John Kerry and Hillary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq. Why aren't democrats on them if it's wrong?

Question

Coragripe do we want years of civil war with a dictator eventually taken over again if we pull out now?

VANL WMD (an anthrax factory) was discovered during Clinton's reign, and thats why Clinton sent some tomahawks over than forgot about it. WMD were found in the 90s, but how were we to know what they were doing since the inspectors were kicked out and he did nothing?

Answer 1

Shh.. You don't want to discuss this. The first one that answered will call you a hater and a troll.

I wonder if Cory will tell us the difference in the 3-5 years that he is talking about. Will he elaborate?

Evidently, scores of liberals think wars should have a certain timeframe or they become "immoral". Thank goodness these people were few when WWII was going on.

You're funny, Corygripe, why don't you play by your rules and answer my questions instead of going to the "you're full of hate" tripe? Are you out of ammo?

Answer 2

Well. I don't believe these two are the best candidates in the minds of all Democrats. Furthermore, generalizing what all Democrats do or do not feel would be presumptious to begin with.

When all the evidence of WMD *seemed* to be there, and yes--I have to mention it even though it's been used so often politically it's lost its relevance--because of September 11th, most people probably rather erred on the safe side. Saddam was a prick anyway, so that just made it easier.

Now that we know the evidence of WMD is questionable at best and manipulated at worst, the question isn't so much why people voted for giving W the power to go to war but rather if, how, and why were the evidence of WMD so wrong to mislead everyone, including Congress.

This is like being lied to and tricked and then being criticized for being lied to in the first place.

Answer 3

Whether it was correct to go to war three years go is a completely different question than whether it's a good idea to still be there today.

In 2003, the mission was to depose Saddam. Less than a year later, Bush announced "Mission Accomplished". What we're still doing in Iraq has nothing to do with why we went there in the first place.

So, when comparing voting records, it may be worth the time to actually read what was being voted upon. The votes to go to Iraq in 2003 dealt with one issue. The votes to remain after 2004 dealt with an entirely different issue, namely whether we should continue being there or not.

When you change the factual situation, it's not surprising that many people will vote differently for one action than they would for another. That's not flip-flopping. That's recognizing important distinctions, and voting accordingly.


{EDIT} Note to "John Skerry". You still seem to have cognitive problems making distinctions. This person asked a question. They seem to actually want an answer. You tend to just spew hatred and disrespect, and hope that people will agree with you.

Answer 4

do yourself a favor. and watch this.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/

you will learn what the CIA felt thought about the Pre War intellgence.
You will see that they did not trust the source of information in Powells speech.
that they did not clear the information in the Presidents State of Uniion address.
and that the president lied that they did.
that even after Chenney was told that he was misinformed, he still continued to repeat the information.


You will basically see that kerry, clinton all who voted did not see the same intellegence that the president had or that the CIA did not confirm the intellegence.

that the DOD created its own intellegence branch to claim whatever it wanted........
that the world did not all agree.......

do yourself the justice and watch then we can talk about the truth.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/

Answer 5

Actually, what they did was vote to give the authority to decide whether he'd enter the war or not.

Clearly, about 60% of America now sees this as a mistake, and certainly demacrats are aware of their votes on this matter.

Answer 6

the political parties mean nothing .it is a circus for the sake of the gullible public .
34 presidents are related to the same family in France(Charlemagne) and Charles the great ,
is that coincidental ,only an idiot would believe that .

Clinton.Kerry .and Bush and Kissinger are all related to the Rockefeller,or Rothschild's family.
they are all Masons and dance to the illuminates tunes
they all are members of the Bohemian grove.
check bloodlines of the Illuminati.at www.infowars.and you may understand why they vote for the same things.

Answer 7

Democrat politicians have two faces.... one red, the other redder. The truth exposes those faces.

Their supporters lack the ability to remember(when it is convenient), or to recall, anything that casts a bad light on Democratic politicians or shows that their candidates lied.

Outright communists also believe, that it is OK to lie to further the communist agenda.

Answer 8

Democrats or Republican votes, the war with Iraq is unavoidable.

Answer 9

for the same reason the ex Klans member Robert Byrd is still in Congress, politicians are corrupt and voters have short memories.

Answer 10

the democrats are political whores--that's why.

my ignorant brother who, being the black sheep of the family, feels obliged to be a liberal wanker democrat---came up with this little ditty in reference to whether or not George Bush 'lied' about Saddam having WMD's.

"when clinton lied, nobody died"

what a jerk. i almost hit him over the head with my cane. he was referring to the whole monica lewinsky debacle---of course he feels clinton was "wrongly accused" in SPITE of the blue jacket.

democrats are evil, just plain evil. take my brother! (Please)