A question: What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2002?

What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2003?
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2004?
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2005? (He voted for more war funds)
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2006? (He voted for more war funds)
What did Obama do to try to stop the war in 2007? (He voted for more war funds)

Is it enough to say "I was against the war" and give a few speeches about it? Why didn't Senator Obama use the filibuster?
He claims he wanted to stop the war, but not enough to stand up?

"I’m really troubled by his questioning the sincerity of Obama’s opposition to the war.
Obama has been there from the start, opposing this war."
--Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), saying Bill Clinton's comments about Obama are
'too personal' and called on Clinton to refrain from attacking Obama’s integrity,

It's "too personal" to question his integrity on the war?
and a great response:
"Oh put a sock in it, Dick. No one's been quicker to apologize under GOP pressure than you...I'm about fed up with the entire cadre of dem leadership in congress, a bunch of spineless dogs. i can just picture you holding obama's hand and defending him against the repub noise machine when they do a mach run on his butt. Come back after you've learned to standup for yourself first, Chump."
-- db531

There's this.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

And then there's this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

If you're tired of spin and ready for a message of substance, read a little of this speech by Obama.
It is a message of unity that brought me to tears.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/CGxG9

Please join us in 2008!

.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.
.......and he talks, talks of unity, and he talks and talks of unity, and he talks and talks.


When is he going to stop talking, he has never said how he would do it!

EDWARDS always explains how he will do it...plus he's a absolutely great speaker..I think better!!

EDWARDS would walk his talk..he has a plan it is already written in stone...the spec is written and ready to go...just go to his website.

EDWARDS 08

and before you ask, *I* drove my ass from Massachusetts to DC and FUCKING MARCHED against this war!

:grr:

to DC in the middle of the night. And anyway, what are Clinton supporters doing asking this question? Hypocrisy or cognative dissonance? Who cares.

I have a friend who spent 7 years in a South African prison fighting apartheid. All of us are falling short of what needs to be done. And the fact that someone in the position of what passes for power, who claims to be against the war (sort of), has done even less than you and I... that kind of lack of action speaks volumes.

yet YOU have never done so.

I will salute your 'friend'.

YOU?

not so much

to NYC on Feb 15, 2003 When The World Said NO TO WAR to yell and shout for hours for our lawmakers to hear us! Fuckin' hillary, man.

Twice actually! :kick: :loveya: :yourock:

:eyes:

but he wasn't any help then.

I prefer to move forward, end it ASAP. John McCain, well we know what he will do! I don't even want to imagine his finger on the "football".

What a joke! :rofl:

He gave a speech & then said if he were elected he wouldn't continue to write blank checks to Bush.

Also, Durbin :puke: and McCatskill :puke: can go to hell.
They are buying the right wing talking points about the Clinton.

As you said Ben:

"Oh put a sock in it, Dick. No one's been quicker to apologize under GOP pressure than you...I'm about fed up with the entire cadre of dem leadership in congress, a bunch of spineless dogs. i can just picture you holding obama's hand and defending him against the repub noise machine when they do a mach run on his butt. Come back after you've learned to standup for yourself first, Chump."

Durbin has no balls.

dam i guess my poor state of illinois has two senators who one has no balls and the other is a reagan republican! by the way.... who are your senators?

McCatskill is a personal disappointment too. A close friend of mine was a key player in her election campaign! We had worked on another campaign for a candidate in the Ohio Primaries before she left for the McCatskill Campaign. She is indeed a disappointment.

Nice try man.

March 2009 - National antiwar marches on the 6th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2009 - National antiwar marches on the 7th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2010 - National antiwar marches on the 7th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2010 - National antiwar marches on the 8th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2011 - National antiwar marches on the 8th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2011 - National antiwar marches on the 9th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2012 - National antiwar marches on the 9th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2012 - National antiwar marches on the 10th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

BTW, your pals in the I/P forum were all hot and heavy in favour of the US attacking Iraq back in February 2002. I marched for peace on a day that we had frigid temperatures.

and I put the links in DU at the time. Getting over 200 peace demonstrators in downtown Indianapolis right across the very exclusive and Republican Columbia Club was quite an accomplishment, particularly considering that we had a major snowfall the night before and that temperatures were below zero.

Nor did he even talk about stopping the War. I never, ever saw him in a D.C Protest March, ever! Wes Clark Did! Many, Many Democratic Leaders have reached out to others to STOP this War.

Obama, Nadda! Zippo....Nothing. Not even a burp.

This is Obama's stance
1.He was ALWAYS against the war, he always thought it was the wrong choice to go in. He thought it was wrong in 2002, in 2004, and in 2007.

