Democrats Disingenuous in Their Anti-War Rhetoric (Victor Davis Hanson)

realclearpolitics.com ^ | February 22, 2007 | Victor Davis Hanson

[neverdem]

Why did a majority of Democratic Senators - such as Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller and Chuck Schumer - vote to authorize a war with Iraq on Oct. 11, 2002? And why is this war now supposedly George Bush's misfortune and not theirs?

The original fear of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, of course, played a role in their votes - but only a role. In the 23 writs that authorized force to remove Saddam, senators at the time also cited Iraq's sanctuary and subsidies for terrorists. Then there were Saddam's attempts to assassinate a former United States president; his repression of, and use of weapons of mass destruction against, his own people; and his serial violations of both United Nations and Gulf War agreements. If paranoia over weapons of mass destruction later proved just that, these other more numerous reasons to remove Saddam remain unassailable.

Nevada's Sen. Reid summed up best the feeling of Democrats that there were plenty of reasons to remove Saddam Hussein in a post-9/11 climate. He reminded his Senate colleagues that Saddam's refusal to honor past agreements "constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."

But it was not just fear of Saddam alone that prompted Democrats to authorize the use of force to remove him. There was the more general, liberal notion of using American arms to stop violent dictators. While the Democratic Party has a strong pacifist wing, its mainstream has always advocated a global promotion of American liberal values - sometimes through the use of preemptory force.

Many Democrats in Congress, for example, had earlier authorized George Bush Sr. to fight the first Gulf War to stop Saddam's mad drive to absorb Kuwait. In 1999, House...

[neverdem]

AMERICA SAYS LET'S WIN WAR (POLL SUPPORTS KEEPING U.S. TROOPS IN IRAQ)

[neverdem]

Ping

[NutCrackerBoy]

Instead of self-serving attacks on the present administration, Democratic senators and candidates should simply confess that while most of the earlier reasons to remove Saddam remain valid, the largely unforeseen costs of stabilizing Iraq in their view have proved too high, and now outweigh the dangers of leaving. -Victor Davis Hanson

At least that might be fodder for an honest debate, but Bush-bashing works out better for Dems in the short run.

[malia]

Maybe a little reminder of what went on before 9/11 and a little something from someone (if anyone would know, she would have -- meaning hillary) who knew what was going on before and after 9/11..... and....

something the DBM seems to have forgotten

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | Source

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec98/albright_11-12.html


http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml

on clinton

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/

Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote

Wednesday, April 21, 2004 Posted: 10:10 AM EDT (1410 GMT)

[neverdem]

Thanks for the link & sources.

[Tolik]

    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out.

Links:    FR Index of his articles:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson 
            His website: http://victorhanson.com/    
                NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
New Link!    http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/

[NonValueAdded]

Let's not forget that the counter-argument offered by some at the time was that Syria or Iran was a bigger problem and why not them instead of Iraq? Well, with Saddam playing with the no-fly zone, the OFF payoffs, etc., it was prudent to get him out of the way first in order to deal with the other pressing problems in the area. Taking down Saddam was a necessary next step toward solving the problems in the region.

[Tolik]

3:47AM EST What, slipping is overrated? Thanks for the thread anyway, you saved my time :^))

[metesky]

But mostly, the rising Democratic furor comes as a reflection of public anger at the costs of the war -- and the sense that we are not winning.

Both of the given reasons are driven mostly by the DNC and the media. In actual human costs, which are always tragic, this has been among the cheapest of U.S. wars with one of the lowest casualty rates. The highest death rates are among the Sunni/Shiite population which is their tragedy. And when you consider the financial cost against the almost 3 trillion a year Fed budget the argument gets even sillier.

Too many years of PC and good living have made us a country too soft and lazy to either think or act realistically.

Am I the only one who notices more and more Dem Reps and Senators getting face time at the funerals of fallen warriors? Shameless...

[goldstategop]

The Democrats ALL voted for the war but now that the political winds have shifted, they have now accused the President of tricking them. Political horsefeathers! They had the same intelligence in front of them as the Administration had and in the post 9/11 climate the Democrats feared looking weak on national security. All that's happened since it they've reverted to their true nature.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Grampa Dave]

The reality of the rats in congress and pseudo conservatives, who hate GW, and what their BDS is doing to our warriors in Iraq is shown below:

[prognostigaator]

bttt

[malia]

"Taking down Saddam was a necessary next step toward solving the problems in the region."

bttt

[maica]

btrl

[maica]

^^^Taking down Saddam was a necessary next step toward solving the problems in the region.^^^

&&&&&


And any member of Congress that does not acknowledge this fact does not deserve to collect a salary.

[kellynla]

Thank you for posting the contradictions.