There were NO UN inspectors in Iraq when Congress voted on the IWR

[ProSense]

July 5, 2002

Iraq once again rejects new UN weapons inspection proposals.

<...>

November 13, 2002

Iraq accepts U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 and informs the UN that it will abide by the resolution.

Weapons inspectors arrive in Baghdad again after a four-year absence.

link

Following the mandate of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, Saddam Hussein allowed UN inspectors to return to Iraq in November 2002. UNMOVIC led inspections of alleged chemical and biological facilities in Iraq until shortly before the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003, but did not find any weapons of mass destruction. Based on its inspections and examinations during this time, UNMOVIC inspectors determined that UNSCOM had successfully dismantled Iraq’s unconventional weapons program during the 1990s.

link

It's not the IWR vote, it's the reason Hillary gives for the vote and her statements on Iraq

[Captain Hilts]

1. And she EXPLICITLY said we should not invade alone or remove Hussein from power. nt

[Dogmudgeon]

2. That doesn't matter. They have their talking points.

They will brook no analysis of the issues. They live only for the adoration of their Messiah.

Their Messiah, on the other hand, at least reads occasionally.

--p!

[ProSense]

4. Some chose to ignore her waffling on withdrawal and setting a deadline? n/t

[Dogmudgeon]

15. Some of us chose to read the full records for EACH candidate

But that would require work.

--p!

[ClassWarrior]

17. Well, then share. Despite the fact that you keep talking substance...

...your posts are glaringly substance-free. Please share with us some of the insights you've gleaned from reading the complete records of each candidate.

NGU.

[Dogmudgeon]

27. You post a one-liner, but want me to do your research?

There have been several long posts here discussing the records of both candidates in just the past few days. I've posted a number of them. Do your homework yourself.

You have enough time to post hostile one-liners -- while sporting a John Lennon avatar. Take some time to read one or two articles about BOTH candidates that have a little depth to them.

Here's a couple of links. There is enough here to hang, and exonerate, both candidates. If you want more, you will have to learn how to use Google or pay attention to links in DU articles.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ114:">Resolution text and vote (menu)

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html">Clinton's Senate floor speech on the resolution (what Hillary Clinton actually said)

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070701faessay86401/barack-obama/renewing-american-leadership.html">Foreign Affairs- Renewing American Leadership (note several hawkish proposals including military expansion)

Living is easy with eyes closed. Reading is more difficult.

--p!

[rodeodance]

35. prosense throws that line out a lot. Its meant to show down posters and their thoughts. Rovian

[ClassWarrior]

36. What's hostile about asking someone for facts?

Especially someone who so loudly touts facts?

:shrug:

NGU.

[rodeodance]

38. Did I say it was "hostile"??? NO.

[ClassWarrior]

42. Was I answering your post??? NO.

:eyes:

Wow. Take a deep breath and calm down. You're out of control.

NGU.

[Dogmudgeon]

44. The scorn, I felt, was palpable

However, you have my apology if I misjudged the tone of the post.

But even the phrase "loudly touts" is just a tad hostile. Of course I have been loudly calling for facts -- substantive discussion of the issues has been sorely lacking. Most of it is continual harping on the Iraq war authorization vote WITHOUT presenting context for EITHER candidate. Hillary is not the hawk she is presented as, and Obama is not a pacifist; I find that they have nearly identical stances.

Obama is hammering her for a vote he didn't have to make -- and I would do the same thing. But no one should leave it at that.

We should not be limited to our champions' campaign rhetoric (and I use that term in its strict sense, not the cynics' version of defining it as deceit). Obama and Hillary each are skilled rhetoricians, but rhetoric is only one key to making a voting decision. My family has lost two friends to Bush's Iraq buzzsaw and Hillary's vote was certainly painful, especially in retrospect. The candidates have broad and deep backgrounds, yet both are also very close politically.

It is an extremely tough call even with information and discussion.

--p!

[ClassWarrior]

3. And that EXPLICIT statement sure stopped the Rape-Publican criminals...

...dead in their tracks!!

:eyes:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

11. Sort of like SAYING you support unions...

...while remaining silent as your MalWart buddies rape the American worker.

NGU.

