• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Clinton Promises to End War if Elected

CurrentAffairs

CurrentAffairs

Banned
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
2,136
Reaction score
44
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday she would not have attacked Iraq if she were president in 2002 and would end the war if elected, as she tried to blunt rivals like John Edwards who are stoking anti-war passions in the Democratic Party.


This is a fascinating statement. So Hillary, at the exact moment in history that she was voting to go to war in Iraq, says she wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq.

Huh? :shock:

You know, I can almost understand the politicians who say, "If I knew then what I know now..." But this remark by Hillary isn;t saying that. She is saying she would NOT have engaged in this war. So I have one question for the Senator. Why did you vote for the war?

Crazy.

My Way News - Clinton Promises to End War if Elected
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday she would not have attacked Iraq if she were president in 2002 and would end the war if elected, as she tried to blunt rivals like John Edwards who are stoking anti-war passions in the Democratic Party.


This is a fascinating statement. So Hillary, at the exact moment in history that she was voting to go to war in Iraq, says she wouldn't have gone to war in Iraq.

Huh? :shock:

You know, I can almost understand the politicians who say, "If I knew then what I know now..." But this remark by Hillary isn;t saying that. She is saying she would NOT have engaged in this war. So I have one question for the Senator. Why did you vote for the war?

Crazy.

My Way News - Clinton Promises to End War if Elected
Click to expand...

1. She didn't vote for the war. She voted months before the war to give Bush authority to use force if necessary. Bad enough tho', I agree.

2. The issue would never have even come to a vote had not the Bush admin and neocons pushed the issue. No one was even thinking about Iraq after 9-11 until the Republican/neocon spin machine went into gear, and a few months later had 3/4 of the country believing there were Iraqis flying the 9-11 jets and that Hussein had nukes.
 
She's such a POS.
 
Iriemon said:
1. She didn't vote for the war. She voted months before the war to give Bush authority to use force if necessary.
Click to expand...
Voting for the war - voting to authorize the war ....really, what's the difference. The parsing of this issue doesn't hold up. She has blatently contradicted herself.
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Voting for the war - voting to authorize the war ....really, what's the difference. The parsing of this issue doesn't hold up. She has blatently contradicted herself.
Click to expand...

Voting for the war implies that in Mar 03 the congress made the decision to approve going to war at that time. Congress never did that. Congress basically passed the buck and let Bush do what he wanted. Not that that is any particularly impressive exercise of their duty, IMO.

I don't see the contradiction at all. The fact that she voted to pass the buck in a Republican driven initiative is no indication she would have attacked Iraq in 2002 at all, had she been president.

Bush and the neocons pushed the entire Iraq thing from day one. Well before day one, actually. Cheney, Rummy, Wolfie and the rest of the New American Century neocons were clammoring to take out Iraq years before Bush became president.

If Clinton had been president, Iraq probably would never have made it to the table. Iraq wasn't involved in 9-11, after all.
 
Iriemon said:
Voting for the war implies that in Mar 03 the congress made the decision to approve going to war at that time. Congress never did that. Congress basically passed the buck and let Bush do what he wanted. Not that that is any particularly impressive exercise of their duty, IMO.

I don't see the contradiction at all. The fact that she voted to pass the buck in a Republican driven initiative is no indication she would have attacked Iraq in 2002 at all, had she been president.

Bush and the neocons pushed the entire Iraq thing from day one. Well before day one, actually. Cheney, Rummy, Wolfie and the rest of the New American Century neocons were clammoring to take out Iraq years before Bush became president.

If Clinton had been president, Iraq probably would never have made it to the table. Iraq wasn't involved in 9-11, after all.
Click to expand...

Not much at all made it to the table during the Clintoon administration that had any real meaning to America except, what?, the mantra THAT IF it feels good do it?
Please, anyone.............. let me know of anything you think I missed during those eight years.
 
PrimBabUB said:
Not much at all made it to the table during the Clintoon administration that had any real meaning to America except, what?, the mantra THAT IF it feels good do it?
Please, anyone.............. let me know of anything you think I missed during those eight years.
Click to expand...

No thanks. I try to avoid blatant trolling.
 
Freedom Agenda - Quotes and Facts on Iraq

funny from a quote in this above link, she said in 2002 says that she does in fact support Bush to remove Saddam and to take action to remove Saddam from power..................
 
Hillary has to be one of the most incompetent candidates to ever run for president......It could only happen in the democratric party.......
 
Cold Dirt said:
Freedom Agenda - Quotes and Facts on Iraq

funny from a quote in this above link, she said in 2002 says that she does in fact support Bush to remove Saddam and to take action to remove Saddam from power..................[/QUOTE]

That was when she was trying to fool everyone into believing she was a moderate.......The truth being she fooled no one and is one of the biggest liberals in the senate.............
Click to expand...
 
Navy Pride said:
Hillary has to be one of the most incompetent candidates to ever run for president......It could only happen in the democratric party.......
Click to expand...

At least you were perceptive enough to say "one of the"... We had "the most" run as a candidate in 2000 and 2004, and he actually won, if you can believe that.
 
PrimBabUB said:
Could I have your definition of what a 'blatant troll' is?

Respectfully requesting.
Click to expand...

I hadn't really thought about an actual definition, to be honest, but to jump into a thread on a particular subject and throw out vague, generalized attacks along with an open ended invitation to comment would fit within it.
 
