Look at the statements on record by the Democratic Representatives and Senators that voted for/against the resolution. Those may mean more than the actual votes.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Records Show Senators who OK'd war didn't read key report
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
Shame on you and your ilk for diverting the guilt and blame.
It rests squarely on Bush and now directly on you and your friends that continue to support him and the lies.
blackangst1
Lifer
wait what? It's Bush's fault the Senate didnt read what they signed? lol I guess that makes YOUR heroes lemmings doesnt it! What an admirable quality!
Lemon law
Lifer
These bills are often so huge and have so much fine print, that its very difficult to know exactly what is in them. And the neocons have been very good at burying their key provisions
in the oddest places. Usually reading bills is a job the actual office holder delegates to staffers---who often have only a few hours---and sometimes even less than that to understand all
that is in a final bill.
Its very easy to come back later and say how could they be so idiotic as to vote for that? But when some of these bills make a stack of 10 New York City phone books look small in comparison, its easier to understand that the devil is in the details.
in the oddest places. Usually reading bills is a job the actual office holder delegates to staffers---who often have only a few hours---and sometimes even less than that to understand all
that is in a final bill.
Its very easy to come back later and say how could they be so idiotic as to vote for that? But when some of these bills make a stack of 10 New York City phone books look small in comparison, its easier to understand that the devil is in the details.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
Yeah.... But that doesn't apply here. At all.
They simply didn't make the effort to read the report. Even when it was brought to Capitol Hill by Joe Biden for review by congress. They ignored it. They didn't even send their staffers over to read it.
I'm LMAO here. Is this really the stance of the Ds now? "Don't blame me for voting for the resolution. I didn't even read it!" 😕 That is the weakest excuse for deflecting blame I've heard in a LOOOOONNNNGGG time. If anything, the excuse that the report contained false or incorrect data just got taken away from them.
For years we've been hearing about the faulty intel and cherry picking... "If we'd known then what we know now..." Blah blah blah... Turns out they didn't even read the report. Weak.
blackangst1
Lifer
A few points: be fair. Both parties are good at burying key provisions. If you think this tactic is somehow crowned on the GOP's head, sadly to say....youre friggin blind.
Secondly, I completely agree it's impossible for every senater to read every bill...but...a friggin war bill? lol gimme a break. It's no one's fault but their own. And I'll say to you also...if it's Bush's fault, then they're alllll a bunch of lemmings who deserve what they got. Ignorance is no excuse.
ericlp
Diamond Member
Uh, I don't think it would have made a difference either... Couldn't they have just watched TV when the white house had the U.S. top weapons inspectors knee deep in thick ass reports stating they didn't find any evidence of any WMD. That pretty much summed it up for me. If the Senators/Congress were too stupid to figure that one out then reading any report would have not made them change their mind.
Face it they were rubber stamping and going along with the flow. Disgusting yes....
There should be zero tolerance for excuses....
blackangst1
Lifer
Here lemme make a flow chart for you.
-----------> I can?t believe that people are making excuses for the people who didn?t read the report. (In other words, cant believe people think NOT reading the report is a valid excuse) ---------NEXT----------> It rests squarely on Bush (kinda self explanatory. But if youre slow I'll decode: It's Bush's fault they didnt read the report.)-----and finally------->my comment on how it is absurd the blame for not reading the report report rests with anyone but the senators.
Get it?
imported_Shivetya
Platinum Member
Apologist aren't you?
Look, if your going to give a President the ability to WAGE WAR I fully expect you to know the whys behind it and understand what you are committing the LIVES of our serviceman too.
I am more disgusted with the people who voted in favor and did not read it than those who read it and voted for it. Dereliction of duty, if not treason, should be brought up for EVERY Congressman signing off on a war authorization bill who does not read the "fine print"
What's going to be your means of pinning Bush down now? If your going to excuse your side for their part in this idiocy then they will can use the same excuse. Of course seeing that ya'll are either Democrat or Republican should be excuse enough for no thinking
blackangst1
Lifer
I cant imagine not one senator didnt read it. It would be interesting to see a count of yay and nay votes compared to who read and who didnt read it.
Anyway just a side thought.
Anyway just a side thought.
JD50
Lifer
Wow, so you guys are actually proud of the fact that they signed a bill that they didn't even read and that is your excuse? What, do they need the President to sit down with each congressman individually and read it out loud to them? You guys are seriously trying to blame Bush for the congressman not reading this? Must be desperate.
ProfJohn
Lifer
Saddam underwent 10 years of harsh economic sanctions and yet you want us to believe he did this when he had nothing to hide?
In 1998 Saddam announced that he would no longer cooperate with UN inspectors, for this Bill Clinton launched protracted air strikes on Iraq. And yet Saddam had nothing to hide right?
I think we can make two conclusions about Saddam, WMD and inspectors.
1. Saddam did have something to hide hence the way he ran interference with inspectors.
Or
2. Saddam WANTED us to believe he had something to hide. Perhaps as a way to feign resistance and make the rest of the Middle East believe that he was standing up to America.
