General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

15. Disagree

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 05:14 PM

Feb 2013

with trying to let Bush off the hook, which is what this is.

You list the Senators who voted against the resolution that passed. Yet they all voted for one or more of the other resolutions, and Feingold stated on the Senate floor: "The threat we know is real--Iraq's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction or WMD--is unquestionably a very serious issue."

Iraq: Bush lied
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022389965

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

54 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It's a Hoax to Suggest that Most Dem Senators Who Voted for the Iraq War were Hoaxed into It. [View all] leveymg Feb 2013 OP

The Dems were boxed-in. The IWR contained language that was supposed pnwmom Feb 2013 #1

Why is it then that most of the best informed Dem senators voted against the IWR? leveymg Feb 2013 #2

yeah, it's that simple isn't it. When you're a keyboard commando. And if Cheney's flying monkeys had KittyWampus Feb 2013 #10

Those who voted against the IWR deserve our enduring thanks. leveymg Feb 2013 #12

It might be that many of the Senators who both fought to improve it and voted for it karynnj Feb 2013 #36

The Democrats could have filibustered in January Chathamization Feb 2013 #38

War is one of the most important issues a Representative will ever have to sabrina 1 Feb 2013 #40

You are absolutely right HoneychildMooseMoss Feb 2013 #46

nonsense. utter and complete cali Feb 2013 #54

But they were told that Saddam would nuke us from the Atlantic with his UAV's Democracyinkind Feb 2013 #3

No excuses. Those senators and represenatives own those votes. Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #4

I agree: Senate Democrats were afraid of looking weak on national security frazzled Feb 2013 #5

They put on their flag pins and joined the "Bring it on" mob. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #6

Smart rich people believing lies ...what else could go wrong? n/t L0oniX Feb 2013 #7

if there's any revisionism going on here, it's that dem politicians were bamboozled by the KG Feb 2013 #8

Thanks for posting the FACTS of the vote.... KoKo Feb 2013 #9

K&R. Thank you for this post. My vote for MPs is clearly influenced by how they did or didn't vote idwiyo Feb 2013 #11

Indeed. Nt xchrom Feb 2013 #13

If that x-Senator democrat who voted for the war sticks her foot into the oval office door challenge Whisp Feb 2013 #14

Disagree ProSense Feb 2013 #15

Nobody's letting Bush off the hook. Just hooking those Senators who swallowed the same line. leveymg Feb 2013 #16

I understand what you're saying, but ProSense Feb 2013 #17

There was a more deeply flawed assumption at work there. leveymg Feb 2013 #18

"It was the final vote on the IWR that counted." joshcryer Feb 2013 #23

If Bush-Cheney hadn't received the backing of the majority in the Senate they couldn't have gone in. leveymg Feb 2013 #34

Bush still acted unilaterally since there was no UNSC resolution. joshcryer Feb 2013 #37

Actually, leveymg, they WERE prepared to go in legally based on the 1991 UN resolution. blm Feb 2013 #43

Fairly easy for them to find out the truth. moondust Feb 2013 #19

K&R They purposefully maintained Plausible Deniability, a.k.a. ir-responsibility. nt patrice Feb 2013 #52

October 16, 2002 and November 5, 2002 gulliver Feb 2013 #20

Yes, but LWolf Feb 2013 #21

Oh noes! You've raised the ire of the Blue Above All brigade with your Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #22

The Congressional vote was of no importance at all. joshcryer Feb 2013 #25

Not really surprising that you've missed the point. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #27

There is no real point here. joshcryer Feb 2013 #29

Your reply is just sad, it is enough to make one believe that there is no hope whatsoever. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #41

Where did I say or even imply that it "justifies their actions"? joshcryer Feb 2013 #42

My apologies, then. That's not how it read to me. Sorry. n/t Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #47

I think they did it with eyes wide open and they knew from the Cleita Feb 2013 #24

IWR got the inspectors in - senators voting for IWR citing inspections should have stood with blm Feb 2013 #28

+1, and remember, Saddam was complying with the inspectors. joshcryer Feb 2013 #30

Kerry was NOT on Intel. And no one on intel saw more documents than Bill Clinton blm Feb 2013 #32

My mistake, he was on it 1993-2000. joshcryer Feb 2013 #33

Still, even senate intel never sees everything - Clinton did. blm Feb 2013 #35

That article deals with Roberts tenure as Chair of the Senate Intel Comittee - after the IWR vote leveymg Feb 2013 #48

I wish we had a law that required politicians to read. joshcryer Feb 2013 #50

And another law that they don't misread the material. ;-) leveymg Feb 2013 #53

I am glad to say that both of Minnesotas Senators voted against the IWR azurnoir Feb 2013 #26

And Wellstone voted against even though he expected that vote to cost him his reelection. dflprincess Feb 2013 #31

Both NY Senators got the pom poms out and voted for war. Nt geek tragedy Feb 2013 #45

I was proud the senators from Maryland (my state) voted against the resolution deutsey Feb 2013 #39

Many Democrats didn't want a debate--they wanted a piece of the action. geek tragedy Feb 2013 #44

The war drums were beating long before Bush was in office davidn3600 Feb 2013 #49

One doesn't have to agree with what someone does in order to understand it. Which makes change more patrice Feb 2013 #51