Iriemon said:
I hadn't really thought about an actual definition, to be honest, but to jump into a thread on a particular subject and throw out vague, generalized attacks along with an open ended invitation to comment would fit within it.
Click to expand...

Oh.....I see. I "jumped into a thread on a particular subject and threw out vague, generalized attacks along with an open ended invitation to comment
" .

So I take it, that anyone you disagree with that wants to comment on a thread is simply "jumping on"?

I didn't think I was being vague at all.

Don't you find an open ended invitation to comment is what a political debate is all about?
 
PrimBabUB said:
Oh.....I see. I "jumped into a thread on a particular subject and threw out vague, generalized attacks along with an open ended invitation to comment
" .

So I take it, that anyone you disagree with that wants to comment on a thread is simply "jumping on"?

I didn't think I was being vague at all.

Don't you find an open ended invitation to comment is what a political debate is all about?
Click to expand...
Ignore him, PrimBabUB. You are correct, though. If you have a differing opinion, he tries to convince others you're trolling. No one falls for it. Enjoy.
 
Iriemon said:
At least you were perceptive enough to say "one of the"... We had "the most" run as a candidate in 2000 and 2004, and he actually won, if you can believe that.
Click to expand...

meaningless jealous hate rhetoric.
 
PrimBabUB said:
Oh.....I see. I "jumped into a thread on a particular subject and threw out vague, generalized attacks along with an open ended invitation to comment
" .

So I take it, that anyone you disagree with that wants to comment on a thread is simply "jumping on"?

I didn't think I was being vague at all.

Don't you find an open ended invitation to comment is what a political debate is all about?
Click to expand...

Nope.

You're post:

Not much at all made it to the table during the Clintoon administration that had any real meaning to America except, what?, the mantra THAT IF it feels good do it? Please, anyone.............. let me know of anything you think I missed during those eight years.

This thread had nothing to do with President Clinton or his policies nor was there any inference to it, including my post which you cited. Your post doesn't even say anything specific about President Clinton's administration, just makes a vague attack that nothing happened during his administration except if it feels good do it, and then you invited comment about anything that happened during his 8 years of the presidency.

That's a troll in my book.
 
Navy Pride said:
Hillary has to be one of the most incompetent candidates to ever run for president......It could only happen in the democratric party.......
Click to expand...

Truly bizarre. You think Hilary is "incompetent" and you think that GWB is intelligent and visionary?
Truly "Alice through the looking glass" here.....
 
funny from a quote in this above link, she said in 2002 says that she does in fact support Bush to remove Saddam and to take action to remove Saddam from power
Click to expand...

How does this equal to supporting the war in Iraq?
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
Truly bizarre. You think Hilary is "incompetent" and you think that GWB is intelligent and visionary?
Truly "Alice through the looking glass" here.....
Click to expand...

Is it Opposite Day again already? :confused:
 
Here we go with Hillary:

- She voted for the war in Iraq when it was politically advantageous to do so, and also abadoned brave individuals from her own party like Max Cleland who spoke against it.
- When the public turned against the war, she turned against it

- She voted for the patriot act back when it was too much of a political risk not to.
- When the patriot act became unpopular and controversial, Ms. Clinton all of the sudden opposed it.

- As first lady she vowed to fight the bankruptcy legislation being pushed by the banks and credit card companies several years ago
- As senator from New York with number 1 contributor being Chase Bank, she voted for it... TWICE..and it passed.

- She was raised as a conservative in a family of Republicans and as a college student campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
- She met slick, and whamo, she's a Dem.

Whatever. This woman is not a leader. She has no deep down true blue convictions. Do not vote for her in the primary and for God's sake don't put her in the white house.

And the excuse, 'The president lied to us', does not fly. She and other Dems knew full well the types of people they were dealing with in the Bush administration and should have demanded better info and intelligence. The thing is, they didn't care. They were afraid of being labeled unpatriotic. We don't need cowards serving who are more interested in keeping their political positions than doing what is right for our country.
 
Originally posted by Wonder Cow:
Here we go with Hillary:

- She voted for the war in Iraq when it was politically advantageous to do so, and also abadoned brave individuals from her own party like Max Cleland who spoke against it.
- When the public turned against the war, she turned against it

- She voted for the patriot act back when it was too much of a political risk not to.
- When the patriot act became unpopular and controversial, Ms. Clinton all of the sudden opposed it.

- As first lady she vowed to fight the bankruptcy legislation being pushed by the banks and credit card companies several years ago
- As senator from New York with number 1 contributor being Chase Bank, she voted for it... TWICE..and it passed.

- She was raised as a conservative in a family of Republicans and as a college student campaigned for Barry Goldwater.
- She met slick, and whamo, she's a Democrat.

Whatever. This woman is not a leader. She has no deep down true blue convictions. Do not vote for her in the primary and for God's sake don't put her in the white house.

And the excuse, 'The president lied to us', does not fly. She and other Democrats knew full well the types of people they were dealing with in the Bush administration and should have demanded better info and intelligence. The thing is, they didn't care. They were afraid of being labeled unpatriotic. We don't need cowards serving who are more interested in keeping their political positions than doing what is right for our country.
Click to expand...
I can't say I disagree with any of this (except the part about not putting her in the White House). But she is looking awfully good right now. And she is certainly more qualified and capable than anyone running so far.
 
And she is certainly more qualified and capable than anyone running so far.
Click to expand...

She's qualified and has the ability, no doubt. I just don't think she's the man for the job.:coffeepap

Strike that last part, lest someone think I oppose her for sexist reasons. (And I really don't)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom