Can Someone Justify Dean's Attack on Kerry for Voting Against Gulf War?

[WiseMen]

Anyone know why Dean is now slamming Kerry for voting against the 1991 Gulf War resolution? Does Dean support "Blood For Oil?" Can this behavior be justified?

Anyone know why Dean says he supported a war killed an estimated 100,000 Iraqi men and women; that desecrated the Muslim Holy Lands; that turned the formerly pro-U.S. Islamic radicals into Anti-American Jihadist, and that led to more than a decade of death and tragedy for people in the region.

John Kerry opposed the Gulf war because he saw U.S. militarization of the region as a potential long-term disaster. Kerry had led the investigation of the Reagan/Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld duplicitous involvement in the Iran-Iraq War during the 80's and saw that the Gulf conflict was not just avoidable, but a war that should be avoided. Kerry argued that the U.N. should be allowed to take the lead in resolving the conflict in a legitimate manner, whether by negotiations or by force, rather that be compelled to a time-table for war dictated by George Bush.

Can any Dean supporter tell me why Dean supported a policy of the U.S. military serving as mercenaries of the sheikdom, a policy of shedding blood for oil, and now maligns a great Senator who tried to stop it.

[Terwilliger]

1. at LEAST....1991 was more justified than last year

The world allayed against Saddam and popular support here...and Kerry voted against?

He's inconsistent as hell.

[Metrix]

3. Most of the Democratic senators voted against it.

There is a reason why.

[TexasSissy]

48. No..didn't most Dems vote in favor of the Gulf War?

I think they did.

[bornskeptic]

51. No. The resolution only passed 52-47 in the Senate.

45 Dems and 2 Republicans voted against it, while 10 Dems and 42 Republicans voted in favor.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=102&session=1&vote=00002

In the House it passed 250-183 with 86 Dems in favor and 179 opposed.

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=1991&rollnumber=9

[Terwilliger]

64. so that, once again, party unity looks like a joke

can't the Dems ever get together on anything?

[Terwilliger]

63. Inconsistency, yes

Tell me, who was in charge in the Senate and the House in 1991?

[Raya]

4. Goal of1 991 Resolution was military action. 2002 was for U.N. inspections

[Terwilliger]

62. "UN Inspections" my left nut

it was a go ahead to supercede the wishes of the UN and attack Iraq pre-emptively

[WiseMen]

71. Guess you are the expert. I prefer to believe Ted Kenedy on this one.

[Snivi Yllom]

33. bingo

Kerry supported a war where there was no threat and voted against a war when a nation had been invaded and was poised to invade others.

[joshcryer]

2. Kuwait was being invaded?

...

[Raya]

11. I guess you don't know thistory of the region. Ok to kill 1 mill Iranians

but not to have border dispute with a small British city protectorate
that has been used for decades by the West to rape the oil wealth of the region.

Kuwait could ligitimately be viewed as a province of Iraq (The Kuwaiti protectorate's relation to Iraq was similar to that of Hong Kong to China) -- except in the eyes of Oil concerns that believe in a God given right to oil profits whether in Venezuela or Iraq.

[auburnblu]

24. Sounds like Germany's arguments

Remember how the arguments were put forth, well Austria is almost like part of Germany anyway and hey, the Rhineland, maybe Germany should claim that.

If anyone on here wonders why some on the left are viewed as always blaming America, look at some of the posts on this thread, they almost seem to make Saddam a noble leader for ransacking Kuwait. Yikes.

Rhineland
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob88.html

Austria
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/judaus.htm

Appeasement of dictators is a great thing if you're the dictator.

I guess many on here would start cheering if Russia decides to fire up the tank engines and take the country of Georgia over. Maybe Russia still thinks it has a right to Georgia???

[WiseMen]

12. And why kill 100,000 people over that? Is Kuwait U.S. territory?

Looking at a map, it looks more like Iraqi territory.

[LuminousX]

40. While no formal military allegience was in place with Kuwait

Kuwait requested our aid. In return, we were able to renegotiate the placement of some of our military bases in the region.

It was not a noble war by a longshot, but you are saying we should have let Saddam walk all over Kuwait. That is ludicrous.

[WiseMen]

56. Why was it OK for Brits to cut off Kuwait as separate Oil Protectorate.

[dsc]

5. Maybe it was the fact that Saddam invaded Kuwait

Or maybe we shouldn't go to our friend's defense in the future. That would make us a well liked nation.

[Raya]

7. Saddam was the "special" friend of the U.S. at the time.

Evidence is that Saddam was at first given the green light. Then
Bush regime 1 decide that they could use the move into Kuwait as
an excuse to establish a major U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia.