Now we know that the oil for food program was full of holes and that Saddam?s personal life style was never affected by the sanctions. And we know that Saddam could care less about the Iraqi people. So it is quite possible that he sacrificed the well being of his country and its people in order to make a personal point of standing up to the west.
He was a crazy megalomaniac who even after being taken from power and thrown in a jail cell insisted that he was still the rightful ruler of Iraq. Is it to much of a stretch to think that this was all a result of Saddam trying to look tough in eyes of himself, those around him and the other Arab states?
In 1998 Saddam announced that he would no longer cooperate with UN inspectors, for this Bill Clinton launched protracted air strikes on Iraq. And yet Saddam had nothing to hide right?
I think we can make two conclusions about Saddam, WMD and inspectors.
1. Saddam did have something to hide hence the way he ran interference with inspectors.
Or
2. Saddam WANTED us to believe he had something to hide. Perhaps as a way to feign resistance and make the rest of the Middle East believe that he was standing up to America.
Now we know that the oil for food program was full of holes and that Saddam?s personal life style was never affected by the sanctions. And we know that Saddam could care less about the Iraqi people. So it is quite possible that he sacrificed the well being of his country and its people in order to make a personal point of standing up to the west.
He was a crazy megalomaniac who even after being taken from power and thrown in a jail cell insisted that he was still the rightful ruler of Iraq. Is it to much of a stretch to think that this was all a result of Saddam trying to look tough in eyes of himself, those around him and the other Arab states?
As a possible amendment to PJ's first point, there is / was some suggestion that Saddam's cabinet / advisors / directors mislead Saddam into thinking they had this stuff when they didn't. They were (according the the reports) too afraid to tell him that the programs were behind.
This is what I still don't understand about this whole issue, at the time, the general concensus was that Saddam had WMD's, right?
That's why we sent in Weapons Inspectors, right?
Why didn't we wait for them to finish their work, since based on what we know now we wouldn't have had to invade Iraq if we had waited for them to finish? Oh wait, I answered my own question. If we had waited Bush wouldn't have been able to use the "Saddam has WMD's" excuse, duh.
That's why we sent in Weapons Inspectors, right?
Why didn't we wait for them to finish their work, since based on what we know now we wouldn't have had to invade Iraq if we had waited for them to finish? Oh wait, I answered my own question. If we had waited Bush wouldn't have been able to use the "Saddam has WMD's" excuse, duh.
That and the fact we probably would have had to wait 10 more years to truely verify any claims from Saddams regime. Remember in the 1990s Saddams regime had to redeclare their missiles, biological, chemical, and nuclear programs several times. I think the biological and missile programs were restated something like 5-7 times. Because what would happen is the UN would catch them in the act and they would be forced to redeclare. When you look at the timeline in the 1990s up until the UN got kicked out of Iraq. It was one of cat and mouse. Saddams regime doing all it could to circumvent the UN and when caught was forced to fess up.
The scary part is we are still missing several hundred tons of mustard gas, several tons of VX, and tons of other munitions his regime admitted to but couldnt produce evidence of its destruction. Who knows how many other tons his regime produced\posssed they didnt declare.
I fear who has their hands on it now.
How about that they were never able to finish their work.
Saddam was refusing to cooperate (for one reason or another).
Did you even review some of the posts above yours?
ProfJohn
Lifer
Saddam had a long history of working with inspectors when world attention was focused on him, but the second that attention shifted away he went back to getting in the way.
Also remember we were under the self imposed deadline that we had to invade in March or April before it got to hot. Our military leaders were pretty clear that May or later was to hot for the troops to operate, especially in full chemical gear, and we did believe Saddam might use chemical weapons on us.
So the general belief was that Saddam would make nice with inspectors for a few months and then when it got to hot for us to invade he would return to his old games. Saddam had done this many times in the past.
Also I don?t think anyone ever believed that Saddam would willingly give up his WMD programs.
DealMonkey
Lifer
I think it's pretty hard to argue that members of Congress were possessed of the same overall intel picture as the White House. Whether that's through their own ineptitude, through WH manipulation of the intel, or some combination of the two, it's the same end result.
thraashman
Lifer
Wasn't the resolution being referred to an authorization to use force, not a vote to go to war. There's a difference. I very explicitly remember Bush saying he needed the authorization of force so he could pressure Saddam into cooperating. And that only if that cooperation failed, would he actually use force. Then when Saddam cooperated, Bush invaded anyway! The faulty and false intelligence is not the issue.You can make arguments one way or another about Bush lying about the intelligence. There's absolutely no mistake that Bush lied because he said he wouldn't use the authority he was given unless necessary, and a retarded kindergartner could have been able to accurately tell you that it was not necessary and the threat worked.
Anyone who still thinks going into Iraq was justified and a good idea is an idiot who I'm amazed can still accomplish the task of standing upright.
Anyone who still thinks going into Iraq was justified and a good idea is an idiot who I'm amazed can still accomplish the task of standing upright.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
