Iraq as Metaphor

All issues are equal, but some issues are more equal than others. Those more equal give an insight into decision making, leadership style, and even character. Anyone who has served in office is familiar with the question, "Why did he/she do that?," meaning why did that politician do what they did? It is a question impossible to answer, that is without having some divine access to the inner recesses of an individual's mind or even soul.

Great decisions, however, can reveal how future great decisions might be made. No decision since the so-called Gulf of Tonkin resolution in Vietnam is more important than the vote on the 2002 war resolution on Iraq. Unlike health care, economic stimulus, immigration, and a host of other concerns, on that question there is clear difference between the Democratic finalists.

For those in the process of deciding between them for super Tuesday and beyond, they should be urged to consider this question very seriously. Those who decided to grant George W. Bush virtually unilateral authority to invade Iraq now must accept responsibility for its consequences. Votes have consequences. The consequences in Iraq are well over 30,000 American casualties [casualty: killed and wounded], possibly one million Iraqi deaths, and at least a trillion American tax dollars spent on restructuring (much wasteful and corrupted) and not spent on U.S. schools, hospitals, and infrastructure.

On issues such as this, it is not enough to say, We all make mistakes. One of the remaining candidates cannot even bring herself to say that. Why not, at least, say, "The president misled me"? Given how tragically wrong that vote was, such an admission would be at the very least a signal of humility, responsibility, wisdom, and character.

Consider these two questions when deciding how to vote on Tuesday and beyond: Why did Senator Clinton give George W. Bush the authority to invade Iraq; and why can she not bring herself to admit she was wrong? Regarding the first, she now says that she was only authorizing war as a last resort. Others who voted as she did and now admit error, including Senators Biden, Dodd, and Edwards, do not make that argument. They admit they were wrong. As to the second question, the plausible excuses are few: she still thinks it was right; she thinks the operation was mismanaged; she clings to the hope that this vote and continued support for it will serve her well with conservatives in a general election; she believes it is a symbol of "strength."

Sorting through a great deal of obfuscation, Senator Clinton still seems to cling to the argument that Bush mismanaged the whole project, that it was worth doing but it was done badly. Thus, she seems to accept unilateral invasion as a first resort, even when intelligence, as it was in this case, is less than clear. She seems to be willing to follow policy makers, in this case neocons, who had a publicly announced imperial agenda in the Middle East. And she permits the impression to grow that "triangulation," in matters of war, requires placing protection of political career over protection of the national interest.

Throughout my life I have tried consistently to avoid being judgmental regarding the motives of others. But, like Senator Obama, even on the sidelines, even without access to classified briefings, even under the war drum beat of the right, and even with a compliant mainstream media, I knew both in my mind and deep in my soul that invasion of Iraq was wrong, that it would lead to semi-permanent occupation, that the war would only just begin when Baghdad fell, and that we were pouring blood and treasure into the sand.

"Triangulation" and "centrism" may have led to eight years of a Democratic presidency in the 1990s. But it also blurred the principles of the Democratic party. It led young politicians to believe that the safest course was in some vague middle ground. And, tragically, it led too many Democrats to believe they had to prove their national security credentials by voting for any military misadventure right wing hawks could think up.

This nation needs a president who will question the conventional wisdom, who will exercise skepticism concerning foreign entanglements, who will have the courage to resist pressure from the narrow-minded bellicose right, who will admit to error when major mistakes are made, and who can look farther over the horizon than most of us. Most of all, we need a president who can restore America's honor, respect, and moral authority in the world.

That president is not Senator Clinton. That president is Barack Obama.

Comments

[standforpeace]

I remember standing in the streets of New York with hundreds of thousands of others in early 2003. It was the month before the war began, and I was hopeful as I stood there united with millions in a global march to say hell no to this war. We were marching to "give peace a chance," and I was hopeful that we would prevail. But the truth is that we had already lost the effort to prevent this senseless war. We lost when Colin Powell stood up to the administration's dirty work in the United Nations, even though he (now admits) that he knew better. And we lost when so many Democrats rolled over for George Bush in an effort to gain ground in the 2002 midterm elections and position themselves to fulfill their personal political ambitions.
The fact that Hillary Clinton either is unwilling to admit her role in enabling George Bush or even worse still sincerely believes that her vote was justified is something that I cannot endorse.
4000 American men and women have given their lives to honor the oath they took to defend our nation. Although I believe that they gave their lives for an unworthy cause in Iraq, I am in awe of their commitment and the integrity with which these men and women (many of them were barely more than kids) sacrificed everything. If we expect America's sons and daughters to kill and be killed on our behalf, shouldn't we at least expect some accountability from our leaders? Shouldn't we at least demand that they have the courage to take tough stands even at the risk of losing their place? Shouldn't we expect that they have the integrity to admit their errors? Shouldn't we expect as much of those who call themselves leaders as we do of the 19 and 20 year old kids that we are shipping off to Iraq?

