Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama opposed the war from the onset - this is important.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:32 PM
Original message
Obama opposed the war from the onset - this is important.
Most Senators caved to the fear of being labeled weak on defense and voted to authorize Bush to invade Iraq. At the time, Obama was a State Senator in Illinois who had not yet made his big splash at the 2004 convention. He didn't have to take a stand on the war, and the perception at the time was that it would be death to a political career to oppose the war. Yet he did come out against the war. Anyone willing to risk his entire career to be a voice crying in the wilderness has shown he has the integrity to be President, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. next question: what will he do to end it?
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. Let the man speak for himself
Sen. Obama: Iraq withdrawal should begin in 2007
November 20, 2006

CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama called Monday for U.S. troops to start leaving Iraq in 2007, arguing that the threat of an American pullout is the best leverage Washington has left in the conflict.

"The time for waiting in Iraq is over. It is time to change our policy," said Obama, a freshman Democrat from Illinois touted as a possible national candidate in 2008.

"It is time to give Iraqis their country back, and it is time to refocus America's efforts on the wider struggle yet to be won."

Obama's speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs came as the debate over Iraq policy has heated up in Washington, with policy makers making proposals that range from a phased withdrawal that begin in four to six months to an increase in troop strength.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. thank you-- I'm a bit concerned over some apparent triangulation...
...especially that reference to "a wider struggle, yet to be won" since I presume he's referring to the "global war on terrorism," a "war" that I want to see debunked and abandoned, not used to ratchet up the security state rhetoric.

Still, Obama remains a strong contender for my support. I'm unabashedly liberal, so at the moment Dennis Kucinich represents my interests better than any of the other candidates. I'll be waiting for Obama to make his intentions as clear as DK has made his. I'm very hopeful that he will be as forthrightly progressive as Congressman Kucinich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
confludemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-23-07 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. Yes, let the weathervane be the weathervane
"The time for waiting in Iraq is over" Oh you don't say. Waiting for what?

"It is time to change our policy" Hasn't that been overdue for like, 4 years now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. What good does experience do if you don't use good judgement?
(See Edwards, Kerry, Clinton, Clark on IWR)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sparerib Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. Speaking of Obama
I am posting, FYI, the content of an E that is circulating amongst the evil-doers on the Right:
Subject: Remain Alert



Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in
Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black Muslim from
Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white atheist from Wichita, Kansas.
Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.



When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to
Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a radical Muslim from Indonesia.
When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a
Muslim school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.



Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick
to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic
school."



Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's
introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary
at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce,
and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo
Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his
stepson to Islam. Osama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism
is the radical teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now
waging Jihad against the western world.



Since it is politically expedient to be a Christian when seeking major public
office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church
of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background.



Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. This email has been posted about 10 times already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. He IS NOT a Muslim. If this was true, wouldn't you think it would have come out during his campaign
while running for the Senate? At the time, we had invaded Iraq and Muslims were the scourge of the earth. SURELY, someone would have 'revealed' he was a baaaaad, baaaad Muslim, no? The ONLY reason this shit is going around is because of his middle name. What a crock of shit.

Thanks so much for spreading the RW lies here on DU.:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweet Freedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Already posted in our Debunker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. he didnt have a vote on it either so i dont see it as that big.
i was opposed to it too but I see it as just having the sense to know that Bush was a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. That's the point - "he didn't have to vote on it" he could have stayed silent
I don't remember any great rush to determine the stand of every state legislator in the country regarding the Iraq War a week after the resolution passed Congress. Obama went out of his way to take stand when he didn't have to and when the common wisdom was that everyone in America supported the war. He not only opposed the war, he offered a discussion of where we should have been focusing our energies. Again, who was looking for advice on foreign policy from an Illinois state senator back then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. i think it could have made it easier to speak out just as much as
it could have made it more difficult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. is that on record somewhere? his opposition from the outset?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. Obama opposed the war link here>
Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq
October 26, 2002
http://www.obama2010.us/2002/10/26/iraq_war.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
10. And then he refused to support DSM inquiry in June 2005, voted against Iraq withdrawal in JUne 2006.
and spoke against a filibuster of Alito publically before he voted for it. And he says he has no interest in investigation of Bush over Iraq war, and says that it already has been litigated.

Once he became senator and HAD the power, he chose to use that power pretty much the same way Hillary did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. But he voted "Yes" to the Levin-Reed Amendment. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. a NON-BINDING resolution with no detailed actions for withdrawal instead of
Edited on Mon Jan-22-07 01:23 PM by blm
a specific BINDING withdrawal plan for Iraq.

What fight is he willing to LEAD on and what votes will he make now AS a senator? Wasn't that the point of getting into office in the first place? To take on the tough fights?

Non-binding resolutions are a hidey hole for those looking to cover their butts.

It is the last resort vote for those looking for real action as the Iraq withdrawal plan's 13 tea votes were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Umm, would you think better of the resolution if you knew that
Hillary was a co-sponsor?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. No. I thought that resolution was a cop-out to cover their butts with the base
because they didn't want to stick their necks out on a real withdrawal plan presented by Kerry and Feingold and voted for by 13 senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Here's the amendment:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. And then he refused to support DSM inquiry - got a link??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. here you go - only ten senators signed the letter for investigation of DSM.
Edited on Mon Jan-22-07 01:54 PM by blm
I thought you were here back then, Imagevision. DU did a heavy activist push on media and congress on the Downing Street Memos. We all called EVERY Senator's office. All the congressional ones, too, for Conyers letter on DSM investigation.

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/515
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
22. He had no constituents to answer to, nor any Senate seat to defend later.

I don't know that it would've made any difference, but we cannot say for a fact that it wouldn't have.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hopein08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-22-07 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
23. You wouldn't happen to have a link that will prove that, do you?
Because I'm really open to hearing it. I want to hear how he came out against the war when he didn't need to. Was it written up in any articles at the time? Do you have the links?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Djinn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-23-07 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
24. unfortunately
Edited on Tue Jan-23-07 01:00 AM by Djinn
he was not and is not against the idea of wars to entrench US power and wealth - his comments on "strategic strikes" on Iran show him to be a man that is OK with the idea of pre-emptive military action against a nation that is not a proven threat.

no matter how one feels about the Ahmadinejad, the mullahs or Iran's nuclear program - to suggest taking pre-emptive action is simply wrong.

"On Iraq, on paper, theres not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. Theres not that much difference between my position and George Bushs position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is whos in a position to execute."

Barack Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
confludemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-23-07 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. that's right, Bush Kerry and Obama are together on wanting to execute Iran "action"
which puts in a different light Obamas and Kerry's glacial shift to expressing any need to end our portion of the slaughter in Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-23-07 01:57 AM
Response to Original message
27. Important point indeed
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC