Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He can have an opinion in hindsight, sure, but the fact of the matter is that he cannot say without any reservations that he would have voted against the resolution, he wasn't there.
It's not hindsight. He gave that speech, and others opposing the invasion, PRIOR to the invasion. How is that hindsight at all?
I've been against the Iraq War from the time the first noises were made about us going there. HOWEVER, it's not an issue by which I measure a candidate.
Why? Because I remember all too well the climate of post-9/11, the demands for patriotism and supporting the president, the intelligence reports that showed Iraq had WMDs, the fact that even Tony Blair spoke to Congress insisting that British Intelligence ALSO had proof of Saddam's WMDs and that he could attack Britain in 45 minutes, etc. The Bush Administration pulled out ALL stops to ensure that everyone believed we had to invade Iraq and he secured the support of dozens of other countries around the world to support the operation. The American people were overwhelmingly in favor of this war.
The case was so convincing, so politically and patriotically charged that to voice opposition meant you would be called a traitor to the country. Doesn't anyone remember this? If I'm asked to believe that Barack Obama, IF he had been in the Senate at that time, would have been the lonely voice of opposition, then I'm sorry, I can't believe that. Obama himself has admitted that if he was in the Senate, he doesn't know how he would have voted.
So, the next president has to find our way out of that quagmire we're in and THAT is what I care about. Looking back and debating the vote to go to war is stupid -- it's long been done, we're there, and nothing changes that fact. Still, it isn't going to be easy to bring home the troops and, frankly, I don't hold any of the candidates to their promises in that regard. The situation in Iraq is volatile and anyone who expects that the new president will handle the situation easily is delusional. It's very complicated.
The Bush Administration pulled out ALL stops to ensure that everyone believed we had to invade Iraq...
...by misleading us, over 900 times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
...and he secured the support of dozens of other countries around the world to support the operation.
Don't forget Poland! The "coalition" was a joke, especially when compared to the first Gulf War.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
The American people were overwhelmingly in favor of this war.
The case was so convincing, so politically and patriotically charged that to voice opposition meant you would be called a traitor to the country. Doesn't anyone remember this?
Yes. I remember that. I remember all the lies and accusations. Somehow if you used reason, logic and patience, you were a pinko communist pu-ssy, at least according to Republicans. I think the number in favor was around 60%. Is that "overwhelming?" Especially considering the falsehoods they were told?
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
If I'm asked to believe that Barack Obama, IF he had been in the Senate at that time, would have been the lonely voice of opposition, then I'm sorry, I can't believe that.
Lone voice? 23 Senators voted against the war. Plus 133 Congressmen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
Obama himself has admitted that if he was in the Senate, he doesn't know how he would have voted.
He made one comment. Which he has clarified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
So, the next president has to find our way out of that quagmire we're in and THAT is what I care about. Looking back and debating the vote to go to war is stupid -- it's long been done, we're there, and nothing changes that fact.
People's past decisions reflect their future ones. Just ask the people who make your credit score.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teatime
Still, it isn't going to be easy to bring home the troops and, frankly, I don't hold any of the candidates to their promises in that regard. The situation in Iraq is volatile and anyone who expects that the new president will handle the situation easily is delusional. It's very complicated.
I've been against the Iraq War from the time the first noises were made about us going there. HOWEVER, it's not an issue by which I measure a candidate.
Why? Because I remember all too well the climate of post-9/11, the demands for patriotism and supporting the president, the intelligence reports that showed Iraq had WMDs, the fact that even Tony Blair spoke to Congress insisting that British Intelligence ALSO had proof of Saddam's WMDs and that he could attack Britain in 45 minutes, etc. The Bush Administration pulled out ALL stops to ensure that everyone believed we had to invade Iraq and he secured the support of dozens of other countries around the world to support the operation. The American people were overwhelmingly in favor of this war.
The case was so convincing, so politically and patriotically charged that to voice opposition meant you would be called a traitor to the country. Doesn't anyone remember this? If I'm asked to believe that Barack Obama, IF he had been in the Senate at that time, would have been the lonely voice of opposition, then I'm sorry, I can't believe that. Obama himself has admitted that if he was in the Senate, he doesn't know how he would have voted.
So, the next president has to find our way out of that quagmire we're in and THAT is what I care about. Looking back and debating the vote to go to war is stupid -- it's long been done, we're there, and nothing changes that fact. Still, it isn't going to be easy to bring home the troops and, frankly, I don't hold any of the candidates to their promises in that regard. The situation in Iraq is volatile and anyone who expects that the new president will handle the situation easily is delusional. It's very complicated.
See, I think it's very important to hold that issue in the context of the emotion and all that at the time, except to me, that means holding the politicians accountable for the vote. It's important that a politician have the spine, conscientious treatment of votes, and moral courage to stand up to popular opinion for what is right. What possible excuse does any politician have for voting for Iraq? Anyone who read the provided information would have seen more than enough to justify a vote against authorization.
The formula for taking down Obama IS becoming clear. And it looks very thin and weak. Thanks for your thoughts. Apparently you can add that he is a gay Muslim crackhead terrorist whose mother was on the grassy knoll and father is an Iranian nuclear scientist that raped Bill AND Hillary back in a pot-filled dorm room where they handed out condoms to small children and planned the socialist takeover of Washington DC.
Actually, I'm starting to realize something...
Rather than talking about what Obama lacks and what Hillary has, Hillary supporters would do much better asking people to vote for Obama using the same arguments the Obama voters are using.
Frankly, it's such a turnoff to voting for Obama, I have to wonder -- do you guys work for Karl Rove? I want ANYBODY except OBAMA! His supporters are like Scientologists!
Did you read the provided information, back when it was provided, burnt? Art? Anyone? I know I surely didn't. Operating from hindsight makes it a slam-dunk, doesn't it? But I remember all too well how one would be personally attacked for voicing any sort of opposition to the war back then. There was NO REASONING with people.
Hells bells, at the high school where I taught, we were forced to participate in a patriotic display of support for the war and the president. Remember the news coverage? How excited and proud the "embedded media" were? How French fries had to be called Freedom fries? Americans apparently have very short memories and I would feel safe in wagering that all of these people who are lauding Obama's claim that he never supported the war are, in fact, people who DID support the war at its onset.
i thought that with bush's incredibly poor performance that the democrats were a given for the general election but, simply put, obama may be too liberal to win the general election and carry the majority of both parties. his voting record is available for anyone to see. it is a little disingenuous to miss 38.8% of the votes because you don't want it to come back and haunt you later. that is not a sign of strong leadership.
Since I'm a new Obama supporter, let me try to explain it to you. Obama has the audacity to HOPE that you will CHANGE because we are the ones that can cause change by changing! We are the hope that is hope! We are the ones that vote for the change and we need to send a clear message that we support hope and change by voting!
He only missed 38.8% of the vote because he was campaigning for change!
If you vote for anyone but Obama you are clearly so on and so forth (I won't bore you by filling in the words here -- you know what you are.)
Did you read the provided information, back when it was provided, burnt? Art? Anyone? I know I surely didn't. Operating from hindsight makes it a slam-dunk, doesn't it? But I remember all too well how one would be personally attacked for voicing any sort of opposition to the war back then. There was NO REASONING with people.
Hells bells, at the high school where I taught, we were forced to participate in a patriotic display of support for the war and the president. Remember the news coverage? How excited and proud the "embedded media" were? How French fries had to be called Freedom fries? Americans apparently have very short memories and I would feel safe in wagering that all of these people who are lauding Obama's claim that he never supported the war are, in fact, people who DID support the war at its onset.
What provided information? There wasn't any. Colin Powell had a picture of some aluminum tubes. I never thought there was a good justification made - just a bunch of innuendo and fear-mongering. I argued with my friends about it. The administration actively tried to create the atmosphere you refer to by purposely misleading us. But if you actually listened to their words, they were empty. Bush would follow a sentence about bin Laden with a sentence about Iraq, despite the fact that there was no connection. Something like 45% of Americans thought Iraq attacked us in the days leading up to the war. That's how good they were at changing the reality in people's minds. Evil brilliance.
Rather than talking about what Obama lacks and what Hillary has, Hillary supporters would do much better asking people to vote for Obama using the same arguments the Obama voters are using.
Frankly, it's such a turnoff to voting for Obama, I have to wonder -- do you guys work for Karl Rove? I want ANYBODY except OBAMA! His supporters are like Scientologists!
Did you read the provided information, back when it was provided, burnt? Art? Anyone? I know I surely didn't. Operating from hindsight makes it a slam-dunk, doesn't it? But I remember all too well how one would be personally attacked for voicing any sort of opposition to the war back then. There was NO REASONING with people.
Hells bells, at the high school where I taught, we were forced to participate in a patriotic display of support for the war and the president. Remember the news coverage? How excited and proud the "embedded media" were? How French fries had to be called Freedom fries? Americans apparently have very short memories and I would feel safe in wagering that all of these people who are lauding Obama's claim that he never supported the war are, in fact, people who DID support the war at its onset.
Um, I did read the information, because I'm in the business. But that's not the point. Those who are in the position to make such an important decision--namely, those who are voting on the resolution--have the explicit responsibility of getting to the bottom of the issue. Anything else is a dereliction of duty, period.
Yes, I was a very unpopular person at times in my place of employment, but I did read the information, and I made an objective decision to vocally oppose what my unelected commander-in-chief was spewing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