He was NOT ALWAYS against supporting the war. Once the invasion had occurred and couldn't be undone, he was for funding the troops, and he was for keeping peace and giving time for the Iraqis to sort things out.

Here is a quote...

"Us rushing headlong into a war unilaterally was a mistake and may still be a mistake...
IF it has happened, then at that point what the debate's really gonna be about is what is our long term commitment is there. How much is is it going to cost, what does it mean for us to rebuild Iraq, how do we stabilize and make sure that this country doesn't splinter into factions between the Shi'as, and the Kurds, and the Sunnis." - Barack Obama

This quote explains his view. Rushing into the war was wrong. HOWEVER, once we were there, we had a responsibility to help rebuild the country, which means funding the war. So Obama was always against the war occurring, but considered it a poor choice to pull funding/pull out, for some time, after we invaded. After we had gave them time, Barrack supported a phase withdrawal.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Hey DU'ers...Beware of unprompted PM's from this newbie:

Example:

Here is the PM this newbee sent:

Reading message in your inbox

Why are you're a freakin idiot

From: angie_love

Date: Jan-20-08 07:19 PM

Hey I don't understand something. Why are you railing against Obama for supposedly not doing anything to stop the war when your candidate Hillary VOTED FOR THE WAR and also funded it. She did not do anything to stop the war so are you going to stop supporting her for it? Stop being a dumb hypocritical bitch, the only reason you like her anyway is b/c of some stupid dumbass biography.

or join date to talk down to them

but i guess somebody with over 12k posts are above simple manners like that

It amazes me how DU'ers can rail against the Iraq War and the spineless Dems in Congress who give Bush everything he wants, yet when 2 of them run for president, everyone gets amnesia.

These are the important issues and there is no other time we can ask these questions and hold them accountable NOW.

funny

John is not in the Senate anymore.

It was his brainfart to not say the war was wrong until the end of 2005. That's what I know.

Well, Lieberman doesn't count.

I believe Edwards. He's concerned about our economy and the effect the war is having on it and I think he's sincere.

Obama and Clinton have the opportunity now to show us that their actions match their promises in the Senate. They haven't done anything.

that's the choice we always have to make when choosing a candidate. Sometimes its a leap of faith and yes, I believe him.

He's a better choice than candidates who say one thing, but do something else when they show up for work every day.

on the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment... Obama and McCain played it politically safe
and didn't show up!
Obama is an inspiring, powerful and charismatic speaker......
We have absolutely no proof he would have voted no to the Iraqi war resolution...
Why do you think the corporate media loves him? Will we ever learn?

We the people need a president who will be an advocate for us,That's the CHANGE we NEED!

Of the top three candidates--Edwards is THE leader on ending the war, universal health care, energy,climate,unions etc... If I can't have Kucinich or Gore--I'll vote for the closest candidate to them- if I can...

John Edwards lays out Climate Initiative March 19, 2007 - Speaking at Benedict College in Columbia, South Carolina, John Edwards lays out a number initiatives to address global warming, including investing in clean renewable energy, Presidential leadership, conservation, and a national cap on carbon emissions. Edwards also mentions his "carbon neutral" campaign.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x85789

John Edwards is asked to describe one of his Senate accomplishments - the Patients' Bill of Rights. He goes on to talk about the personal nature of his lifelong work, fighting against powerful insurance companies and special interests. "We need a president who believes deeply in this battle." Recorded during the Democratic debate sponsored by ABC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbhVFAAVJ98

John Edwards - Fighting for One America - Veterans & Iraq
He talks about veterans, soldiers coming come from Iraq, and the draft during his Fighting for One America Bus Tour in Iowa on August 13, 2007.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqOdGSXDsCs

"It is time for a president of the United States to ask Americans to be Patriotic about
something other than war" John Edwards

Obama has repeatedly made it clear that he is unwilling to use militarism to look "tough," unlike Clinton.

On the floor was 11 months after he was elected.

Against Kerry's withdrawal plan.

*Neither* Obama or Clinton can claim to be more "anti-war" than anyone else.

And....I sincerely believe Obama would have voted for IWR if he were a Senator then, nothing and I mean nothing in his Senate record would give me *any other idea*.

In fact, it's pretty much identical to Clinton's, since he was elected.

and you?

:eyes:

Didn't you SUPPORT the war?

for the IWR. His answer, honest at that time was: "I don't know."

Well, we know how he would have voted: PRESENT

Isn't that what he does with all bills that can bite?

Demonstrates his exceptional decision making skills.

I'd appreciate it if you could show us where he said that he didn't know how he would have voted....unless you are talking that one time where he covered John Kerry and John Edwards the day before the convention...although he still said that far as he was concerned the case had not been made.

Thank you for your forthcoming evidence to substantiate your remarks without spin in advance.

