who got war right

[goodhue]

Democrats who got war right

In the Senate, 29 Democrats backed the president's request while 21 opposed it. In the House, 81 Democrats backed Bush's request while 126 voted "nay."

When all was said and done, 147 congressional Democrats opposed authorizing Bush to wage war with Iraq, while 110 Democrats bought the president's line.

As Democrats who backed the war, such as Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman and former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., now try to come off as war skeptics, it is worth mentioning that the only Democratic presidential contenders who voted against the war when it mattered were Florida Sen. Bob Graham and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

Like President Bush, Democrats who backed the war have a lot of explaining to do. Democrats who opposed it, including Graham, Kucinich and Andy Olsen, are rapidly being proven right.

http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/editorial/53663.php

[AngryWhiteDemocrat]

1. Hang on...

As Democrats who backed the war, such as Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman and former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., now try to come off as war skeptics

When did Lieberman become a war skeptic????

[whoYaCallinAlib]

2. Good question . . . he's still defending this war.

[IDUDOYOU]

3. There was no "right" or "wrong" about this war

The only "right" was that things could have been done better, before the war, during the war, and after the war.

Dean supporters need to stop saying the war was wrong, because this question become inevitable-Do you mean Saddam Hussein was in the right?

Criticism of Bush should come by what he did before the war and after the war.

Not the war itself.

Oh, that's right.
Dean supporters consider themselves to be the Democratic party, while other Democrats are not really Democrats.

[HFishbine]

4. "Dean supporters consider themselves to be the Democratic party"

Actually, I'm one of those independents the dems are trying to capture.

[Capt_Nemo]

5. Did you know aggression is a war crime?

This war was an aggression, if you mind checking what the UN charter
says about the legality of war.

By making an apology for aggression do you mean Adolf Hitler was in the
right?

[wuushew]

6. That means the war was a happy accident

That has never been the United States historical policy, In WWII the United States knew the Japanese were going to start a conflict in greater Asia but we clearly had a let them strike first policy. Don't say something absurd like "we don't want a smoking run to be a mushroom cloud" The chance of serious causaulities of American citizens is so small as to be almost infatesimal. Especially in light of constant observation and partial occupation of Iraq. The reality that is thousands of Iraq civilian and military dead will not be offset by the false promise of American democracy in that country. If the United States has so many noble humanitarian goals why then are we abscent in restoring peace to the continent of Africa? The answer is easy, Iraq was a minor humanitarian problem that was easily dealt with for a massive payoff in oil wealth.

This war was wrong

[ProfessorPlum]

7. No, that's a bad argument

saying that the war is wrong because the costs far outweigh the benefits is not the same as saying you think Saddam is right. I'd rather have Saddam back where he was, contained militarily and economically, and have all of those lives and money and allies back, than have the situation we have now.

Things could have been done better, you are right - like not going to war.

Edit for typo.

[EAMcClure]

9. Quit that shit

This kind of hyperbole does nothing for camraderie.

People can back a candidate without individuals such as yourself barfing on them with bullshit sweeping generalisations.

Eric

[Terwilliger]

11. this war was absolutely wrong...period

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

15. starting war is a war crime. Bush is a war criminal per Nuremberg

quote

"We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which
their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the
war, but that they started it. And we must not allow
ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war,
for our position is that no grievances or policies will
justify resort to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced
and condemned as an instrument of policy."

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert L. Jackson
Chief U.S. Prosecutor
at the Nuremberg Tribunals
August 12, 1945

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/jack02.htm

[indigo32]

19. You are unbelievable

I bet you don't even know whom this poster backs...
Yet there you are grasping at any opportunity to trash Dean supporters....

BTW not supporting this war <> supporting Saddam...
to claim otherwise is really bad logic.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

8. The majority of Americans support the war against Iraq

They did, and they still do. Does that make it right? No. Does that make anti-war a losing issue in a general election? Probably.

