- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama's Iraq Attacks: Some History
Email
ShareSeptember 13, 2007 3:01 PM
ABC News' Rick Klein Reports: Newsweek reported Thursday that Sen. Barack Obama's campaign is eagerly pointing out a passage in a speech Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton gave in 2002 in explaining how Obama's views on Iraq differed from Clinton's at the time.
"Intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability and his nuclear program," Clinton, D-N.Y., said in 2002, in explaining her decision to vote for the war. "He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of Sept. 11, 2001."
But it bears remembering that while Obama came out against the war publicly before Congress voted to authorize, he has also conceded publicly that he had he had access to the same intelligence available to members of Congress, he may have come to a different conclusion.
In his 2006 memoir, "The Audacity of Hope," he described the threat posed by Saddam Hussein in roughly similar terms as Clinton did in 2002.
"Like most analysts, I assumed that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and coveted nuclear arms," Obama wrote. "I believed that he had repeatedly flouted UN resolutions and weapons inspectors and that such behavior had to have consequences. That Saddam butchered his own people was undisputed; I had no doubt that the world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
In the book, Obama goes on to explain that he still thought the threat posed by Saddam "was not imminent." As he said in Iowa on Wednesday, "The case for war was built on exaggerated fears and empty evidence. . . . But conventional thinking in Washington lined up for war."
September 13, 2007 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (1)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The inescapable fact is that Saddam Hussein had no military force with which to threaten anyone. US & British forces were constantly overflying Iraq, so it would have been impossible for Iraq to have launched an attack even if they had had the means.
The "war on terror" is a total fraud.
It does not appear that Iraq or anyone else is better off without Saddam. It does appear the US would be better off without either political party.
Hillary's initial support for the "war on terror" demonstrates her unfitness to hold office, especially the presidency.
Posted by: tuckerndfw | Sep 14, 2007 2:43:48 AM
Post a comment
