Pelosi yesterday stated that Iraq was Bush's war, well, maybe, but why did the Democrats vote to go to war

Question

In those days leading to the vote, the CIA prepared a briefing on Iraq, a top secret briefing, which was reasonable and ambiguous as to Iraq having ties to Al Qaeda and wmd's. ONLY ^ SENATORS BOTHERED TO READ THE REPORT, and no aide could read it and give the Senators an evaluation. THEY WERE NEGLIGENT in carrying out their duties and act shamelessly now, with 20/20 hindsight vision...

ONLY 6 SENATORS READ THE REPORT...

Answer 1

"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
pretty much says it all.....

Answer 2

Few reasons.Some were and are uninformed and that's unacceptable but the reality.The patriot act got voted too while most didn't even read it.Politicians,not even Democrats are perfect,you got slackers at the job in every filed including congress.
Others felt intimidated by the political climate the Bush administration created post 9/11 where dissent was demonized as treason.
Another group supported voted to give the authority to use force because it was the popular thing to do at that point.
With most of the Democrats who voted for Joint Resolution 114 it was probably some combination of those three.

The dramatic, much-debated vote on Joint Resolution 114 was taken on October 11, 2002. It passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23, and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133.
In the end, 156 members of Congress from 36 states had enough information and personal insight and wisdom to make the correct decision for our national and the world community.

Answer 3

Democrats lean whatever way benefits them at the time. They look out for the good of the party rather than the good of the country. At the time they voted, it seemed the popular thing to do. Now that the war has become unpopular, they are against it and try to claim they've been against it all along.

The Republicans aren't perfect, but at least they pick a side and stay on it for the most part.

Personally, I'm getting sick of both sides fighting back and forth with one trying to undo what the other has done so the other party looks bad. This is mostly a democratic tactic, but it's end result is the country can never get anything done because of the selfish needs and bickering of politicians on both sides.

Answer 4

Because they were under the same pressure the rest of the US leadership was, to do something which looked pro-active while NOT pissing off Bush's REAL bosses, the Saudi Royals. And since the Dems were in a MINORITY in Congress, the Invasion was rubberstamped by the REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, by going along with the YES vote, they showed bipartisan unity, something Republicans have no clue about. But of course, had they indeed voted agasint invasion, every Republican in the country (which is ALL of them since they wont join the Military themselves) would have denounced them on Fox Noise as being "Anti American" or "Pro Al Qaeda".

Do Republicans REALLY have such short, inefficient memories? We still have morons in here who think you're a Commie Pinko Rat Weakling if you don't have the "Stars and Bars" in your avatar photo, like that really proves ANYTHING.

As an example, one of your employees telephones you to tell you your wife is cheating on you and your house is on fire. You have no way of confirming this yourself, so you take your employee's word for it (after all you hired him or her, why SHOULDN'T you be able to trust what he or she says?). You tell your employee, ok do what you have to do to put the fire out and deal with my wife.

Your employee goes to your home, bulldozes the (non-burning) house to the ground and shoots your wife, then calls you back to tell you the house is gone and it wasn't YOUR wife doing the cheating, but she's dead anyway so it doesn't matter, and to tell you that since your house is gone, your employee is building a new house on that spot for him or her-self (you're now homeless), while you get the bills for demolition of your old home and construction of his new one. Then you find out he or she is REALLY working for a whole different set of employers, ones in the (you guessed it) home building business.

Should you be blamed for taking the word of someone you thought you could trust?

Answer 5

maybe my eye...things went tough and the pelosi ite faithful jumped off the boat like scattered roaches. the democrats clearly voted as this was the poltically correct thing to do at the time. since the polls changed so did they. this is called grandstanding or posturing as is nothing new. they voted for the war attempting to get the spotlight to gain power through the previously explained political correctness and posturing, nothing more or less.

Answer 6

Well it's clear the Democrats are too weak to handle war issues, so they should just stay out of things when the adults are discussing national defense.

Answer 7

"LIBS VOTED FOR WAR": A TIRED ARGUMENT


And bullschit. Liberals voted for war because Bush phonied up the intelligence. Bush is a liar, and he should be tried for war crimes (along with architects Cheney, Rummy, & Wolfie.)

Answer 8

they were blinded or fooled by the 9/11 attk and think that iraq is resposible for the chaos... in my view i think they should not destroy a whole forest because of 1 tree that is bad

Answer 9

Because they "blame" Bush for making them vote that way Need proof just ask Hillary Clintoon She cannot take personal responsibility for anything

Answer 10

The "political wind," has changed, there's time to be a Democrat and then there's time to be an AMERICAN, when will they wake up...