Kerry's IWR speech on the Senate floor 10/9/2002

[LittleClarkie]

So much is said about Kerry's stance on the IWR, that I copied it out the Congressional Record and put it on my site for people to read exactly what he said if they hadn't already.

http://members.hostedscripts.com/board.cgi?user=TaliBanned2&a=read&read=1102306997

This bit is interesting:
"I want to underscore that this administration began this debate with a resolution that granted exceedingly broad authority to the President to use force. I regret that some in the Congress rushed so quickly to support it. I would have opposed it. It gave the President the authority to use force not only to enforce all of the U.N. resolutions as a cause of war , but also to produce regime change in Iraq , and to restore international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region. It made no mention of the President's efforts at the United Nations or the need to build multilateral support for whatever course of action we ultimately would take.

I am pleased that our pressure, and the questions we have asked, and the criticisms that have been raised publicly, the debate in our democracy has pushed this administration to adopt important changes, both in language as well as in the promises that they make.

The revised White House text, which we will vote on, limits the grant of authority to the President to the use of force only with respect to Iraq . It does not empower him to use force throughout the Persian Gulf region. It authorizes the President to use Armed Forces to defend the ``national security'' of the United States--a power most of us believe he already has under the Constitution as Commander in Chief. And it empowers him to enforce all ``relevant'' Security Council resolutions related to Iraq . None of those resolutions or, for that matter, any of the other Security Council resolutions demanding Iraqi compliance with its international obligations, calls for a regime change."

And this:

"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. And the administration, I believe, is now committed to a recognition that war must be the last option to address this threat, not the first, and that we must act in concert with allies around the globe to make the world's case against Saddam Hussein.

Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies.

In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days--to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force. If he fails to do so, I will be among the first to speak out.

If we do wind up going to war with Iraq , it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community, unless there is a showing of a grave, imminent--and I emphasize ``imminent''--threat to this country which requires the President to respond in a way that protects our immediate national security needs. "

[sandnsea]

1. April 2, 2003

"What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States."

I can't even imagine what it feels like to have been put in the position of having to decide whether Saddam was being honest about WMD or not, and whether to trust Bush or not. How do you decide which piece of human trash is worse; and who really could have ever dreamed Bush would fuck it all up so badly.

[JohnKleeb]

2. I know, it would be tough, wouldn't it

That speech to me is proof that Kerry wasn't a warmongrel.

[WildEyedLiberal]

4. ABSOLUTELY

"How do you decide which piece of human trash is worse?"

That's the NUMBER ONE thing I hate about people who trash Kerry for his IWR vote: they act like Saddam Hussein was a democratically elected leader who was all things considered a pretty nice guy, maybe a little authoritarian, but who overall minded his own business.

That's nice revisionist history, but it isn't true. They should ask the Iraqis who they claim to care about so passionately whether or not they liked Saddam. Granted, they liked Saddam better than our armies, but that does not mean that Saddam was not at all a threatening figure who terrorized his people.

Was Iraq a part of the "war on terror?" No, because Bush went to war for his own personal selfish reasons and used 9/11 as an excuse. But it is incredibly dangerous and stupid for leftwingnuts to pretend that there was nothing wrong with Saddam at all, and to demonize Kerry for making an agonizing decision with the nation's security in mind. Last time I checked, the safety of this country isn't in my hands, or theirs either. As a federal official, Kerry has a larger burden to bear than most of us.

"Who really could have ever dreamed Bush would fuck it all up so badly?"

Not even I. I thought it was unnecessary and deceptive to go to war, but I figured it would be over in three months - as did Bush, apparently, when he pranced about in a flight suit. What an incompetent fuck up.

[JohnKleeb]

5. right Saddam was a tyrant

Really, and it really does seem like a non-hawkish vote. Can you imagine though, many of his same detractors would be big defenders of him if he had voted no, thats what I think, its so annoying because I think it wasn't a bad vote.

[Forever Free]

3. There was NO "flip-flopping".

Kerry's position has always been consistent and intelligent. He has NEVER changed his position on the IWR or the war during the primaries and the campaign. The unfortunate fact is that the Republicans totally dominated the media cycle and was able to hammer that false and erroneous notion that he's a "weak, out of the mainstream, to the left of Teddy Kennedy, big government, liberal flip-flopper'.

