderer, that isn't defending shoplifting

Yes you did. You boasted about how the Iraqis should thank you for your horrific crime against humanity. Cuz you brought em all that cool Freeeedum shite. No matter how you try to spin it, you are defending it.

You are an illiterate, illogical idiot. Anyway, what would anyone expect from a slave, damn it, and proud of it, like you?

How's your, if you can't beat em run to the front of the parade and scream for it to go faster, ideology working out for you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

How could anyone have anticipated that the POTUS and his administration could be capable of such bald-faced lies?

The POTUS and his Administration was merely quoting what a lot of leading Democrats were saying based on intel from US and allied intel agencies. Are these lies?

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

147 Democrats voted against the Iraq war. Why do you never quote them?

 

[kaz]

Give us a break with your rewriting history.

Iraqi Kurdistan - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Peshmerga fought their own war to obtain self rule. The NFZ preserved it.

A NFZ is not an invasion in any sense of the invasion of Poland by the Germans and the invasion of Iraq ordered by GW a Bush.

It was still an invasion. What it certainly was not was an "occupation," which is what that idiot thinks it was.

If the US stopped supporting the Kurds, they would have been overrun by Saddam. Clearly it was an invasion

So stop with the conjecture then and prove it. Post a link to an article stating Clinton put "boots on the ground" in Iraq.

The point is irrelevant to the discussion which is that Clinton was a neocon just like HW, W and Obama. He was. He tried to topple the Iraqis militarily and he tried to set up Kurdish autonomy militarily. He nation built directly in Kosovo, Bosnia, Haiti and Somalia. He also attacked the Sudan and Afghanistan.

So you tell me what difference it would make to you if we went into the Kurdish region with military personal or we just armed and advised them across the border. Would it make any difference to you? How would it make a difference?

Irrelevant?? You made it relevant by lying. Your lack of credibility is relevant to any discussion you have. That you're so pathological, that you can't have a discussion without lying, is a relevant factor in every discussion with you.

Not liberal = lie, got it

 

[kaz]

kaz 11388892

I opposed the invasion, stupid bitch

But you don't recognize the fact that only one man is solely responsible for the invasion you claim to oppose. It was not Saddam Hussein who forced the UN inspectors to leave Iraq on March 17 2003. The decision to bomb, invade, kill and destroy his way to disarming Iraq instead of the peaceful option still available was made solely by none other than President George W Bush and not one other person on the planet.

Non-sequitur

 

[kaz]

I am not saying the invasion is your fault. The invasion is the fault of GWBush and no one else. But you can't seem to find a valid argument against that

You're about to go back on ignore for being boring as shit. But I'll give you one more chance starting with a serious answer to this question.

Actually, I argue against the war all the time. There is something seriously wrong with you that you don't see it considering all the time you see my arguments in the threads you actively participate in then you say this.

My arguments against the Iraq invasion are:

1) It was Unconstitutional. The only authority for the military granted and the only authority for the military which should be granted is for the "defence" of the United States. Attacking Afghanistan was that, they attacked us. Invading Iraq was not. Nation building in Afghanistan was not. In Afghanistan, we should have gone in, killed as many al Qaeda and Taliban as we could and left. We should not have gone into Iraq at all. I oppose Gulf War I, Gulf War II, and having any military bases or permanent troops in the middle east.

2) It was not in our national interest. The Arab governments and Europe are under a far greater threat from radical Islamic States. Yet we push them aside and fight it for them. It's ridiculous. Look what happened when we didn't attack ISIS. Jordan and Egypt did. Why should they take care of themselves when we do it for them?

I don't care if you call me a Republican and don't grasp my views, if you think it offends me that's part of your simpleton mind. But it's DULL to have you keep arguing your obsession with W with a libertarian. I don't give a shit. Ignore me, address my views or keep arguing with W with me. If you continue to do option 3 you will disappear from my screen again until next April which is as you know the month of my birthday and amnesty month for those of you who don't offend me but bore the shit out of me.

 

[paulitician]

Uh huh, it's all about the Freeeedum with you dipshits. Brought 'Freedom' to the Iraqis by way of killing thousands & thousands of their children. How bout that Freedom? Nice job greedy fat ass American.

Wow, you keep saying to someone who opposes the invasion the invasion is my fault. That's just rhetorical genius. How do you come up with that stuff? Your local playground?

You opposed it, yet still defend it. Are you lying to us, or just yourself? Earlier you boasted about how the Iraqis should thank you for brutally slaughtering thousands of their children in the name of 'Freedom.' Maybe you're just confused. Whatever.

Strawman. I never defended the invasion. I'm criticizing you for your hyperbole. If I say a shoplifter isn't a murderer, that isn't defending shoplifting

Yes you did. You boasted about how the Iraqis should thank you for your horrific crime against humanity. Cuz you brought em all that cool Freeeedum shite. No matter how you try to spin it, you are defending it.

You are an illiterate, illogical idiot. Anyway, what would anyone expect from a slave, damn it, and proud of it, like you?

How's your, if you can't beat em run to the front of the parade and scream for it to go faster, ideology working out for you?

Yes, you opposed it, but also support it. Seriously, you're a confused wingnut. Probably about that time for you to start ranting about how American Workers should just shut up enjoy getting paid shit wages.

 

[kaz]

Yes, you opposed it, but also support it. Seriously, you're a confused wingnut. Probably about that time for you to start ranting about how American Workers should just shut up enjoy getting paid shit wages.

You are a very stupid man