At least that is the history I have heard.

Another Bush Dynasty scam.

[paulk]

8. Kuwait was no "friend" of ours...

This is the cheapest shot Dean has taken so far - but it least it shows his true political leanings. He stood with the Republicans.

[auburnblu]

25. Really

http://reference.allrefer.com/country-guide-study/kuwait/kuwait46.html

Then why was the U.S. protecting their ships during the Iraq/Iran war?

[paulk]

44. Because Iraq wanted us to

The two countries Iraq recieved the most aid from during the Iran/Iraq war were Kuwait and the USA.

[LuminousX]

41. So there was MORE reason to go into Iraq this time around?

What persuaded Kerry to accept war this time instead of last time?

[paulk]

47. Kerry didn't "accept" this war

he has always maintained that a diplomatic solution was obtainable.

Just like the first time.

[fabius]

6. Dean's statement is a political attack, doesn't need justification.

This from a Dean supporter.

He's just countering the Kerry "you gotta have foreign policy experience to go up against Geeooorrrge Buuuush."

Any Democrat now running including Sharpton would have a better foreign policy than Chimpy. Bozo the Clown would make us safer.

The Bush plan for Iraq is starting to look exactly like the Kucinich plan. "UN in, US out".

Personally I was not in favor of Gulf War I, especially after it appears Saddam was tricked into it by the Bush 41 Admin. so that we could firm up our presence in the Persian Gulf.

But Dean's attack is just as legitimate as some of Kerry's.

[WiseMen]

31. If it just shameless swiping then it may backfire

[LSdemocrat]

9. It's a justified war as opposed to the more recent Iraq war

One of our allies was invaded. We assembled a coalition (including Saudi Arabia, where Islamic holy lands are still intact) and got UN approval.

We did the right thing.

[paulk]

14. Kuwait was not our ally

we had no formal treaty with them.

Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil by slant drilling under the border. It's just as possible to make an argument that the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was justified. GHWBush suckered Iraq (who WAS our ally) into invading so he could have an opportunity to try out some new weapons systems.

Besides, wars are good for ratings, a lesson he also taught his son .

[LuminousX]

42. If Kuwait was slant drilling and not sharing the profits like Iraq claimed

that would be a matter for the World Court and not an acceptable reason for invasion. Iraq had claimed Kuwait to be its territory for decades, but was held in check. Invasion like what Iraq did is NEVER JUSTIFIED.
Just like our invasion of Iraq WASN'T JUSTIFIED.

Why did Kerry support one and not the other? It is a simple question.

[paulk]

50. Iraq had gone to the UN several times

They were ignored. They told our envoy they were thinking of invading and got a green light. Bush suckered them.

I'm not claiming the Iraq invasion of Kuwait was justified. What I'm saying is if you can make the argument that Iraq was justified just as easily as you can make the argument we were justified. I agree with you, none of it was justified.

All of it could have been avoided diplomatically. Which has been Kerry's position all along, that diplomatic solutions need to be exhausted before military solutions are used. However, the threat of military action can often help "diplomatic" solutions along - and that's one of the reasons why he authorized the use of military force.


The IWR vote was not the black and white proposition Dean makes it out to be. He has constantly maintained that he opposed the war and everyone else supported it. This is simply not true. Dean's entire campaign is based on a distortion - a lie. And that is the fundamental reason why I can't support his campaign.

[bigtree]

59. Something from my files

Bush I, who ultimately triumphed in making Kuwait safe for future monarchies, said of his own military adventure in Iraq, "We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a New World Order, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations."

That was utter nonsense. The rule of law that was enforced in the ousting of Saddam Hussein from Kuwait was nothing more than the product of a patronage that was forged in the U.N. with U.S. taxpayer-funded payments to Saudi Arabia's King Faud, Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, Jordan's King Hussein, and others.

The risk to the world community, as stated by the president then, and by this president today; that an enriched Saddam would align with some radical Muslim theocracy, would be in sharp contrast to the campaigns against those very forces in which Iraq had waged war at our bequest and with our eager assistance.

The Bush I administration's stated objective in their Gulf war was to protect the flow of Mideast oil to the U.S. and to prevent Iraq from obtaining a seaport from which Iraqi shipments would supposedly depress an already sputtering world market.

Saddam Hussein had not threatened the American people in his power grab for a greater share of the oil pie. Indeed, the U.S. must have been aware that the overproduction of oil by Kuwait and Saudi Arabia prior to Iraq's invasion was a move to drive the price of oil down, and in the process, weaken Iraq.