[John Q. Citizen]

6. She issued a great signing statement. That showed foresight, in case the war went south.

I wonder why she never bothered to read the initial UN Arms inspection report.

I wonder why she thought Iraq had a nuclear program?

Apparently she didn't vote for the IWR, but instead voted for her signing statement.

I want to issue one on my income taxes this year. Something like, 'Any errors or discrepancies are unintentional and should not be construed as an attempt to mislead', or something to that effect.

That should cover my ass.

[sandnsea]

5. It's her support of the war for 4 years

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4327894&mesg_id=4327894

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. when was the IWR vote?

[KittyWampus]

9. October

[Adelante]

19. October 11, 2002 nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

23. So what did Hillary do, once the inspectors got in and didn't find

anything to stop Bush before March? To me, the point I knew for certain that Bush was invading no matter what was when he sped up the invasion despite the lack of wmd evidence. A prudent person would have slowed down when nothing was found. If this had been me, I would have been screaming from the rooftops - "Slow down - wait until they actually find weapons!"

[sampsonblk]

31. Bush sped up because of the lack of evidence

At least that was my view at the time. As evidence mounted that there were not 500+ tons of WMDs in Iraq, Shrub had to make a choice. Bush was supplying "tips" to the inspectors, and they were turning out to be "garbage after garbage after garbage," according to one of the UN inspectors involved in that huge waste of time.

So Bush got the inspectors out of the way and rushed in, as so many fools do.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. Right. That's when I knew he was a lying sack of shit war criminal

and as long as I live, I will never figure out why people ignore this and why he is not in front of the world court.

[MethuenProgressive]

8. "..use these powers wisely AND as a LAST RESORT." The HillHaters keep blaming her for what Bush did.

[Tarc]

12. The stench from Team Obama's desperation is getting a bit ripe

They needed a knockout punch last night, but landed (at best) a draw.

[ClassWarrior]

13. Yes, it's desperation...

Obama's on the ropes, so relax... chill out... Don't waste your time campaigning for Sen. Clinton in the primary. She's already got the nomination all wrapped up. You'll actually be doing her a FAVOR by saving your energy for the GE.

Yeahhh... desperation... that's it...

:rofl:

NGU.

[Egnever]

14. there was no need to give him those powers in the first place

Blaming a complete lapse in judgment on what bush did is crap. It was totally obvious what bush was going to do. At the time he refused to sign any bill that put any conditions on him whatsoever. He still does it to this day. The idea that they didn't know what was coming is ludicrous. The vote was timed to pressure the Dem's into voting for it going into an election. Many caved to the fear of backlash from the electorate. It was a vote based on politics not on any sense of doing what was right. It was painfully obvious at the time which is why so many of them put so many caveats in their speeches. They knew what they were doing they said everything they could in their speeches to try to give themselves cover.

The fact remains it was very poor judgment. Hillary cant win on this one she was wrong and no amount of pretending will change that.

[MadHound]

22. No, I blame Hillary for what she did

She went against the wishes of not only her constituents, but against the wishes of the American people. If she truly didn't realize that the IWR would greenlight Bush to hit the Shocknawe button, then she is too stupid to hold the highest office in the land. If she did have that realization, well then she is too morally bankrupt to hold the highest office in the land.

I remember waaay back in '03 how many, many people offered the suggestion that if we didn't like the vote on the IWR that we should hold those who voted for it responsible for their actions and not send them back to office. Well many people in the anti-war movement are still doing that, and now they are holding Hillary responsible for her actions. Perhaps she should have thought about that before she voted for it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. What is your point in saying that? n/t

[ClassWarrior]

16. Clinton claims she voted for the Iraq invasion in order to...

...give the inspectors a chance to do their jobs. Except they weren't there anymore.

NGU.

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. The point of the IWR for those who supported a version of it

was to provide leverage to pressure the United Nations to enforce its own prior resolutions regarding Iraq. Those resolutions included provisions, consistent with the cessation of actual combat after the Gulf War, to monitor events inside of Iraq to make sure that nation did not restart it's efforts to develop and/or stock pile weapons of mass destruction.