:rofl:

There's this.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

And then there's this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

If you're tired of spin and ready for a message of substance, read a little of this speech by Obama.
It is a message of unity that brought me to tears.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rospars/CGxG9

Please join us in 2008!

and still believes that was a mistake

Hillary has been all over the board on that

He used his power of words.. which didn't stop hillary and the gang.

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda."

Man, I wish I could have seen this speech in 2002..I would have posted it on DU..fair dinkum.

was originally delivered--except then it wasn't a speech then, it was lengthy testimony before the House Armed Services Committee on September 26th of that year.

Of course it wasn't Senator Obama who was giving testimony either, it was General Wesley Clark making all the points that the senator later included in his much briefer speech.

General Wesley Clark--who endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton in September of 2007.

Just sayin'....


http://www.politicallibrary.net/library/C/Clark%20Wesley/clark_2002_09_26_HASC_testimony.htm

that Clark endorsed hillary..he changed..Obama hasn't.

Has Senator Obama? Is this the candidate of change?

"Obama was critical of his parents and grandparents for breaking up from their respective communities and moving to other towns and countries. They allowed themselves to be seduced by the American dream of individualism and mobility, something which to Obama seems 'credulous and shallow.' "

"Freedom from tradition is not an end in itself, and continuity is good for people—these seem to be governing principles in Obama’s universe, principles which are expressed in his political outlook. On healthcare, he states that he does not wish to reform today’s system to the same extent as his main opponent in the primaries, Hillary Clinton..."


http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9988

someone who has the General as his avatar to cop to it. On the whole I like Obama..ya'll can nit pic all day long cause I know he's not perfect but he's much more perfect than my freakshow senator hilary.

And I like Obama too, I just don't think he's the great progressive hope so many seem to think he is. (I thought the Deaniacs were similarly mistaken about their guy--heck, he kept TELLING people he was a moderate.)

gender wrong.. Well, Clark was against the War On Iraq and the kyl-lieman bill and then he endorsed hilary which I understand has to do with loyalty but that's a big turn on a dime for me.

Dean is Dean..he was against the war on Iraq from the very beginning, too, and I supported him..you couldn't label him..and he's still going strong and I'm proud of what he's doing for our country. They're both good at reaching out and building coalitions.

I don't think Obama is way progressive ..he just seems like it after 8 years of bushit, but, he cares about people and has worked hard for them in the Ilinois senate...I don't think you have to be inside the beltway to get the experience you need to lead a big nation.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The favored Democratic presidential candidates are facing criticism after they voted against a bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hillary Clinton, of New York, and Barack Obama, of Illinois, said they were not satisfied with the bill because it did not contain a timeline for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

Sen. John McCain, a Republican presidential candidate, called Obama and Clinton's positions "the height of irresponsibility.'' (Watch both sides trade barbs over the vote )

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, further slammed the two Democrats.

"Their votes render them undependable in the eyes of men and women of the United States military and the American people,'' he said.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/25/vote.effect/index.html

He's still in the Senate. He can make a difference. He hasn't done so.

Hillary has taken every possible position there is on the war, and the fact is she voted for the IWR. It wasn't until recently has just changed her position about that war

I happen to agree with your point, it is NOT too personal to question his integrity on the war, and it definitely isn't too personal to question HER integrity on the war

Here, make up your own mind who has more integrity on the war:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/01/cli...

She only changed her mind about the war when she saw that the majority was coming against it. If they were for the war, she'd be singing to high heavens high the war was justified. Hillary goes where the wind blows.

because of her voting record

The truth is I don't believe this thread is to debate or inform, but just to flame bait, otherwise the person who started the thread would be responding more to the posts

So, don't try and bite off more than you can handle.........and you CAN NOT HANDLE ME, cause your way off your turf.

So, no more unprompted PM's to me or any other DU'er.

Here is the PM this newbee sent:

Reading message in your inbox

Why are you're a freakin idiot

From: angie_love

Date: Jan-20-08 07:19 PM

Hey I don't understand something. Why are you railing against Obama for supposedly not doing anything to stop the war when your candidate Hillary VOTED FOR THE WAR and also funded it. She did not do anything to stop the war so are you going to stop supporting her for it? Stop being a dumb hypocritical bitch, the only reason you like her anyway is b/c of some stupid dumbass biography.

One after the other.

If the answer to that question is no, and if you truely believe that, then I also suggest that Hillary would not be your candidate either

Look at her voting record on the war my friend

i'm waiting for an answer too, but looks like we're not going to get one as you're assuming this thread was started out of curiosity and the OP wanted a logical answer. Even though the OP got a logical answer, his main reason for starting the thread was to incite and piss Obama supporters off more than having any sense of LOGIC to it.

you there?