Aside from the question of the danger that the expansion of Saddam's dictatorship may have posed to the region, the defense of Kuwait's territorial integrity was a foreign concept to H.W. Bush who had participated in and overseen the ordering of the mining of the Nicaraguan harbor, the invasion of Grenada, the overthrow of the president of Panama and the installation of a U.S. puppet government there, as well as the acquiescence of Britain's invasion of the Falklands in 1982.

The Bush I administration issued a national security directive which listed among its objectives; ". . . the defense of U.S. vital interests in the region, if necessary through the use of military force; and defense against forces that would cause added damage to the U.S. and world economies."

More importantly, the security directive declared that access to Persian Gulf oil and the security of key, friendly states in the area were vital to U.S. national security. It was on that basis that President Herbert Walker Bush waged war with Iraq.

The nation's reward for the blood and sacrifice of our men and women in the armed forces in that Gulf war was a further decrease in production by the Mideast oil giants under OPEC- the group which controls around half the world's oil trade. That resulted in the doubling of U.S. oil prices from $20 a barrel to $40 (slightly more than we pay now), and the fostering of a crippling recession.
As the National Security Strategy of 1991 stated, "Economies around the world were affected by the volatility of oil prices and the disruption of economic ties to countries in the Gulf. Egypt, Turkey and Jordan were particularly hurt."

As a consequence of the U.S. hostile presence in the region, radical Muslim groups were able to portray our military invasion and the positioning of our bases in Saudi Arabia as an affront to the teachings of their religion and were able to convince others of like mind to band against what they viewed as groundless U.S. imperialistic expansion; putting America at an increased risk of retaliatory terrorism.

The Bush's routs of Saddam may have made them appear to be warrior kings. But in the context of their overwhelming domination of the inept Saddam and the hapless Iraqi army, they more resemble Don Quixote.

In the classic tale of the ideal vs. the real, Quixote battles windmills that appear to be giants, and sheep that look to him like armies. He believes himself the victor, comes to his senses, only to be trapped by his delusion; forced to play the conquering hero.

(Mods-These are my writings)

[Raya]

66. Thanks Luminous. Kerry never supported the Bush War. He OPPOSED IT

[no name no slogan]

16. Too bad GW1 led directly to 9/11

GW1 gave the US an excuse to establish a military presence in Saudi. This military presense, in turn, pissed off many of our Muslim fundamentalist allies in places like Afghanistan and Kosovo. Having "infidel" troops in the country that is home to the two holiest sites in Islam was an affront to many Muslims-- and not just fundimentalists, either.

These fundimentalist "allies" (bin Laden, for example) turned against the US, and began terrorists attacks DIRECTLY against US interests around the world. Their largest attacks were against American embassies in Africa....up until 9/11.

So there you have it: bullshit GW1 war --> US troops in Saudi --> piss off old Muslim fundi "allies" --> 9/11 attacks. Unfortunately, it really IS that simple.

----------

Don't forget the fact that Kuwait was also "slant drilling" under Iraqi territory and STEALING their oil. Iraq raised this with the UN, too, but they did nothing to stop the Kuwaitis from violating Iraq's sovereignty.

Of course, this was severely under-reported by the whoremedia who wanted nothing more than war. But it was one of the biggest stories of the year outside the US (www.projectcensored.org).

[fujiyama]

27. We did the right thing...

and let the Shiites to rot.

It can actually be argued in a strange and twisted way that this war was more justified than the last one, because atleast we got rid of Saddam.

In the last war, we signed a seizefire, and allowed Saddam's armies to go ahead and massacre thousands of Shiites, Bush had encouraged to rise up...American troops and Normon POS was right there watching Saddam's choppers go in and kill them.

The dad was as big a shit as the son. I wish we wouldn't kid ourselves over this.

Neither of these wars were justified and it seems like back in the day Kerry actually was more liberal. He also seems to have stood up for his convictions. Now it's harder to argue. This time he didn't want to be on the "wrong side of history" -- same as Gephartd, though he seemed to have some sort of hawkish evangelical experience after 9/11.

[Raya]

73. Not when resolution was forced. Kuwait was not an ally

[AliceWonderland]

10. Oh please

GWI was political theatre. Even if the green light were not an issue, Iraqgate sure as hell was. Yeah, GHWB and Co. cared so damned much about oppressed Kuwaitis. I'd roll my eyes but the statement doesn't merit the effort.

[Metrix]

13. The Highway of Death was not a proud moment

in American military history.

