Myth: Hillary Was In Favor Of INVADING Iraq

[Danneus]

She voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq IF NECESSARY. However she EXPLICITLY said back in 2002 that she wanted to go to war only as a LAST RESORT:
I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible.”
Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of<br>United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

[Donkey®]

You don't give a loaded handgun to a child.

[RMNIXON]

About as close to saying "I voted for the war before I was against it" as you can get without actually saying it.

[Danneus]

Well, Barack's stance regarding the Iraq war has actually been much more equivocal than the Obama loving media suggests. The fact is, he actually said that he doesn't know how he would have voted if he had been a US Senator at the time:

"I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know."

Rep. Jim McGovern: Senator Obama's Curious Comments on Meet the Press - Politics on The Huffington Post

He's also not as anti-war as the media suggests that he is. In fact, he's said in several speeches that he's not averse to using force:

WAR AND ANTIWAR – Obama and Dumb Wars
Obama’s antiwar speech was made at an A.N.S.W.E.R. rally. In Obama fashion, his speech repeated themes, “I don’t oppose all wars” (4 times) and challenging authority, “You want a fight, President Bush? (3 times) and the hook line, “I am not opposed to all wars. I am opposed to dumb wars”. It was a fiery sermon preached to the choir of protesters. There was nothing brave and inspirational about it…it was an antiwar/political speech at an antiwar/political rally. It was amid a gathering of numerous activist groups, representing multiple causes, (some radical anti-American), a simmering hotbed of civil mobilization and protest - a comfort zone for fellow activist/organizer Obama.

He was not under the thundering cloud of responsibility that Senator Clinton and others endured and were obliged to address in Resolution 45 as part of their official duty. According to Obama’s avoid-controversy record, if he had been on the line to cast a vote, he would most likely have voted “Present” and avoided the political fallout he planned to use against his opponents.

Bill Weinberg offers an analysis of current groups in "THE POLITICS OF THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENTAnd the Intractable Dilemma of International ANSWER":
"Both UFPJ and ANSWER have been criticized by some activists as top-down and insufficiently democratic. But concerns are growing over ANSWER's links to a doctrinaire neo-Stalinist organization called the Workers World Party (WWP), which has a history of seeking to dominate coalitions, and has some embarrassing ultra-hardline positions." THE POLITICS OF THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT | World War 4 Report
A.N.S.W.E.R. Act Now to Stop War & End Racism (ANSWER):

Most of the country opposed the Iraq war and didn’t buy the propaganda of the Bush Administration, and feared all the things that came to pass, but they were stuck between America’s bluster and patriotism. The sad truth is that George W. Bush made threats Americans had to back up or lose world respect. He was the bully hiding behind the tree leaving others to finish the fight, and pride reared its ugly head.
The mushroom cloud imagery was a convenient salve for America ’s doubts.

If anyone thinks they can avoid the collective American guilt-by-association discomfort of the ongoing war in Iraq (although powerless to prevent it) by blaming Hillary Clinton (also powerless to prevent it), then they deserve condemnation, not applause. To act as if the Senate Resolution Clinton and Edwards signed was the impetus for Bush to go to war is pure ignorance of the facts.
The convergence of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz signaled the fervor to attack Iraq , before September 11. It was the elephant in the room. George H.W. Bush had sealed and hidden from the public a previous Iraq war plan devised by Wolfowitz due to its inflammatory concept.

In contrast to his October 26, 2002 antiwar speech, Obama policy states:
“I will not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.
We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability — to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities. But when we do use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others — as President George H. W. Bush did when we led the effort to oust Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991.” Renewing American Leadership, Barack Obama, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007 Welcome to Obama for America

“Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.
Secure Loose Nuclear Materials from Terrorists: Obama will secure all loose nuclear materials in the world within four years. While we work to secure existing stockpiles of nuclear material, Obama will negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material. This will deny terrorists the ability to steal or buy loose nuclear materials.”

