Do Edwards supporters support the War in Iraq

[trumad]

as whole heartedly as Edwards himself? Do Edwards supporters think that the war in Iraq is going well? Edwards does!

Can Edwards supporters say that Bush Mislead the Country to war, because Edwards can't!

This is your guy... Do you agree with him on somehting this important.?

[bahrbearian]

1. He just like's to look a things in a Positive light.

500+ dead not a bad thing, 300 billion for illegal war we can afford it, thing's aren't that bad.

[chimpymustgo]

2. John Edwards is a great man.

Do you really think that posting attacks on him ad infinitem is going to change his supporters' minds?

If you do, here's the clue phone.

John Edwards can beat the skin off AWOL. Park Ave, skiing, Yale, draft dodgers would lose all 50 states. Thank God, Edwards, or Kerry, or even Clark will save us from that.

[not systems]

18. Is that a yes? n/t

[Egnever]

36. ROFL

Now that was funny.

[jenk]

3. actually no, I don't support it like Edwards

I think it's good that Saddam is out of power, I think we need to retrace our steps and re examine our advance to war. The intelligence needs to be re-examined. But what ground would edwards gain by yelling and pointing the finger at bush like a loon?

Edwards can't say Bush mislead the country, that would be political suicide (ex, Dean, Clark) that's why the GOP can't tar and feather him, he's watching his language!

[Victor Wong]

4. You're right, JRE should just come out ranting and raving about Bush lying

like Dean or Clark. <sarcasm>

[arewethereyet]

5. I believe he made the best descisions he could

and things are not going so poorly in Iraq as you would seem to think.

Yes, I support him totally.

[Cuban_Liberal]

6. I didn't support the war.

But I'm not a single-issue voter, even in the primary.

[kak2f9]

7. I'm against the war but STILL support Edwards.

I did not belive in going to war. I did not believe Iraq was an imminent threat. HOWEVER, I did not see the same intelligence that Edwards and the rest of the Senate Intelligence Committee saw. I do believe that Edwards' decision was based on careful analysis of the information presented to him and his collegues. I admire him for sticking to his conviction even when it was not popular to do so.

Edwards cannot say Bush lied about going to war because he doesn't know that he did. Maybe Bush lied, maybe the CIA fed Bush inaccurate information, maybe everything was true but Saddam moved the WMD before we got there. WHO KNOWS?? This is why Senator Edwards has called for an investigation to see if Bush misled the country or if it was an intelligence failure.

I strongly support Senator Edwards. I don't agree with him on every issue, but no candidate will ever agree with me 100%. During this primary I have sought to support the candidate who I feel will do the greatest service to our country. This candidate is John Edwards.

[DjTj]

9. Welcome!

Glad to see more Edwards supporters here. :hi:

[kak2f9]

16. Thank you!

:7

[JohnLocke]

12. Welcome to DU, kak2f9!

Glad to see you here!!

:toast: :yourock: :toast: :yourock: :toast:

[kak2f9]

17. Thank you!

:toast:

[leyton]

14. My thoughts exactly.

But you state it better than I could have.

:)

[spooky3]

22. that's very close to my feeling, too.

I think Edwards, as a lawyer, may view lying as telling people something you KNOW to be false, versus telling people something false.

I personally now believe Bush (and others) to have lied, but using the first definition, I would not have the evidence to support it.

If so, that's why Edwards, the candidate with a higher degree of responsibility than I have as a non-candidate, can't now say Bush lied.

[leftist_rebel1569]

33. Very well said

welcome to DU, kak2f9! :hi:

[dawn]

38. Me too. n/t

[newyawker99]

41. Hi kak2f9!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[DjTj]

8. No, I do not support the war.

I was really pissed in October 2001, I went to a talk by Scott Ritter, and I wrote letters to my Senators. I do not support the war, but...

I understand that we would not have gone to war if Edwards had been President for the past 4 years.

I also understand that running around waving your arms screaming, "Bush lied!, Bush lied!" is not the way to win an election. It is most definitely not the way to win a Southern state, and John Edwards knows that, having won an election in North Carolina.

Whether we pick Dean, Clark, Kerry, or Edwards, there will be absolutely no impact on what happens in Iraq. None of them have a time machine and none of them can go back and keep us from going to Iraq. The job of the next President will be to get us out of Iraq, and the plans of these 4 men are very similar. What they think about what happenned in 2001 has absolutely no bearing on the future.

Edwards is saying what he needs to win. That is the most important thing.

[w13rd0]

10. "Edwards is saying what he needs to win"

...yeah, Bush did that too. He claimed to be a uniter, a compassionate conservative. I don't dislike Edwards, but that particular statement doesn't fill me with confidence. I hope he isn't just "saying what he needs to win"...

[DjTj]

27. ...but I was against all the other things Bush was saying...

...If Edwards fools the conservatives and independents, and stands up for OUR interests when he is in the White House, I'll be very happy with that.

[sleipnir]

13. The way Edwards is talking, we'd be at war with Iran and Syria by now

if he was Pres.