[PurityOfEssence]

15. the best part was his saying "we all had the same information"

as if he was privy to the special top secret horseshit served up to sitting legislators. This is the kind of Dean statement that just drives me up the walls; how does he look Matthews in the eye and say that he had all the same information that the others had? That's just prima facie ridiculous.

I'll give you this, though: 1991 was a much easier decision. I thought that one was justified. (Of course, with what I know about April Glaspie now, I'd have been crabbier about it.)

[Raya]

72. I realy think Dean believes what he says. It's crazy, No?

[sleipnir]

17. There's no defending the Truth...Kerry followed * happily into a war

this time.

He used to have scruples, now he just has 10,000 people's blood on his hands.

[WiseMen]

20. Sorry. Kerry Opposed War. So says Bush regime.

Kerry to Bush: "Mr. President, do not rush to war!"

"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" (Boston Globe, April 3, 2003).

[Raya]

67. Some people love to avoid the issue.

[WiseMen]

18. Kerry was right. He Opposed Bush Criminal Secret Dealings in Iran/Iraq

which killed around 1 million.

He opposed Bush rush to war for Oil in Kuwait.

Saddam deserved to be stopped. But not as part of scheme for U.S. control of Arab oil wealth.

[Paragon]

19. Can Someone Justify This Thread?

I think Kerry told his detractors to "bring it on".

And so they are.

[Loren645]

21. Nicely said Paragon.

eom

[WiseMen]

22. Would love to hear Justification for Dean's Pro-War Position

[Paragon]

23. Dean is pro-war?!?

What color is the sky in your world?

[sangh0]

32. "if we must do so unilaterally we will"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/30/ftn/printable523726.shtml

"...We have to defend the United States, and if we must do so unilaterally we will...

...Here's what we ought to have done. We should have gone to the U.N. Security Council. We should have asked for a resolution to allow the inspectors back in with no pre-conditions. And then we should have given them a deadline saying "If you don't do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as Americans to defend ourselves and we will go into Iraq."
"

[paulk]

53. Dean himself has said he was pro war

The only military action he has "opposed" is our most recent one. If you are supporting Dean because you believe he is "anti war" you really need to take another look at him.

[Raya]

68. I agree. I think the scream was a war-whoop

[HazMat]

26. It is amazing how they forget.

Gulf War I was far less justified than the Iraq war:

1. Kuwait was slant drilling and stealing Iraq's oil.
2. Saddam was secretly given the green light by Bush41 to invade Kuwait.
3. Bush41 wanted an issue for re-election. There were no more enemies (USSR was all but finished) and one had to be created.
4. BFEE wanted to test new weapon systems.
5. BFEE wanted to secure the oil in Kuwait, and possibly Iraq if Saddam could've easily been overthrown (Bush41 was going to overthrow him but chickened out for fear of casualites on our side.. that wouldn't have played well in the upcoming election).
6. Democrats like Kerry wanted to go through the UN, since it didn't involve US national security.
7. Most Democrats voted against Gulf War I. I believe Al Gore was the only one who voted for it, and he was considered to be very conservative in those days.
8. The Gulf War situation (especially the strong American presence there) angered the Islamic world and indirectly created radicals like Bin Laden, which led to 9-11.
9. The Clinton admin had no choice but to deal with the mess left by Bush41. Now Saddam was indeed a real threat to us. If Saddam ever got his hands on WMD he would surely use them in revenge against America or American interests.
10. Kerry, like most Democrats, supported Clinton's '98 action against Iraq. Then, consistent with his '98 position, Kerry voted for the IWR to hold Saddam accountable, to protect America. Kerry voted for a process where war would be the very last resort.

If Dean supported Gulf War I, then he stood with the Republicans who helped to create this unsafe world we live in today. If Dean supported Gulf War I he took a position *completely* at odds with Democrats and Democratic values.

[WiseMen]

28. Thanks for excellent summary. Still waiting for Dean supporter counter

argument.

[RogueTrooper]

37. What is he going

when the Republicans rock up to his door and bring this up? Kerry is running on his ability to beat Bush. What is he going to say?

[LuminousX]

43. So you are saying we shouldn't have done anything about the invasion?

[HazMat]

70. Bush41 shouldn't have given Saddam

the thumbs up to invade in the first place.

Once Saddam invaded, we should've gone through the UN in order to AVOID the war (remember, war as a last resort?). The Gulf War was avoidable, but BFEE wanted an issue, wanted to test new weapons, wanted the oil and the contracts.

Think about it, Saddam is a brutal dictator, but he felt as though Kuwait was stealing his oil, that Bush41 lied to and betrayed him, and now the whole world was against him. BFEE left Saddam no other choice but to fight back, wouldn't you ?