[EAMcClure]

10. The majority support for war is shaky

Being anti-war will not be a losing issue. Tie the war blunder on Bush, sketch out SPECIFIC reasons why Saddam could have been contained rather than ousted/exterminated, and make yourself ant-Iraq war, not a peace and love "hippy."

Make the Iraq blunder an albatross, and the populace will begin to agree with you. The U.S. public is not firmly into the war right now, and casually will continue to mount and the costs will continue to accrue.

Anti-war is a good issue, and will be the fulcrum for a Dem win.

Eric

[ulysses]

13. the majority support for the *invasion*

didn't come about in a vacuum, but rather in the absence of many voices from the leadership arguing against it.

[GreenArrow]

14. That would mean something, maybe,

if the majority of Americans could find Iraq on a map. The average American is in a deep, deep sleep.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

16. lol

*very* good point :)

Okay, let's be realistic though - I bet the majority of American VOTERS could find Iraq on a map.

[Eloriel]

12. Graham voted no because the resolution wasn't tough enough

Not exactly what the rest of us had in mind about what "matters" about a no vote.

Eloriel

[lkinsale]

17. Misleading. Graham's actual statement on the senate floor

Senator Graham's Floor Statement on the Iraq Resolution October 10, 2002

...Madam President, different people have different opinions of what our national security priorities should be. Clearly some, including the President, believe the first priority should be regime change in Baghdad. Others believe our first priority should be to disarm Iraq by removing its weapons of mass destruction.

As important as those goals may be, I have difficulty. The United States has many challenges, threats and priorities to respond to, particularly in the region of the Middle East and Central Asia. The Israel-Palestinian conflict, India-Pakistan, the threats posed by weapons of mass destruction. Even if we say the number one issue should be containing weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, I frankly do not believe that Iraq should be our first concern.

We do not know the full capabilities of the state of Israel, although we believe it has the full capability to defend itself against attacks or the threat of an attack. We are aware of the significant threats posed by India, Pakistan and Iran. But I can say without fear of contradiction, all of these possess substantially greater capability and means of delivering weapons of mass destruction than does Iraq.

Of all of the issues that we care about, and those over which we have some ability to determine the outcome, in my judgment, the number one priority should be the war on terrorism and the protection of the people in the United States, our homeland. Our top targets should be those groups that have the greatest potential to repeat what happened on September 11, killing thousands of Americans.

This timid resolution, I fear, will only increase the chance of Americans being killed, and that is not a burden of probability that I am prepared to take. Therefore I will vote no.

I close with the words spoken in one of the darkest periods of history of the Western World, in 1941, by Winston Churchill: "Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events."

*****

I think there's a lot here about what "matters" about a no vote. Graham did not make this vote based on political expediency. He made his "no" vote based on his convictions. And they look like pretty wise convictions, in hindsight.

*******

Click to subscribe to Graham04 on Yahoo Groups

Contribute to Graham For President (Enter "Laura Kinsale" as your BobCat if you want to give me credit toward my pledge to raise 1k for Bob.)



http://grahamchat.whitesandworks.com:80/chat/world/html/login.html

[ConsAreLiars]

18. Divide & Conquer, eh?

Simpletons and ideologues often pose black and white views of the world: right-wrong, divine-evil, with us or with them, ad nauseum. The strength of the progressive movement is found in the fact that the world is in reality far more complex than that perverse kind of thinking can handle.

Such either-or propositions are worse than useless. They are dangerous delusions. Very dangerous. That is the kind of demogogic "thinking" which underlies this illegitimate regime's policy of creating thousands of bloody corpses and maimed children and parading these images in front of the very populations where Anti-US sentiment had long ago already become quite serious. This amoral view of the world, which justifies fanning the flames of religious zealotry and arming and organizing these fanatics into paramilitary squads simply because they were "with us" - this psychopathic willingness to seek short-term advantage by any means; this is just what created AlQaeda 20 years ago and just what is now nurturing the work of hatemongers and bigots around the planet every day.