Why do Democrats oppose Bush for invading Iraq?

Question

"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 Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"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

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"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

"[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, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"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

"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

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"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

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

"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

"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

"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

"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

"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

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"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

"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

"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

Answer 1

Lets face REALITY: The Democratic BASE and its robotic "lock-step" followers are not true Americans.
Their goal is to eliminate free enterprise, free practice of religion, and create a "one-world" government under the leadership of the UN or a similar failed policy.
They honestly believe a Marxist - Socialist - Communist form of government with totalitarian rule is best for all of US WHO ARE TOO STUPID TO TAKE CARE OF OURSELVES. So they must be the ELITE who inherit the leadership positions.
Their LIBERAL education from our LIBERAL universities has brainwashed them to believe they are the ones to fill that position even though they are the ones who FAIL to learn the lessons of history.
That is why Marxism has failed every time it has been tried.

Answer 2

Democrats are same as Republicans because both parties look after the interest of US. Democrats agreed with Bush in the first place.to attack Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Now democrats realized that the process of war is not in favor of US and at the end there will be a shameful defeat for marines in their mission. Democrats opposed Bush for two reasons - one to maintain their political position within US nation and another one to rescue US army from further damage prior to safely withdrawal from Iraq and Afghan.

Answer 3

a million.) We went into Afghanistan whilst Bush replaced into in place of work. 2.) We went there because of the fact we have confidence that's the place Osama Bin weighted down is. 3.) We opposed Iraq because of the fact of here motives: - we've been lied to. - falsified records. - non-biddable contracts presented to companies with own connections to the Bush administration. - the insane claims that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 4.) it is not that we are in want of the conflict in Afghanistan, this is that we experience Osama Bin weighted down merits what he gets for claiming accountability for 9/11. al Queda has been making use of the mountainous region in that u . s . a . for a collectively as now hiding out, so as this is the place we went.

Answer 4

You can copy and paste all you want. The fact is that we were rushed into a war without making an earnest effort to avoid it. Saddam was not a threat to us and had nothing to do with 9/11. Both were either implied or stated directly as the justification for the invasion. Neither was true. We went in and beat the hell out of a defenseless country, killing untold thousands of civilians in the process then completely screwed up the post war recovery.

Answer 5

It's called free thought. Just because a Democratic lawmaker said it was justified, does not mean I thought it was a good idea. I was for invading Afghanistan, as they were connected to 9-11, but any fool could have seen that there was no connection between Iraq and 9-11. Bush has eroded what support he did have with his mismanagement of the war once it started. I, unlike Bush followers, do not blindly support someone just because they are a member of my party.

Answer 6

First off, you can throw out all those quotes from 1998. that was about the weapons program from '98, which is different from the one we went to war over. I assume you know that, and are still using those quotes as propaganda against those who don't. The other explanation is that you yourself are ignorant to the history of US and Iraq relations as it relates to weapons programs.

The other quotes do indeed show that some were not fully aware of the situation in Iraq. This is most likely derived form a selling of the war from their superiors.

Answer 7

Everyone loves to jump on the bandwagon to hit the "evil doer". Its called politics. After 9/11 it was the "patriotic" thing to do.

HOWEVER !!! Most jumped onto the bandwagon based on WMD EVIDENCE that was FABRICATED by BUSH and company!!! Now that the truth is out....and 500 Billion dollars have been WASTED not to mention soldiers killed, people are withdrawing their support.

Its too bad they won't admit they were LIED to and IMPEACH Bush for it.

Answer 8

Crap, I forgot the question! Oh, yea, the WMD's were not found. The Pentagon has said that there is no proof of WMDs or Hussein's involvement in 9/11. We were duped!

Answer 9

I think the Bush persons equate themselves with the original burning bush that was not consumed. I doubt they can make the same claim, though.

Answer 10

Because, despite all your cut and paste rhetoric, Bush was the one who actually ordered the invasion, and he is the one with the authority to end the war.