Obama vs. Clinton on Iraq - October 2002 (when we KNEW Bush would attack)

[jackstraw45]

As I think about who to vote for on Tuesday, another thread reminded me to go back to 2002 when the Corporate media and GOP were on a MARCH TO WAR. We, at DU, knew the intelligence was BS and reading Obama's words from 2002 feel like a breath of fresh air contrasted to the Clinton nuanced, safe and corporate position of insincerely taking the administration "at it's word."

___________________________________________________

Obama, October 30, 2002 in Chicago:
http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/01/barack_obamas_2002_speech.html

"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Queda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars....You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Queda, thru effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings....You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair."

(WOW - that's how I felt then)


Clinton, October 10, 2002 in DC:
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

"Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt (YES THEY WERE)....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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. (even we at DU knew these intelligence reports were being cooked)...

..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....So Mr. President, for all its appeal, a unilateral attack, while it cannot be ruled out, on the present facts is not a good option...(YET WE KNEW THAT WAS WHAT THE ADMIN WAS PLANNING. EVERY HONEST PERSON KNEW BY OCT 2002)

....Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible...(EVEN THOUGH EVERYONE KNEW HE WAS LYING, WAR PLANS IN HAND)

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort.(BULLSH*T - IT WAS A VOTE TO PROTECT A CAREER RATHER THAN OUR TROOPS WHO WE KNEW WOULD BE SENT INTO THIS MESS)

[ingac70]

1. K&R!

[jasmine621]

2. I think Obama had better be careful on this one.

Most people believe it was a good thing to get rid of Saddam but it was a bad thing to occupy Iraq once that was done. Hillary's vote was much the same as many who now endorse Obama. She has always said that the conduct of the war and the occupation was wrong. And she was one of the earliest to call for a withdrawl plan. In a GE, she can go toe to toe with any Republican on national security and defending the US. Obama won't fare so well.

[jackstraw45]

4. I disagree. Iraq is a disaster and the media has bought the BS about the surge...

Let McCain run on Iraq. I'd love it. He just said he supports this Presidents and the $1 TRILLION war. As American families are being tossed into foreclosure, schools closing around the country, Katrina neighborhoods STILL in disrepair, inflation on the rise, homeless vets, health care out of control, oil costs at record highs, I welcome the debate on the best use for that TRILLION dollars AND the Iraq war as a national security issue.

Also, Clinton has proven she can nuance her way around the Senate but talk is cheap. Last I heard, she was tap-dancing her way around the issue of permanent bases and a "phased redeployment."

[milkyway]

12. This doesn't seem true to me. Are you saying that the majority of Americans today think we should

have invaded Iraq, depose Saddam, and left? Can you link to a poll showing this?

And Hillary was one of the earliest to call for a withdrawal plan? That's a new one that I've haven't heard before.

She can go toe-to-toe with repugs on national security? Because she supported a war that is an abysmal failure, that costs over a trillion dollars and thousands of lives, strengthened al Qaeda recruitment, let Afghanistan fall apart, and left Osama bin Laden a free man? That sounds like a "national security" winner to you?

[JackRiddler]

17. "Most people" were suckers in 2002...

And in 2008 they know damn well they were suckered.

This can be soft-pedaled to soothe egos, it need not be avoided!

[damntexdem]

18. Bullshit. He called a dumb war a dumb war, and he was right.

He can legitimately trumpet it.

[killbotfactory]

3. Don't blame Clinton for her supporting the stupid war

She would have looked positively foolish if she opposed the invasion and it turned out great!

[milkyway]

9. And that's exactly why she voted to send thousands of Americans, and hundreds of thousands

of Iraqis, to their deaths. Must keep up appearances! Such an inspirational leader.

[DiamondJay]

11. thats a joke right (and I SUPPORT her)

see thats the thing she really fucked up on. She would be undisputed and Obama wouldn't have a leg to stand on if Hillary had just looked at history, Vietnam and Korea. She thought it was gonna be like desert storm just because it was Bush vs. hussein again. She made a BAD calculation, and it took all the wind out of her sails. I'M even mad at her,

[suston96]

5. A little better context.......

...it was an authorization for the President to use force if all else failed.

"My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.

*****

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed."

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

Get it? - use these powers wisely and as a last resort.