I'll say it again: Gulf War I is the root of our biggest problems in the world today : the terrorist attacks during the `90s, Bin Laden, 9-11, Iraq War. It radicalized and turned that region against us. They saw it as an threat to Islam, and set out for revenge.

[windansea]

29. whew.....confusing

so Kerry voted against the gulf war...which had UN approval and a huge coalition of nations...but he voted for IWR which had no UN approval or large coalition....

somehow I don't think the average voter is going to get it

[WiseMen]

30. He voted against the Gulf War resolution - Which forced military

action rather than give time for U.N. led diplomacy and a
multi-lateral solution. Bush 1 really built a coalition on U.S. terms using a lot of false information -- baby incubators,
doctored satellite photos etc.

IWR was framed to take matter back to the U.N. to return inspectors. Force was supposed to be a last resort if a threat to U.S. security persisted.

One can understand the votes if you look at the resolutions and the argument and circumstances that surrounded these votes.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. Sure...Kerry was wrong and his backwards Iraq votes prove

that his judgement on these matters plain suck. There you have it.

[mdmc]

36. Dean is dumb to criticize

War is wrong and most Dean supporters opposed both wars. Dumb.
Did he really criticize Kerry for opposing Gulf War 1?

[WiseMen]

38. It seems to be now his standard slam -- "Kerry is Foreign Policy Dummy"

Slams that he Voted against Gulf War I, which Dean says he supported along with Al Gore.

[Padraig18]

35. Because it was the right thing to do, of course.

Iraq invaded Kuwait in an act of naked agression, and that invasion threatened to further destabilise an already dangerously unstable part of the globe.

What's so hard to understand about that? :shruig:

[Sensitivity]

39. Dean says the Oil field were burning. It was a crisis, but Kerry balked

[paulk]

52. the oil fields weren't burning

Dean's recidivist history makes him look like a fool. His comments make it obvious that his grasp of foreign policy is inadequate for the presidency.

[bornskeptic]

54. Yes, that's what Dean says.

"A lot of folks in the campaign, including Senator Kerry, complain about my lack of foreign policy experience," Dr Dean told a rally last night.

"But he voted not to go to war when the oil wells were on fire and the troops were in Kuwait."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1131542,00.html

Those of us who were paying attention, however, know that Saddam didn't set fire to the oil wells until after the U.S. attack.

[Dhalgren]

45. Losing respect for Dean on a daily basis.

How he can say he supported GWI is beyond me. If anyone thinks GWI was "justified", then you have to say GWII is, too. Dean is the anti-war/pro-war candidate? Yeehaw!
Dean is unelectable in Nov. '04.

[TexasSissy]

46. Not a Dean supporter, but I agree w/him on this one.

I was in favor of the Gulf War but not the Iraq War.

[Sensitivity]

49. Issue is not just the war, but the "Resolutions" and the circumstances

The U.S. had not been attacked in any way. In fact, the U.S. had
been aiding Saddam in his brutal war against Iran.

Kerry said it was for the U.N. and the Arab League to take the lead based on regional security and national sovereignty principles, not G.Bush based on Saudi friends and Big Oil interests.

[WiseMen]

55. That is exactly the point. Can always criticize "Vote" if ignore context

[w4rma]

57. Can you justify Kerry's attacks on Dean's opposition to the Iraq war? (nt)

[WiseMen]

58. You Mean: Why Kerry never attacked his own position that Dean co-opted?

Funny, Funny!

[mzmolly]

60. Dean didn't co-opt crap. He was against the war and JK is all over the

place on the issue, depending on his audience. Thankfully for him, many of his elderly followers are hearing impaired.

[sangh0]

61. Dean wasn't always against the war. Dean flip-flopped!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/30/ftn/printable523726.shtml

"...We have to defend the United States, and if we must do so unilaterally we will...

...Here's what we ought to have done. We should have gone to the U.N. Security Council. We should have asked for a resolution to allow the inspectors back in with no pre-conditions. And then we should have given them a deadline saying "If you don't do this, say, within 60 days, we will reserve our right as Americans to defend ourselves and we will go into Iraq."
"

[Raya]

65. Judy needs to give him a spanking. Bad Boy!

[retyred]

69. You want justification? You can't handle justification!

It's howard dean, since when does howard dean need justification for attacking anyone? The man is a hypocrite, he attacks first then is the "Only Democratic candidate to whine and cry to Terry M."


retyred in fla
“Good-Night Paul, Wherever You Are”
So I read this book