Hussein threw out the U.N. inspectors some time prior to the IWR. The IWR was passed to put teeth behind a diplomatic offensive to force Iraq to allow the United Nations to reintroduce inspectors inside of Iraq with the freedom of motion needed to do their job effectively. Many thought U.N. inspectors would discover WMD's if they returned to Iraq under those conditions, but either way as long as inspectors were on site inside Iraq doing their job Iraq could not continue to thwart U.N. Security Council resolutions.

In fact a very strong case can be made that the IWR performed exactly as it was meant to do. With the ratcheting up of threats toward Iraq, Iraq reluctantly agreed to allow U.N. inspectors to return to Iraqi soil. The whole thing broke down when President Bush refused to allow the U.N. inspectors the time they needed to finish their work, instead pulling the plug on that entire operation by warning he could not guarantee their safety any longer if they remained inside Iraq. That was a clear signal to get out before he invaded. They did and Bush invaded.

Had Bush not disregarded the pleas of the international community to allow the U.N. inspectors the time they needed to complete their work, it would have been proved that Iraq had no WMD's and there would have been no rational remaining for Bush to invade Iraq.

[ClassWarrior]

25. The point of the BCI was to trust Bush**. Period.

And given what we all knew back then, that was a major error in judgement at best.

(By the way, it had nothing to do with "war," so why call it the "IWR?" Call it what it was - a Blank Check for Invasion.)

NGU.

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. I hope you agree that at minimum it makes sense

to understand that those who voted for the IWR cited their attempt to get inspectors into Iraq, not a stupid miscomprehension belief that they were supporting inspectors already inside of Iraq through it.

U.N. inspectors got into Iraq after the IWR passed, which is what those who voted for it intended to make happen.

[rodeodance]

32. She gave a very reasoned explanation for that vote. I, for one, am not going

to make her pay the rest of her life for it. Nough said!

[ClassWarrior]

34. No, we'll let the dead soldiers' families pay for it instead.

NGU.

[rodeodance]

37. I can't reason with you either --so, i will not spend my try trying.

[ClassWarrior]

40. When did you attempt to "reason?" All you've done is accuse your fellow DUers...

...of being trolls. And then you gloated about it.

:shrug:

NGU.

[rodeodance]

41. a few point--first my beef is with

prosense and his posts in general. if he wants to respond he can.

second. It is very broad brushy of you to say i accuse fellow duers of being trolls and gloating. I need to be careful and so do you.


enough said. have a good day.



......hen did you attempt to "reason?" All you've done is accuse your fellow DUers...
Posted by ClassWarrior


...of being trolls. And then you gloated about it.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClassWarrior]

24. Wow, that was hateful.

Mighty Progressive of you.

NGU.

[rodeodance]

26. well, when I see RW talking points--i just think rushy-types are paying a visit.

[ClassWarrior]

28. You know better than that...

...but why admit to an error in judgement and apologize for it like a real Progressive, when you can play all innocent and pretend you're ignorant, right? Apparently Sen. Clinton is a role model for you.

NGU.

[rodeodance]

29. no, i was acting like Obama for a moment--He can't accept responsiblity.

[ClassWarrior]

33. And another cheap shot.

Pitiful.

But thanks for helping keep the thread kicked.

NGU.

[rodeodance]

39. I am sorry for acting like Obama.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hayu_lol]

43. How quickly some have forgotten what happened when BushCo...

cooked the books after the inspectors went back in. It was Rumsfeld, when he told the inspectors that the administration knew where the wmds were--and the inspectors requested the locations from Rumsfeld who said: "Theyare north, south, east, west of Tikrit." The administration did not furnish locations to the inspectors.

Hillary and 75 other Senators, including some of our recent presidential drop outs, voted for the IWR.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4329338

There is Hillary's speech. Some of you need to read it several times in order to comprehend it.

Her statement is quite clear what she felt about the bill was about. Her attitude was a positive as it could be under the circumstances. The inspectors were allowed back in by Saddam until Bush pulled them out. The inspectors had total access to all sites at the time.

We had hundreds of thousands of people taking to the streets. The world had millions hitting the streets. Bush went.

[ProSense]

45. You equate Hannity with facts? n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. So what? She voted for a pre-emptive war that was not threatening us.

[jackson_dem]

48. That is her argument. The IWR was to pressure Saddam to let the inspectors back in