[DinaLee]

Well, there you have it. Gary Hart spoke what has been on my mind. I am a fan of Hillary Clinton's, but she lost me forever when she voted on that immoral, illogical war. She claims, over and over again ad nauseum, that if she had known then what she knows now she would have voted differently. Why didn't she know then what I knew? She is more educated than I am - I don't have a law degree. Is is possible that she lacks common sense?

[wrw0101]

The real reason I believe Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq authorization, and the reason she cannot state is she wanted to maintain credibility and viability as a potential commander in chief, period. If she had voted against the resolution, and we stormed through Iraq in about 48 hours, and then if EVERYTHING WENT WELL, there would have been parades all summer for George Bush, democracy would be sprouting in the middle east, gas would be 50 cents a gallon, and Hillary would get her brains beaten out by Karl Rove types in the general election about being too soft to be Commander in Chief.

[reinaldok]

I truly find it quite difficult to imagine that any democrat or any other open minded person could possibly consider voting for Hillary. I see a Hillary victory as four or more years of the same non-effective government we now have. What really do these Hillary backers think? I just cannot understand.

[bassnman]

Well, I'm at my wits end. To me there really isn't one candidate running right now the should be president. If you put your hand in the Washington cesspool and expect to pull out a diamond you are dreaming. You are going to get exactly whats in a cesspool, crap.

That being said and that I'm am one of those evil, Christian conservatives you all love to hate. I can not in good conscience vote for John McCain or any of the other so called Republican ilk.

I will sit out this election or maybe even vote for Hillary. At least I know where she stands. There is an old saying, be careful what you wish for as you may get it. If she can go as socialist as she is deep down, the government will be coming to take away from you as well as me. Since I don't make or have much it won't hurt that bad. You say Bush has ran over the constitution, (no argument from me) Hillary will make him look great. Hillary will be the one to never leave office, not Bush.

Besides England has a queen for life, why shouldn't we.

This is not a joke, it is the way I see things. And by the way, if you could ever meet me and get to know me, I am not as evil as you portray ALL Christian conservatives. I treat everyone with the same respect as I would expect no matter what. I give money or aid to help others and I have even adopted children to try and give them a better life. I don't expect my government to force others to come to my aid. I have been doing my share to try and make things better for others.

[msilen]

HOWEVER THE QUESTION THEY DON’T ASK OBAMA is WHY Did You Not Vote For The War??`

His Whole Win Against Hillary Rests On He Did Not Vote For The War In Iraq Because OF HIS GOOD JUDGEMENT

And SHE DID, because the Commander in Chief the VP, the Secreatry of State the Secretary of Defense the Atty General the CIA, FBI and many many more all of the Republicans and almost 100% of the Democrats voted for the war and for very very good reason. Weapons of Mass Distraction Yellow Cake Nuclear to make it with and of course all the media was for it the world was for it, how many more could have been on the side of giving President Bush the Presidential ability (to, with all the facts in and all the world mostly agreeing with all the leaders of our country and many leaders of other countries agreeing—

HOW WAS IT THAT OBAMA IN PARTICULAR DID NOT VOTE FOR THE WAR AGAINST NEARLY ALL THE WORLD AT THAT TIME AFTER 9-11 WERE AGAINST IT?

REASON: Obama had been raised as a Muslim son as his father was Muslim Not Only The First Father But The Second Father As Well
Obama went to a Muslim school during his most formative years (Those cultural years are some of the most important years of forming opinions as they are at that age of influence Also Obama had many radical and non radical Muslims as friends and or family
In And Out Of School, Point Being—Obama Did Not Vote For The War In Iraq For One Reason Only- That Reason Being Mr. Obama Would Not Vote for the War In Iraq Because There Were And Are Non Extremist Muslims And Possible Family Members that were going to be FOR SURE (In this Iraq War) BE KILLED.

HOW ARE YOU IN GOOD CONSCIENCE GOING TO VOTE AGAINST FAMILY AND ALSO AGAINST YOUR FAMILY’S BELIEFS? AND YOUR FAMILY TIES??
Answer YOU DON’T
YOU VOTE AGAINST THE WAR!