God I HATE those fuckers.

[seito]

6. I found this article very insightful

I just stumbled across it the other day.

The Trial of John Kerry
By William Rivers Pitt


http://www.truthout.com/docs_03/121003A.shtml


Senator, said Alterman, I think you may be the most qualified candidate in the race, and perhaps also the one who best represents my own values. But there was one overriding issue facing this nation during the past four years, and Howard Dean was there when it counted, and you weren't. A lot of people feel that moment entitles him to their vote, even if you have a more progressive record and would be a stronger candidate in November. How are you going to win back those people who you lost with your vote for this awful war?

...

This was the hardest vote I have ever had to cast in my entire career, Kerry said. I voted for the resolution to get the inspectors in there, period. Remember, for seven and a half years we were destroying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, we found more stuff there than we thought we would. After that came those four years when there was no intelligence available about what was happening over there. I believed we needed to get the weapons inspectors back in. I believed Bush needed this resolution in order to get the U.N. to put the inspectors back in there. The only way to get the inspectors back in was to present Bush with the ability to threaten force legitimately. That's what I voted for.

The way Powell, Eagleberger, Scowcroft, and the others were talking at the time, continued Kerry, I felt confident that Bush would work with the international community. I took the President at his word. We were told that any course would lead through the United Nations, and that war would be an absolute last resort. Many people I am close with, both Democrats and Republicans, who are also close to Bush told me unequivocally that no decisions had been made about the course of action. Bush hadn't yet been hijacked by Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney and that whole crew. Did I think Bush was going to charge unilaterally into war? No. Did I think he would make such an incredible mess of the situation? No. Am I angry about it? You?re God damned right I am. I chose to believe the President of the United States. That was a terrible mistake.

[JohnKleeb]

7. that terrible war mongrel *sarcasm on*

I understand it damn well now.

[angrydemocrat]

8. JohnKleeb

I'm glad you understand it well now. I just wish some of these others would take the time to find out what they are screaming about before they scream. They act like they know so much when in fact they don't know there ass from a whole in the ground when it comes to Kerry. When people call him a war monger it burns me up! And what really pisses me off more than anything is when these assholes call him a repub-lite or compare him to that illiterate dumbass that has his ass parked in Kerry's home at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.:grr: :grr:

If there is one thing I can say about Kerry and know it is a fact is that had it been him in the White House rather than this illiterate dumbass we have there this country would not be at war right now. How can I say I know that? Well first off this man would never take this country to war unless it was a very last resort. Second there would have been no need for war because he would have taken all the steps necessary to see to it the weapons inspectors would have gotten into Iraq and did all the inspections necessary and wouldn't give and inch until it was done and the inspectors had did a complete and thorough check. Last by Kerry doing his job we would know then what we no now there was no damn weapons of mass destruction therefor there would be no war.

I myself am addicted to politics and have a teenage daughter that I have rubbed off on. And we keep up with the Senate. And long before Kerry ever decided to run for president he became a favorite of mine. I have studied up on the man for years. He is also my daughters favorite and has been for years and she like me knows quite abit about the man. She is planning on getting into public service herself. And she says all the time Kerry is the one that inspired her to do so. As soon as she graduates we are moving to Boston for her to go to college there. She made choice to move to Mass. and go to college due to Kerry. So to say the least he has inspired me as well as my daughter alot. And it amazes me at how much more my daughter knows about him than some of these that make there nasty remarks.

But I must say if you would really get to know this man and learn all there is to learn about him and it is alot, you would trully be amazed just what kind of man and leader he is. As you have seen just by looking at one Senate floor speech and one interview the man made what a difference it can have in making people understand what he really is about. I hope you choose to learn all you can about him and try to open peoples eyes about him. Because if this election isn't overturned we will be supporting this man again in 2008 because he will run for president again. And the more you learn about him you will realize we need this man as a leader in the worst kind of way. I think everyone will work twice as hard in 2008 as we did in 2004. That may sound impossible as hard as we all worked this time but after this emotional election people will find even more the next.

[JohnKleeb]

9. I understood where he was coming from

I was disappointed but I didn't hold that vote against him. Really as it was said above, who the hell are you supposed to trust, Bush or Saddam, both are human trash as said. I love and admire John Kerry, and I think it's a true shame that he was regarded to some because of this vote as only an ABB candidiate.