Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(111,052 posts)
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:01 PM Jun 2014

Should both Democrats and Republicans apologize for the Iraq War?

...if they voted for the resolution to go to war?

And why did most of them do it? In my opinion, it was because they were more concerned about political repercussions, rather than the best interests of our country or our soldiers. They did not want to be called "weak on defense". They voted to send thousands of our troops to their death on the flimsiest of evidence. They showed a lack of judgement not befitting a US Congressman or US Senator.

Why shouldn't they apologize? And the apologies should come from both sides. The calls for another war are totally unacceptable from either side and should disqualify any member of either Party that calls for it.

Take it to the people. If you support sending more troops into Iraq and further escalation of their civil war, then let the voters decide in November. Americans cannot accept such reckless decisions without consequences ever again.

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Should both Democrats and Republicans apologize for the Iraq War? (Original Post) kentuck Jun 2014 OP
Which is worse, to vote for war in order to not look weak on defense, or NightWatcher Jun 2014 #1
I can't help but believe, it was a very small % that believed it was the right thing to do Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #3
all of them need to apologize, then go to jail forever. roguevalley Jun 2014 #18
If we can put them in jail forever, I don't need the apology. FiveGoodMen Jun 2014 #24
I think the number of people who thought it was for the good of the country is miniscule. Most of sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #19
America is building up quite a reperartions Bortman33 Jun 2014 #2
Yes. nt alsame Jun 2014 #4
fuck the apologies Skittles Jun 2014 #5
We all know that neither of those things will ever happen. ManiacJoe Jun 2014 #6
so repukes can endlessly scream about Benghazi Skittles Jun 2014 #7
Sure, bring it up all you want. ManiacJoe Jun 2014 #8
Guess again derby378 Jun 2014 #14
They actually didn't get President Clinton on Monica Lewinsky yeoman6987 Jun 2014 #15
Lying under oath is terrible. JoeyT Jun 2014 #22
there's nothing to be FOUND with Benghazi Skittles Jun 2014 #17
You and I both know that. ManiacJoe Jun 2014 #20
plenty of DUers agreed with Obama that we needed to "look forward" Skittles Jun 2014 #23
They are already doing so..their handlers and the polls are telling them it's politically expedient. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2014 #9
Considering the President and Pelosi are claiming the AUMFs are still in effect and legally legit Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2014 #10
The IWR was not "a resolution to go to war" BootinUp Jun 2014 #11
funny. Senator Leahy said it was. Senator Byrd said it was. Senator Kennedy said it was cali Jun 2014 #13
Because they all damn well knew that voting "yes" on the IWR meant that the U.S. would attack Iraq. scarletwoman Jun 2014 #16
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ slipslidingaway Jun 2014 #21
Just because they apologize doesn't mean I have to accept it derby378 Jun 2014 #12

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
1. Which is worse, to vote for war in order to not look weak on defense, or
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:05 PM
Jun 2014

to do so because you think it was the right thing to do at the time?

If some kind of juvenile peer pressure is why they voted for war, they should be run out of office, given a wedgie, and stuffed into a locker.

Like trumad said, enough of us knuckleheads here knew that we were being sold a line of BS and were against this. We should not be smarter than Congress.

Uncle Joe

(58,284 posts)
3. I can't help but believe, it was a very small % that believed it was the right thing to do
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:16 PM
Jun 2014

even among the Republicans.

It didn't take a genius to realize the motivations and evidence were bogus or fabricated.

As for apologizing I believe they should, although it won't bring the dead back nor heal the massive numbers of wounded, but I believe that would be the right thing to do.

Furthermore the apologizes must be sincere, I don't believe Glen Beck was sincere for promoting the war he was just trying to change the frame for cynical political reasons.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
19. I think the number of people who thought it was for the good of the country is miniscule. Most of
Thu Jun 19, 2014, 12:04 AM
Jun 2014

them knew and either supported it for nefarious reasons, or did it as a political calculation that has backfired. Some of those HAVE apologized.

But yes, anyone who voted to give the liars the power to take our country to war, should apologize, but frankly it's way, way too late.

We need leaders who 'get it right' on these serious issues.