[Garvagh]

Superb commentary! Hillary Clinton entirely abrogated her responsibility to the nation to see through blather put out by publicists, even when the promoters of a war clothe themselves in the robes of "national security adviser" etc. etc. Clinton knew Condoleezza Rice was a complete ignoramus regarding the Middle East and in effect a stooge for the war party. By refusing to acknowledg her gross error of judgment, Clinton helps to enable the continuing defrauding of the American public by the war party (who pretend to be protecting Israel, and the American people, from "terrorists" when the US has killed tens of thousands of people in an obviously illegal war.

[AnnaList]

Yesterday, on "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," Hillary Clinton was asked how she intends to enforce her "mandate" for Universal Health Care. George asked if she plans to garnish paychecks, or in someway punish those who choose not to participate. Obviously annoyed by the question, Hillary did her usual dance, but did not answer the question directly; she simply restated her position. Those who say there is little difference between Barak's plan and Hillary's had better pay closer attention. Both plans allow you to keep your existing health plan if you choose to... Barak's plan REDUCES THE COST
of Health Care, making it affordable to everyone. (They both propose subsidies for those who need help in purchasing health insurance.) Hillary's plan, however, will
INCREASE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT. The process of implementation alone will drive up the cost. Someone, some department,will have to be created to track,collect premiums and apply subsidies. All Americans want more affordable Health Care, but we don't like being told that we have no choice. Barak's plan does cover everyone, and gives us that choice. In the final analysis, Hillary's plan to "mandate" will end up costing "us," the American tax payers, more, while Barak's does not!

[ProfessorDuh]

You're right, and we were right when we knew, then, that the invasion of a country that never attacked or threatened the U.S. was a terrible, unjustified, immoral thing to do. There is no possible answer for this, so Hillary Clinton provides none.

[Boadicea]

Bang on, of course.

Here's the thing, though. Democrats can't say Bush lied about Iraq and get away with it. That's just partisan propaganda. They all had access to the truth, all our elected politicians, but the majority were lazy.

Many who voted against the war took their responsibility seriously and READ THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE. Hillary did not. Nor did she ask for private briefings with intel officers, as Lincoln Chaffee did. Instead, she relied on her "experience in the White HOuse" to make her decision to vote for the war.

Wrong experience, wrong decision, wrong vote. Wrong person for president.

[giantsteps]

Humans are fallible, that is why I am waiting for the second coming.

In the meantime, Barrack sits comfortably in the middle and that is a good place to be.

[emerywood]

I SHALL NOT VOTE FOR ANY CANDIDATE WHO NEVER ADMITS FOR ONCE THAT HE OR SHE WAS EVER WRONG.
a PERSON WHO BELIEVES HE OR SHE IS ALWAYS RIGHT IS A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN.

[EvereaderinSC]

There is LOTS of evidence that Hillary did not study the pre-war intelligence out there. At the very least, she is misleading us on that.
I think a lot of her lack of admission of anything let alone an apology is a hold out of the BushCheneyCORP mantra of never-apologize for-anything - period.
One side of Hillary doesn't want to be seen as anything less than "one of the guys." But I think this ties in with her husband, who I don't think ever apologized for anything Monica either. He may have hinted at an apology for the fact that he got caught.
He is clueless as to what he did cause as a result of his Monica-shenanigans, pretty much the mess we have now, as Gore's the one who paid the price in 2000.
I can't stand that Bill's back, out there, around, ready to be co-prez as if he's earned it and deserves it.
I suspect a LOT of folks in their heart of hearts out there feel the same way that I do. I Guess tomorrow we'll find out for sure...
Vote smart out there folks! I'm proud to have seen Obama in person, here in SC and then voted for the guy along with a lot of other South Carolinians. Sincerity counts for a lot with me, & trumps experience, (whatever the heck that might be). How sincere was Hillary? From what I heard she had Bill delivery her "concession" speech from who knows where, while she was FAR from her SC supporters, on to some meeting in Tennessee, as if folks up there even cared. What sort of sincerity or thanks to her SC supporters was that?

[flatus]

It seems to me that the real culprits in starting this war were the members of the Intelligence Committees. THEY were the ones that had access to the unredacted NIE. It is THEY who should have informed the other Congressional members. Rather, they chose to uphold their vow of secrecy instead of protecting their nation.

[bottomdwellah]

The reasons for the invasion of Iraq? Five words can pretty well sum them up. AIPAC, MISC, and BIG OIL. MISC you ask? Military, Industrial, Scientific Complex.
Hillary will NEVER redudiate her vote to "remove Saddam from power". To do so would be to repudiate one of her most powerful constituencies. Which one? Take your pick, I have my own idea!