Clinton Vote to Let Bush/Cheney Invade Iraq Weakened US Military, Afghan/Pakistan Problem Rages On

[Dems Will Win]

Because Hillary, Biden, Dodd and Edwards did not stand up to Bush and let President Cheney invade Iraq, our military at this point could not effectively intervene in Pakistan if al-Queda was about to take bases with nuclear weapons.

We could no doubt get some Special Forces in there and bomb the hell out of them but stabilizing a country of 160 million is not possible now.

Because of Iraq. Because Hillary and Edwards took their eye off the ball and got fooled by Cheney, especially Hillary who was finally convinced to vote YES on Iraq because Condiliar told her to, saying that "Dick got confused" about the authorization being for war not inspectors.

!!

Why didn't Cheney ever get OBL? THe Pakistan is a sovereign state argument is ridiculous. It would not fall to extremists if we went in and got him, as Obama will do. Pakistan is mostly secular and not about to fall to extremists.

Bush is just protecting his dictator so the OBL bogeyman lives on. OBL alive is the GOP's only hope at this point.

But because Hillary and the others voted for the Iraq Invasion, we have no capability to help stabilize Pakistan at this time.

Remember we have a peacetime volunteer Army and you have to be careful with it. Hillary and Edwards and Biden and Dodd and Cheney were not.

This whole episode shows that Obama has good judgement and the other Senators do not -- and foolishly caved to Rice and Cheney in the midst of war hysteria back in 2002. Now we pay the price for their folly...

How Hillary was convinced by Condiliar to switch focus to war in Iraq:

Clinton: Rice linked Iraq vote, inspections
Submitted by Monitor Staff on Fri, 2007-12-21 19:47.

Following up on what Ambassador Richard Holbrooke told us earlier this week regarding Hillary Clinton's vote to authorize the use of military force against Iraq, we asked Sen. Clinton today if it was correct that Colin Powell had persuaded her that the resolution could be a vote to avoid war rather than a vote for war.

She replied: "No, it wasn't Colin Powell. It was Condi Rice. Condi Rice told me specifically when I was still weighing all of the evidence, and I had been to the White House one last time -- I think, if I'm not mistaken, it was Oct. 8 -- and I'd had the whole presentation by the CIA and others and I hadn't asked any questions, I had listened. And I went back to my office, and Condi Rice called me and said, You didn't ask any questions, do you have any questions? I said I only have one: Will you use this authorization to put inspectors back in, so that we can find out whether any of this is true, how much WMD he still has or has reconstituted? She said, Yes, that's what it's intended to do. I think Dick might have gotten confused."

Monitor: And you had no reason to doubt her?

Clinton: "I did not. Because -- certainly I didn't rely on the Bush administration. I did a lot of my own due diligence, I talked to a lot of people in my husband's administration, I talked to Tony Blair, I talked to a lot of sources, and I had the same question: Do you think he still has these kinds of capacities? And the rationale made sense to me. When we got there after the first Gulf War, he was much further advanced in his nuclear program and we knew he had used chemical weapons. When we discovered his nuclear program in '91, the inspectors went in and for seven years dismantled everything that they could find. In '98, he threw the inspectors out, which at least to me raised the possibility that they were getting close to something, and therefore he wanted them out. The Americans and the British bombed every site that he prevented the inspectors from going to that we had a record of, but we had no good intelligence as to what was or wasn't there. And the idea behind any concern about Saddam Hussein was rooted in his personality and his governing philosophy. He was a megalomaniac.

"Putting inspectors back in -- which the United Nations voted for, the Security Council was all in favor of -- was a way to really put some checks and balances to find out what he really did have. What we know now is that Bush had no intention of letting the inspections run their course. But the argument of putting inspectors back in, backed up by force -- because Saddam never did anything that didn't have at least the backup threat of force -- was not on its face totally illegitimate. So I was willing to give him the authority to do that, and he misused the authority."

So she couldn't figure out that the neo-cons would misuse the authority? Isn't that like being a really, really bad judge of what other people are actually like?

[MNDemNY]

1. That's only if you actually believe that BHO would

not have voted for the IRW if he had been in the Senate. His record in the Senate since, and his record in the IL Leg. pretty clearly shows that he would have went along with the majority and voted for the IRW. Any one who doubts this, is delusional. Flame away, obamanation, but BHO would have voted for the IWR.

[Dems Will Win]

2. I call bullshit! Not allowed to just pull stuff out of thin air.

And you have Barack's initials wrong, it's BNO for Barack Neo Obama. Didn't you hear the Oracle say he was THE ONE?

http://xs222.xs.to/xs222/07490/TheOne!.gif

PLease correct yourself from now on. Thanks!

[MNDemNY]

6. No I missed that directive. So, it's BHO for me.

[dkf]

This hit on Obama is an irresponsible post.

How dare you make an assumption like this. Especially when the man made a speech and declared his opposition you then think he would vote FOR it?

Not Everyone was gutless or clueless like Hillary etal.

And Biden should have known better. Maybe he understands foreign policy, but he has no clue about George W. Bush.

[MNDemNY]

7. Your delusions are clouding your common sense.

[dkf]

11. I'm deluded?

hahaha. Oh no, I'm NOT deluded. And that is why I knew voting for the IWR was a big mistake...and I've been proved RIGHT thank you.

[MNDemNY]

13. I thought it was a mistake as well,

But that doesn't change the fact that BHO would have votes Yea, as his record indicates. His continued votes to fund it, the absence of any effort on his part to remove the criminals in the white house is also quite glaring.

