General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHillary must feel so proud...One million dead from Iraqi invasion and occupation
Anyone who voted for this illegal war should NEVER become president of the United States. EVER.
Authors of the report, titled "Body Count: Casualty Figures After 10 Years of the 'War on Terror,'" have told Truthout that other casualty reports, like the often-quoted Iraq Body Count (IBC), which has a high-end estimate at the time of this writing of 154,563, are far too low in their estimates, and that the real numbers reach "genocidal dimensions."
Joachim Guilliard, the author of the Iraq portion of the study, told Truthout that the new study relied heavily on extrapolations from a previous study published in the prestigious Lancet medical journal, which put Iraq's numbers at 655,000, but the study was published in 2006 and is now dramatically out of date.
"The numbers of Lancet, reaching genocidal dimensions, represent a massive indictment of the US administration," Guilliard said. "Most Western media are not interested in it. The IBC numbers, however, are [seen as] acceptable. They are in line with the general picture of the war in Iraq according to which the Iraqis themselves are primarily responsible for most violence."
Truthout
snooper2
(30,151 posts)leave poor Hillary alone...she only has 20 million in the bank now to play with!
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Really, there is a standard where some set the bar higher than for others. His vote wasn't the make or break to defeating it or it passing.. so he could have stood on those principles everyone so much likes to point to.
hlthe2b
(102,387 posts)Something the RW not only fails to manifest, but in effect is using the same BS arguments to start more wars.
But, let's punish the mistakes of those on the Left (as so many seem to be suggesting) by electing another slate of RW neocons.
emulatorloo
(44,188 posts)Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)Any liberal who voted for this war does not deserve to be our next president. I will continue to express that until the primary is over and our nominee is elected. I hope to GOD it is NOT Hillary.
hlthe2b
(102,387 posts)and we'll be screwed for generations vis-a-vis the US Supreme Court. But, you'll be proud, now won't you?
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)My vote goes to John Kerry
Hillary or any Republican? - Hillary
---------
Neither of their votes were the make or break for the resolution.
I blame Bush, Cheney and all the other jackasses in the previous administration.
cali
(114,904 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)to vote for the killing.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Interesting how no one made a big deal of that.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,169 posts)Wow. Why didn't the Bennnnnnnnnghazeeeeeeeeeeee crowd catch that?
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)Nope.... and it was a hell of a lot closer to the date of their campaigns for office...
Barack Obama voted to fund the Iraq war a bunch of times before and when he was running for President.
This bar everyone likes to set for Hillary is way above what has been set in the past for others... I'm just curious as to why?
Gman
(24,780 posts)Of course. The far left at the time would have excuses Obama from just about anything.
Gman
(24,780 posts)It's pretty much his fault. Had he not run for prez, the whole of the Bush years would have never happened.
And you ignore the time and context of the IWR vote. An election was coming up shortly that Democrats needed to win and get the focus off Iraq where the GOP had a propaganda advantage. And the vote didn't matter anyway as Bush was going todo whatever he pleaded anyway.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)of Harris and 5 Justices. Do not legitimize Bush like that.
randome
(34,845 posts)Most politicians don't vote 'No' on a bill they know will lose. As has been pointed out elsewhere, Kerry and Edwards voted the same way.
It would be preferred if people always stood up for their principles and voted their conscience. But in the art of politics, such concepts only arise under extreme circumstances.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]
JEB
(4,748 posts)that the reasons for attacking Iraq were phony, phony phony.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)There's at least one other OP that's the same as this one, so I'm gonna guess it is.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)Sunlight is always the best disinfectant. You have a good day.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)We'll either get eighteen months of it for 5 1/2 years (or 9 1/2 depending).
morningfog
(18,115 posts)edhopper
(33,633 posts)In "Hard Choices," Clinton, a former secretary of state and former U.S. senator who is exploring a 2016 presidential campaign, writes: "[M]any Senators came to wish they had voted against the resolution. I was one of them. As the war dragged on, with every letter I sent to a family in New York who had lost a son or daughter, a father or mother, my mistake become (sic) more painful."
Clinton continues, "I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn't alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple."
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)Why should we give Hillary one after making such a massive, deadly "mistake?"
edhopper
(33,633 posts)the differences are glaring.
The disaster that would come from a Repug President is to horrid to think about.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)and the gloating afterward.
Gman
(24,780 posts)Then you know nothing about the Iraq war.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)vote for clinton.
brooklynite
(94,748 posts)pnwmom
(108,997 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)still_one
(92,427 posts)The Irian negotiations, and the reestablishment of relations with Cuba, while every republican candidate supports the invasion, is against the negotiations with Iran, and does not want to reestablish diplomatic relations with Cuba
I won't get into the social issues or Supreme Court differences, but it is obvious
JI7
(89,276 posts)They think he would have gone in regardless of any vote in congress.
They also don't think democrats including many who voted for the iwr would have started the war in Iraq if they were president.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)NT
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Proud", eh? You'll tortuously rationalize that allegation for us, yes?
Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)Yet John Edwards was the darling of much of the left last time around - even though he fucking was a cosponsor of the Iraq War Resolution. The IWR authorized use of force under certain circumstances. It was a mistake for any Democrat to vote for it, but it took a President itching for war to justify invading Iraq when he did under false premises.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)of our current political mechanism. There are two ways to respond to this problem:
1. Resign one's self to the reality that no matter what we do, our leaders will continue to wage elective war for their own purposes, and focus on other issues.
or
2. Refuse to accept it and do what is necessary to find another way.
Most Democrats I know choose #1. I advocate #2.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The fact that we stayed there for decades is horrible and a statement about our entire country.
YET
Who ya gonna vote for? That REALLY is the question here in 2015.
If it was up to me, I would elect Jim Hightower!
However...elections are not left to us peons, we merely play a small role in the process.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)Remember, Clinton is the same politician who has repeatedly bashed the Obama administration for not "intervening" in Syria and Iraq, and who was an energetically cheering on our involvement in the Libyan debacle. I have no doubts that she would lead us into even more war and destruction. That's bad for us, and bad for the civilians we will inevitably kill.
And, while I'm hesitant about attributing her husbands flaws to her, let's be bluntly honest...the Clinton's have never exactly cared about body counts.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)they'll just insist that the IWR wasn't a vote to directly invade Iraq
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Voting for authorization for use of force (which I wouldn't have done) was predicated on bush exhausting diplomatic means. Which he did not do.
It was an authorization to act if it was needed but was not a vote, directly, to start a war. Some hoped the authorization might be a bargaining tool against Iraq and wake saddam up to how serious things were on inspections/etc.
Bush is the one who misused his power. I wouldn't vote to give him that, but I can understand why some might.
All of this is an attempt by some to excuse bush for his abuse of power.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)No prouder than I am of John Kerry, Joe Biden , and the 59% of her fellow Democratic senators who voted for the IWR.
It was a mistake...