Anyone who fails their country on an issue as important as this should be barred from having the power to make such an egregious error of judgement, for whatever reason, ever again. They are a threat to the lives and wellbeing of other human beings.

I see that Pat Robertson and Glen Beck have both declared anger now at Bush/Cheney. That's great, but way too late for all those who have died, who are maimed, who have committed suicide, who continue to live in terror in their own country.

An apology just isn't enough.

 

Bortman33

(102 posts)
2. America is building up quite a reperartions
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:15 PM
Jun 2014

Deficit . . . American Indians, Afro Americans, Japanese Americans, Vietnamese, Cubans, Haitians, Chileans, Iranians, Iraqis, American Women, Mexican Americans, War on drug victims, students teachers, workers, . . .

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
8. Sure, bring it up all you want.
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:27 PM
Jun 2014

Just don't be fooled into thinking that doing so will get your either the truth or the culprits "HELD RESPONSIBLE".

Just like them screaming about Benghazi is not getting them anywhere.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
14. Guess again
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:38 PM
Jun 2014

Remember how the Republicans nailed Clinton to the wall over Monica Lewinsky? They started with that whole Whitewater shell game, and after poking at Whitewater with a stick long enough, they would up with Linda Tripp's tapes of Lewinsky's story.

Make no mistake - I am convinced that the teahadists are looking for a little blue dress to pin to Obama and thus wreck his second term.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
15. They actually didn't get President Clinton on Monica Lewinsky
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:54 PM
Jun 2014

They found him guilty of lying under oath. Anybody who does that is in a bit of trouble if caught.

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
22. Lying under oath is terrible.
Thu Jun 19, 2014, 02:11 AM
Jun 2014

He should've given the least untruthful answer instead. Apparently THAT isn't a problem.

Skittles

(153,113 posts)
17. there's nothing to be FOUND with Benghazi
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 11:05 PM
Jun 2014

there's PLENTY of evidence the Iraq war was a SHAM, a sham that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and a trillion f***ing dollars......ENOUGH ALREADY

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
20. You and I both know that.
Thu Jun 19, 2014, 12:48 AM
Jun 2014

However, getting the government to admit the truth and to hold the culprits responsible seems highly unlikely.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
9. They are already doing so..their handlers and the polls are telling them it's politically expedient.
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:30 PM
Jun 2014

The same reason they voted for it in the first place.

They are a craven bunch who are now using ignorance as an excuse for the killing.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
10. Considering the President and Pelosi are claiming the AUMFs are still in effect and legally legit
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:33 PM
Jun 2014

exactly who is going to apologize to whom and for what?

Washington (CNN) -- I'll let you know what's going on, but I don't need new congressional authority to act, President Barack Obama told congressional leaders Wednesday about his upcoming decision on possible military intervention in Iraq.

...

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California agreed with McConnell's assessment, adding she believed congressional authorization for military force in Iraq back in 2001 and 2003 still applied.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/18/politics/us-iraq/index.html

BootinUp

(47,084 posts)
11. The IWR was not "a resolution to go to war"
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:34 PM
Jun 2014

I do not understand why intelligent people FAIL to accurately represent what that resolution authorized.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
13. funny. Senator Leahy said it was. Senator Byrd said it was. Senator Kennedy said it was
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:36 PM
Jun 2014

but you're so much smarter than they were and Leahy is. Not to mention many, many others.

I don't understand why people like you think they're smarter and better informed than someone like Senator Leahy.

scarletwoman

(31,893 posts)
16. Because they all damn well knew that voting "yes" on the IWR meant that the U.S. would attack Iraq.
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:55 PM
Jun 2014

Please don't insult our intelligence by trying to claim that those who voted "yes" didn't know exactly what would happpen. It was so obvious, even someone with half a brain could see it. So I'll excuse any Dem who had less than half a brain at that point in our history - which begs the question of why our party would elect anyone with less than a half a brain for Senator - but I do not excuse anyone else.

derby378

(30,252 posts)
12. Just because they apologize doesn't mean I have to accept it
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 09:34 PM
Jun 2014

If they were so stupid as to vote for the resolution when all of us were screaming for hard evidence of WMDs in Iraq, they're gonna have to do a much better job of kissing our collective asses.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should both Democrats and...