YOU THERE BEN????

thought not.

:eyes:

"People talking without speaking"
"People listening without hearing"

know someone is asking for my attention....

That's classic DLC Triangulation.

put soldiers in the field and then deny them the appropriate tools to do the job. Cutting off funding while some of our fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters are in the field would be next to treason imo. However, that doesn't excuse one from having the balls to as least voice their opposition in other ways. Biden had this exactly right, so did Hillary and Obama. What you need to do is look and see how they voted on the resolutions that did not pass requiring the withdrawal timelines.

I am not running for the highest elected office on the premise that I opposed the war from the beginning and am the anti-war candidate.

and no other candidate can make that claim....I mean, the ones running.

Just like Bill Clinton said more than he didn't have sex with that woman.

In context, Obama stated that the case hadn't been made....and was covering the people that you voted for at the time, who both had voted for it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=132&topic_id=4106912&mesg_id=4106912


Bill needs to look into the mirror, cause he's really contradicting himself with a bunch of lies.....and should concentrate on figuring out what his own stance is and was, before trying to make a case for someone else.


"That's why I supported the Iraq thing." Bill Clinton, June 23, 2004 (CNN)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/index.html

"I opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning." Bill Clinton, 11/27/2007, (NYT)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/us/politics/28clinton.html?ex=1353906000&en=cf3f18a5f01db61b&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
-----------
MEET THE PRESS
01/13/08

(Videotape, October 10, Clinton's 2002 Iraq speech):
SEN. CLINTON: So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interest of our nation. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein, this is your last chance. Disarm or be disarmed.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Casting your vote for conviction for the authorization for use of military force against Iraq resolution. That same week Senator Obama gave a speech, and this is what he said: "I know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors. ... I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that" "invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale" "without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than the best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars."

Who had the better judgment at that time? :shrug:

------------------
MR. RUSSERT: I want to stay with your vote because that same day, Senator Levin offered an amendment, the Levin amendment, and this is how the New York Times reported it. "The amendment called ... for the U.N. to pass a new resolution explicitly approving the use of force against Iraq. It also required the president to return to Congress if his U.N. efforts failed." ... Senator Levin said, "Allow Congress to vote only after exhausting all options with the United States." You did not participate in that vote. You voted against Carl Levin, who was saying give diplomacy a chance and yet you said no. You voted to authorize war. The resolution you voted for, Robert Byrd said was a blank check for George Bush. Ted Kennedy says it was a vote for war. James Carville and Paul Begala said anyone who says that vote wasn't a vote for war is bunk.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, Tim, if I had a lot of paper in front of me, I could quote people who say something very differently, so I know you're very good at this and I respect it, but let's look at the context here. Number one, the Levin amendment, in my view, gave the Security Council of the United Nations a veto over American presidential power. I don't believe that is an appropriate policy for the United States, no matter who is our president. :eyes:
------------------------------

MR. RUSSERT: But you voted for all the funding for the war.

SEN. CLINTON: I did. I never--I'm not premising my campaign on something different. :wtf:

MR. RUSSERT: And then until '06 was against the timetable.

SEN. CLINTON: But I did what I--my principle concern has always been doing what I thought was best for our country and what I thought was best for our troops. I'm not here saying anything different than that. I'm not giving you a story line that does not hold up...

MR. RUSSERT: But did he have better...

SEN. CLINTON: ...under the facts and the times we were in.

MR. RUSSERT: Did he have better judgment in October of 2002?

SEN. CLINTON: You know, look, judgment is not a single snapshot. Judgment is what you do across the course of your life and your career.

MR. RUSSERT: A vote for war is a very important vote.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, Tim, we can have this Jesuitical argument :wtf: about what exactly was meant. You know, when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution, :wtf: said it was not a vote for war, when I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, "if you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job," I was told that's exactly what we intended to do.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22634967/page/3/
---------------------------------------------

Sen. Hagel's Proposal indeed! Ha!

has always opposed the war.... besides the fact that I doubt that he would have taken a principled stance.... all we have to do is look to McClurkin, Kyle-Lieberman etc. to see that Obama is NOT good at taking a principled stance. .... so under the pressure, he would have caved just as other fine people did, such as Clinton & Kerry.

Because he was still opposed to the war. He didn't give up claim to shit. That's your story.

You are just spinning....and you are beginning to remind me of Linda Blair in the Exorcist!

but hold on to your sliver of nothing; since it is all that you have!

What courageous stand has he taken since that gives you this confidence?

Filibuster in the state senate isn't very effective on a federal bill.

Hillary would be saying that he doesn't support the troops. She would say that she wants to end the war, but she won't leave the troops on the battlefield without the supplies they need.