Obama and Iraq
From recent televised debates, at least this has become clear: Obama is the only leading candidate who opposes the war in Iraq. The Republicans certainly don’t. Clinton may think that the war was mismanaged, which it has been, but she refuses to repudiate her vote on the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. Let it not, five years later, be forgotten exactly what it was that was passed:
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the
Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary
and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq
It is not enough to ask what our next President to do with the war that we have on our hands today. Rather, we must also ask whether our next President will give us a new war. Among the front-ronners, Obama, and Obama alone, has stated the clear and plain truth that there was no national interest at stake in invading Iraq. That we were discussing whether to invade Iraq ought to have contained the answer within the question. I trust in Obama’s judgment to not lead us into any more unnecessary invasions - as if there were ever an invasion that were necessary.
Lincoln Chafee is correct in that “helping a rogue president start an unnecessary war should be a career-ending lapse of judgment.” Failing that, I would settle for not promoting Bush’s helpers to the Presidency.