[dkf]

15. Well then I guess you are smarter than your candidate..

Must give you a lot of confidence in their ability to run the country.

I guess now you'll be telling me that Al Gore would have voted for the IWR if he were in the senate. lol.

[MNDemNY]

17. My candidate voted against the IWR, MY candidate has never voted to fund the war,

My candidate has introduced an impeachment bill against darth vader, My candidate supports real universal health care. Need I go on? My candidate is far more progressive on the issues than your candidate.:shrug: :shrug: :shrug: So STFU

[Dems Will Win]

4. Here is BNO's speech against the War from 2002, that's why I'm voting Neo in '08!

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.

The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.

I don’t oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

[MNDemNY]

8. A speech doesn't equal a vote.

Again if you really think he would not have voted for the IWR your just blinded by the neon halo you've placed on BHO's head.

[Dems Will Win]

12. That's Neo, not neon...

[MNDemNY]

14. Yea, run with that.

[Dems Will Win]

18. I am

[MNDemNY]

21. That and a bag of chips will get you 3rd place in Iowa.

[Dems Will Win]

And what place is Kucinich going to finish in Iowa

Will he beat Gravel? (I'm trying to raise expectations for DK here)

[MNDemNY]

33. Mock the "real" Democrat. Vote for the corprate shill.

[TahitiNut]

10. It takes a "True Believer" to shore up his faith ...

... on the basis of Convenient Fictions instead of facts. There seems to be a simultaneous inability to distinguish between 'opinion' and 'fact' ... but that's just my opinion based on observations.

:shrug:

[Enrique]

3. you found a way to spin the assassination in favor of the biases you already held

and the point of this exercise is?

[Dems Will Win]

5. That because Hillary did not stand up to Bush, and the Dems caved

we took our focus off Afghanistan and let OBL go in Pakistan. Can't fight three wars at once with a peacetime army.

Bad move.

Now all we can do in Pakistan is send in Special Forces and bomb. We would be hard-pressed to stabilze the country because of the neo-con-Hillary-Edwards War in Iraq.

That's my point. Bhutto's assasination and Pakistan instability just points up that Washington insiders are so bought out by the oil companies that they cannot protect us anymore.

However, Obama did not make that BIG MISTAKE, and has said that if Pakistan does not get OBL soon, he will.

[dkf]

9. Clinton won't apologize for the IWR.

She gave her blank check to George W. Bush and he used it. Now her decision is responsible for the worst foreign policy decision in the history of our country. She FAILED the biggest test of her career.

Take responsibility for your candidate. You are supporting the decisions he or she makes.

I on the other hand feel perfectly comfortable that my first choice, Al Gore, and second choice, Barack Obama, and my main guy Howard Dean had a clue.

[MNDemNY]

16. So, you support the decision for BHO to have Lil' Donnie MC his gospel concert?

C'mon take responsibility for YOUR candidates actions. I take responsibility )(proudly) for my candidates decisions and votes.

[dkf]

19. Honestly, I'm not super offended by that.

I've been trying to tell my Mom and my favorite Aunty that being gay is no big deal, but they are old school. Not that they go off about gay people all the time, but they do feel it is a sin. That is how they were brought up and those type of "value" judgements are pretty ingrained at their age.

I guess if I wanted to condemn Obama, I'd have to disown the people I love best in this world and I'm not willing to do that.

[MNDemNY]

20. My family are bigots, so I will just let it slide? Nice response.

Naive as your candidate.:shrug: :spank: :spank: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[dkf]

26. Oh yeah and you outcast every person in your life who doesn't believe

in the gay lifestyle? I accept my family whether I agree or disagree. I would say that my mom is not one for advocating sexual experimentation and therefore cannot get over the "ickyness" of it all. She doesn't even believe in premarital sex for goodness sakes. You think I'm going to be able to convince her that gay sex is hunky dory?

Gay rights will solve itself in time. When the younger generation takes over it will be moot. That fight is already won in my eyes.

[MNDemNY]

27. Lifestyle? You are you mothers child. So sad.

[Bluebear]

28. 'Lifestyle'? And being gay is about sex to you?

[FredScuttle]

29. How does your mom feel about blacks?

Or immigrants? Hispanics? Asians?

Another question....when this "younger generation" takes over, gay rights won't be a concern because....the younger set are all open-minded, thoughtful folks like you?

[IndianaJones]

30. I would guess "icky" nt.

[FredScuttle]

31. Well, at least she doesn't have to trouble her pretty mind with thoughts of "sexual experimentation"

and the such.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

32. you dont have to disown your family, to disown their values

nor to we have to promote bigotry because someone in your family is bigoted.

[MNDemNY]

25. ?? chirp.

[Windy]

23. hahahahahaha...you people are a joke. There is NO comparison

[MNDemNY]

24. After reading your very intelligent post, I have changed my mind.

I will now submit to the obamanation.

[Bitwit1234]

22. We do know one darn thing

bush told the congress that Saddam had WMD, they voted to let him go after them. They did not ---even the republican members ---voted to bomb any thing.

BUT OBAMA GAVE AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW TO THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE. In it he said since bush said Iran had nuclear weapons...you see HE BELIEVED BUSH....he wanted to bomb the devil out of them. Even send in missiles.

But afterward he made light of the fact that bush said so and he believed him...gee I thought he has been ranting and raving and so have his American Idolers that Hillary Clinton voted to invade Irag...well I guess it depends on who you are...no where either did the resolution say INVADE IRAQ OR BOMB IT....

But you never ever anywhere see one of the American Idolers say anything about Obama's bomb lust.