Arrogance? Obama seems to believe that the world is his stage, that all nations are simply a grass roots effort for him to organize and mobilize. As for foreign policy, it is often difficult to see the difference between Obama’s policy and Bush doctrine. He will reach out to Iran and other troubled nations “without preconditions”, then offer “a choice” – agree with his demands or face isolation and sanctions. Clearly, Obama prefers the word “choice” to “ultimatum” which is more accurate in the context of his policy, or is it doctrine?

The Democratic Party | Community Blogs | Anti's Blog: Why Do You Hate Hillary?

[DosEquis]

then she should have voted no to a bill that gave the president the power to do so, including the permission to use nuclear weapons.

[Smull]

This is my first real post, so I'd like to say hello to everyone. I'm a 19yr old political science major at Kutztown University Pennsylvania. I'm also pretty libertarian in my views, though I'll likely vote for Obama.

With that said, Congress abdicated its responsibility when it gave Bush the authority to go to war. Its suppose to be Congress that makes that decision and to give over blindly to the President (especially this president) was a mistake. But what bothers me most is that this is the second time our country made this mistake (Gulf of Tonkin Resolution). The checks and balances are there for a reason.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Danneus

Well, Barack's stance regarding the Iraq war has actually been much more equivocal than the Obama loving media suggests. The fact is, he actually said that he doesn't know how he would have voted if he had been a US Senator at the time:

"I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know."

Wow.........at least he's honest. He could have used the opportunity to bash anyone who voted yes and claimed the moral high ground but instead he told it for real. Obama saying "I don't know what I would have done" IMO makes hillary look like even more of a douche.



and btw, welcome back

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Smull

This is my first real post, so I'd like to say hello to everyone. I'm a 19yr old political science major at Kutztown University Pennsylvania. I'm also pretty libertarian in my views, though I'll likely vote for Obama.

With that said, Congress abdicated its responsibility when it gave Bush the authority to go to war. Its suppose to be Congress that makes that decision and to give over blindly to the President (especially this president) was a mistake. But what bothers me most is that this is the second time our country made this mistake (Gulf of Tonkin Resolution). The checks and balances are there for a reason.

I remember seeing some people on the forum say that Congress did make the decision to go to war by passing the AUMF, and just because wasn't titled a "Declaration of War" is irrelevant

Any thoughts on that?

btw, welcome

[Smull]

I wouldn't say its entirely irrelevant that it wasn't an official "Declaration of War" A war is a war regardless of weather or not we "officially" call it one or not. I think it undermines the integrity of our government to not declare a war when we fight one.

But the bigger issue is that Congress effectively authorized the President to go to war. And saying "whoa, dude we didn't think he'd actually do it!" doesn't quite cut it for me as a good enough explanation. This is much more important than the semantics of weather or not we took the official legal channels to do it or not. At the end of the day Congress still authorized it.

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by Smull

I wouldn't say its entirely irrelevant that it wasn't an official "Declaration of War" A war is a war regardless of weather or not we "officially" call it one or not. I think it undermines the integrity of our government to not declare a war when we fight one.

But the bigger issue is that Congress effectively authorized the President to go to war. And saying "whoa, dude we didn't think he'd actually do it!" doesn't quite cut it for me as a good enough explanation. This is much more important than the semantics of weather or not we took the official legal channels to do it or not. At the end of the day Congress still authorized it.

Congress willingly gave up their congressional power to declare war. Saying, "Well I wanted it as a last resort" to me as well strikes me worse than simply saying I voted for the war. It reveals her of being negligent to her duties.

[Publius]

So the Clinton spin-machine extends all the way down to the delegate level now?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Publius

So the Clinton spin-machine extends all the way down to the delegate level now?

both clinton and obama are actively courting ALL delegates, hoping to get their vote.

[JaJae]

Hillary was banging the war drum and supported the war in Iraq for quite some time before she realized it was hurting her chances to become president.