After diplomatic channels have been exhausted. They were never used. Blaming the Iraq war on Hillary Clinton when an entire country was deceived by the Bush war-mongers is one of the most egregious gang-bangs I have ever heard of.

[jackstraw45]

6. Give me a BREAK. Anyone being honest with themselves knew what it was...

In October 2002, we ALL knew that we would go to war if Congress gave ANY kind of authorization (even if it did contain language to cover their asses implying war was a last resort).

[suston96]

7. Honesty? No. 8th Grade English reading comprehension......

"My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.

*****

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed."

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

[jackstraw45]

10. But it WAS a rush to war...it WAS a vote for unilaterialism. Just because a pol spins...

a bill to make them look misled, it doesn't make it so. Only a person with a 5th grade education didn't know by October 10, 2002 that we would be AT WAR within MONTHS of any Congressional authorization of force. But keep telling yourself that Hillary couldn't have known, that she REALLY believed that this was not a vote that WOULD lead to unilateral war.

Just don't let the FACTS get in the way.

August 26, 2002
Cheney: "The risks of inaction are far greater than the risk of action."

September 4, 2002
US defense officials confirmed plans to use commercial shipping to transport another cargo of tanks and other military equipment to the Gulf region later that month. V-O-A Correspondent Alex Belida at the Pentagon reported the move comes as the Bush administration weighs a possible pre-emptive attack on Iraq.

September 16, 2002
Iraq says it will allow international weapons inspectors to return "without conditions."

The US acknowledges that it has recently asked the British Government for permission to build special shelters on the island of Diego Garcia so that US B-2 Spirit's could operate from the airbase there.

September 24, 2002
The 82nd Airborne Division is notified to be prepared to deploy to the Gulf within two weeks.


And so on...

"The administration is planning today to launch what many people would undoubtedly call a short-sighted and inexcusable act of aggression. In five years, however, I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality." - Jeffrey Goldberg, the Slate, October 3, 2002

[milkyway]

15. Her ass-covering speech did not mean shit! Here's the only words that mattered:

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

<snip>

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.
The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by
the President to—
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security
Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq
and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security
Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay,
evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies
with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the
Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary
and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.—In connection with the
exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force
the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter
as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising
such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his
determination that—
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic
or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead
to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist
organizations, including those nations, organizations, or
persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist
attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
(c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.—
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory
authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the
War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in
this joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War
Powers Resolution.

<snip>

[Whisp]

19. at that point in time it was well established that *

was a fucking liar just itching to gun tote.

[suston96]

20. We live in a Republic...Direct your rage at the real villain.

Your taking sides in an election is a right - a right which I aggressively support. But your impugning the intents of a US Senator who followed the instructions of an Executive Branch by furnishing false information to the Congress to secure this resolution, at the same time deceiving the nation and the entire world, is repulsive and very transparent.

If all you have to support your candidate is this, then I can sense your desperation. He has much more going for him than fabrications by some of his misguided supporters.

[milkyway]

8. One thing that's always pissed me off is listening to Dems talk about what they said on the floor of

the Senate. What a farce. The only thing that had any bearing at all was what was said in THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ (what part of that title is so difficult for Clinton and the rest to understand?).

Cover-my-ass speeches on the Senate floor don't mean shit. Does Hillary really thing that Cheney actually gave a fuck what she was yapping about? All he wanted was your fucking vote, and you gave it to him.

Thank you for contrasting that with Obama's intelligent , clear-eyed understanding of the true nature of the situation. People sometimes forget the war fever that was gripping much of this country in the aftermath of 9/11. It took balls, and wisdom, for Obama to see things as they truly were and to stand up and say so.

K&R

[suston96]

21. Speeches before votes are necessary and historical. Learn something about the process...nt.

[jackstraw45]

22. I believe the criticism was of the CONTENT and not the process...

nt

[Bread and Circus]

13. K & R. Either Hillary was fooled or she wants us to be fooled by her

If she didn't know, then she's and idiot.
If she did know, then she's treating us like idiots.

Which is worse?

[Barack_America]

14. But if she had voted "no" on IWR, it would have hurt her chances for reelection...n/t

[TeamJordan23]

16. k&r. nm