Oct. 2002 HRC Voted Against Weapons Inspections in Iraq

[leftchick]

unless she is referring to another ammendment? She voted against the Levin ammendment. I can't find any others at the time.....

On MTP....

MR. RUSSERT: As we sit here this morning, Saddam rebuilding a nuclear weapons program, just not true; giving aid and sanctuary to al-Qaeda, debatable. Your vote in the best interests of the nation. Do you believe that your vote was in the best interest of the nation?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, I cast a sincere vote based on my assessment at the time, and I take responsibility for that vote. I also said on the floor that day that this was not a vote for pre-emptive war. I thought it made sense to put inspectors back in. As you recall, Saddam had driven out the UN inspectors in 1998 and the situation in Iraq was opaque, hard to determine, and I thought that it made sense to put inspectors back in. Now, obviously, if I had known then what I know now about what the president would do with the authority that was given him, I would not have voted the way that I did.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20941413/page/2/



In 2002, Hillary Clinton voted to authorize the Iraq war. As the war became more and more unpopular, Hillary explained that when she voted for the Iraq war resolution, she was actually voting for a further appeal to the UN. However, soon after, she voted against an amendment requiring the President to go to the UN to receive authorization for the Iraq war.


HRC: “My vote was based on the best assessment that I could make at the time, and it was clearly intended to demonstrate support for going to the United Nations to put inspectors into Iraq.” Source: Union Leader Interview, February 10, 2007.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Hillary%20percent3A+I+didn't+vote+for+war&articleId=f188127c-d8a3-4c2e-b089-7a0dbf1c2880




Hillary Clinton voted against the Levin Amendment, which would have required the President to get a UN resolution before invading Iraq. Source: US Senate Roll Call, October 10, 2002.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00235

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Levin Amdt. No. 4862 )

Vote Number: 235 Vote Date: October 10, 2002, 03:08 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 4862 to S.Amdt. 4856 to S.J.Res. 45

Statement of Purpose: To authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces, pursuant to a new resolution of the United Nations Security Council, to destroy, remove, or render harmless Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons-usable material, long-range ballistic missiles, and related facilities, and for other purposes.

[Evergreen Emerald]

1. The Levin amendment gave too much power to the UN

She did not want the US to be subservient to the UN. Many democrats voted against it.

[jasmine621]

5. She voted the way most Americans would have. Got a problem with that.

Remember the majority sentiment in this country is that the UN is the enemy.

[leftchick]

7. ummmm

I thought only freepers believed that and they certainly are not the majority.

[atreides1]

9. Yes the UN is the enemy

Unless they vote in favor of a US policy, then we're all good pals!!!!!

[mod mom]

10. Most Americans think the UN is the enemy? GOP talking point.

[bonito]

12. No Israel has ignored many UN resolutions

That is AIPAC propaganda, they even have a" UN watch"

[TerwilligeRedux]

6. Isn't Levin a long-term member of the armed services committee?

Why would Hillary reject the amendment offered by this highly experienced senator, who thought giving the UN the go-ahead was far preferable to Chimpy doing whatever he wanted. The UN is an American puppet organization anyway, they've never had "too much power."

[atreides1]

8. It gave the Security Council some power

But it's the same amount of power that the Security Council has now! Many Democrats voted against it, true, but not based on principles but because they were to afraid to be seen as weak on terror!

If it had gone to the UN Security Council first it's very possible that the French, Russians, or the Chinese would have voted no, and maybe just maybe, 3900 American troops would still be alive, along with a 150,000 Iraqi citizens!

But you can't go back in time, so the least that any of the candidates can do is to be honest about their record!

And no I haven't chosen a candidate yet.

[Dhalgren]

2. She was in favor of the war that she was not in favor of. She voted

against sending inspectors because she hoped that inspectors would be sent. If she didn't know now what she didn't know then, we wouldn't be having this discussion. That is crystal-clear...no?

[DaLittle Kitty]

3. Precisely!

[leftchick]

4. thank you for the translation

:rofl:

[Jim__]

11. Iraq agreed to weapons inspectors in September 2002. The IWR passed in October 2002.

The Levin Amendment was about a UN Reolution authorizing the use of US Armed Forces in Iraq. Your thread title is misleading.