Earlier this month, Hillary Clinton made headlines when she implied that her vote for the "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002" was a vote for inspections, not war. Though she has never publicly apologized for her vote, she has claimed several times that she was misled by the Bush administration, either about intelligence or their intentions.
Why did Hillary really vote for the war? Did she support it at the time? Was she misled? Did she, with an eye on a future bid for the White House, consider it to be a politically savvy move?
If she was misled, why didn't she speak out against the war once she knew the administration's intentions and that there were no WMDs? Remarks she made to the Council on Foreign Relations in December 2003 suggest she did in fact know what she was doing when she voted for authorization of force. And at the time, just after Saddam was captured and the war looked winnable in the near future, she stood by her vote.
From the speech:
I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote. I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors. And I also knew that our military forces would be successful. But what we did not appreciate fully and what the administration was unprepared for was what would happen the day after.
Though this election is about the future, we shouldn't forget the past. Though this election is about change, it should also be about accountability. John Kerry got a free pass on his support for the war in large part because of an "anybody but Bush" mindset in the Democratic party. But support for the war does not equate to electability this time around.
The video of Clinton's speech is below.
Like this post? Get updates via|
Comments (5)
I don't see how this proves your point. That is, in that speech, Clinton says what she has been saying all along: She voted to give the President the authority to go to war, if necessary, in the belief that the President would use that authority as a means to pressure Saddam to accept inspections, and the UN to go through with them. She has always stated that she stands by her vote to give the President the authority to go to war, because she thought that Saddam needed to have the "stick" above, in order to accept "the carrots" and allow inspectors in. What she says she was misled about, is the fact that the president never intended to allow the inspectors to complete their duty, but would instead push for war once he was ready.
In short, her vote was to force Saddam to acquiesce to UN inspectors, not for the President to declare war. It was a vote to give the President a tool to use in diplomacy, as in, unless you comply we're coming in. It's a nuanced position to be sure, but the speech you cite, does nothing if not reinforce her argument.
Posted by NYkrinDC | January 30, 2008 4:10 PM
Please note: I'm not a Clinton supporter. :)
Posted by NYkrinDC | January 30, 2008 4:11 PM
Why did Hillary really vote for the war? Did she support it at the time? Was she misled? Did she, with an eye on a future bid for the White House, consider it to be a politically savvy move?
In 2002/2003, voting for the war looked like it would be all but required of anyone planning a successful future run for the White House. Heh...
Maybe she thought it was the right thing to do, but it's hard to believe that she wasn't thinking about 2008.
Posted by Dr X | February 1, 2008 11:04 AM
NYkrinDC: I see your point, but the fact that she gave the speech after the war began and still claimed it was the right thing to do suggests she didn't necessarily have a problem with the stick being used. If she didn't expect, and didn't want, Bush to follow through with the authorization she gave him, why didn't she express that after he abused the power? It seems as if she either thought the use of force was the correct course, or she's simply incapable of admitting she was wrong.
I tend to agree with Dr X. At the time, voting for the war was the politically convenient thing to do, not just for Hillary, but for many Democrats with an eye on the White House. Kerry and Edwards made the same mistake.
Posted by Elyas | February 1, 2008 12:33 PM
Again, in the quote you provide of the speech she reiterated that she disagreed with how the president used the authority that was given to him.
I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors.
I'm not arguing that political calculation was not involved in how she voted, rather, I think that this actually helps her argument in stating that she was misled about how the authority was going to be used.
After all, what she has said time and again is that what "she was misled about, is the fact that the president never intended to allow the inspectors to complete their job, but would instead push for war once he was ready."
Posted by NYkrinDC | February 7, 2008 6:02 PM