He's "happy" that self-contained dictators are taken out of power unilaterally, at the cost of billions to US taxpayers and ruining the future of our country. If he were Pres. for the last four years, based on many of his recent statements and past sentiments, I predict we'd be in no better shape with Wars than we are now. He's a dangerous card and he won't be in my deck.

[DjTj]

30. LOL

If you really think Edwards is a hawk, you aren't paying attention at all.

Here are some direct quotes from JRE:

We need the right mix of forces to handle counter-insurgency and peace enforcement operations, including special forces, light infantry, and better intelligence. I would bring NATO into the effort immediately, with the goal to eventually placing NATO in charge of Iraq's security.


In Iraq, the Bush administration's plan has failed to bring our allies into the effort and empower the Iraqi people.

I will immediately turn over oversight of the civilian authority to the United Nations and give our allies a seat at the table.

The U.N. must play a central role in helping Iraq become safe and secure, as well as training Iraqi security forces. NATO must also be involved.

I will establish specific timetables to transfer authority to the Iraqis to give them more control over their economy, civilian authority, and security, and to help them create a new government that defends their freedom and represents their diversity. And I will establish an independent oversight commission to ensure that the contract process is competitive, fair, and transparent.

[mmonk]

11. I don't see a change or message concerning foreign policy

in a vote for Edwards fundamentally. I will not vote for him or Lieberman unless I have no choice unless because they became the nominee.

[AP]

31. You think he's an imperialist who wants to rip off the wealth

of foreign nations and transfer it to Wall St and Houston? Really?

Does that make any sense at all?

When did he start looking after their interests?

[BootinUp]

15. I'd have to hold my nose

If Edwards wins the nomination.

The Iraq War issue and the future War on Terror are very important issues for me, and I want someone who will change the direction of our foreign policy. And who has real credentials on foreign policy.

[dolstein]

19. I supported the war and gave Edwards $100

But I'm not supporting him specifically because of his war resolution vote. I just think he'd be a very strong candidate against Bush, not just because he's not a total wimp on national security, but because of his background, his speaking skills and his message.

[tjdee]

20. He is not running for the President of Tjdee.

I am very much against the war in Iraq.

However--I'm not a one issue voter and I can appreciate the fact that he is running for President of all fifty United States.

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

21. I support Edwards and believe he will bring the troops home soon

As soon as possible. Iraq is not my top issue.

[CalebHayes]

23. NO! But I can get over it.

[Edwards4President]

24. No

From what I can tell, a lot of Edwards supporters disagree with him about the war to varying degrees but they aren't one-issue voters and believe that he is the best candidate overall to beat Bush and will make an outstanding president. It doesn't do any good to support a candidate who thinks exactly like you do about one specific issue if that candidate can't win in November.

I'd rather have a president whom I respect and agree with on 85% of the issues that matter to me than have a six month love affair with a candidate whom I agree with 100% on a few issues, only to watch him lose and then spend another four years with a president who stands for nothing that believe in.

[AP]

25. Hell no. However I was relieved Edwards voted yes on that resolution.

The issue where the Democrats lag farthest behind the Republicans is national security.

That's why the Republicans are so desperate to run this campaign on that issue. The last thing the eventual nominee needs to do is to explain to the 63% of Americans (which includes many Democrats) why they aren't wrong to trust the Republicans more than the Democrats on this issue.

Furthermore, I'm not an idiot. Obviously, Bush was going in no matter what. There probably would have be a LIHA event to get it if he didn't get his resolution. Furthermore, there would have been a LIHA if the nominee didn't vote Yes, regardless of whether Bush got his resolution.

I'd rather be wrong on that vote and president, than right on that vote and looking at another four years of Bush. And frankly, I think that's all that IWR was about.

[AP]

26. I DO support Edwards's vision for Iraq: a democracy with

the profits flowing back into a broad, wealthy middle class. I think he's right about that.

[tryanhas]

28. We are not one issue voters

We are reasonable enough to understand that they voted to authorize the President (the office) to go to war, based on the intelligence that they received, and the promises that every method would be exhausted to make this an international effort.

They didn't vote to go to war. They voted based on conditions that they were promised.

If you are going to hold them accountable for that, then that's your problem, I'm not going to do that. And it's easy for someone like Dean to complain about a vote that he didn't have to make, AND WOULD HAVE MADE, had he been in Congress, because Clinton also said that he would have voted for the Resolution had he been in Congress, and Dean was for going to war against Iraq back in 1998 when Clinton was considering, but hey, you can ignore the facts and believe whatever you want to.

I choose not to be a one issue voter, and the bottom line is, I believe that John Edwards is the best candidate to beat Bush, and I'm not one of those one issue voters who consistently cost the Democratic party elections by JUMPING AND VOTING GREEN just because they might disagree with the nominee on ONE FREAKING ISSUE.

[Amager]

32. Especially when demanding 100% agreement on that one particular issue

will guarantee us another 4 years of Bush!

[melv]

35. We should hold them accountable, not excuse them

I remember well the vote. Edwards, Kerry and all the rest voted to authorize the President because mid-term elections were coming up and the mood of the country was pro-war. A majority of our citizens were caught up in the CNN/FOX showdown drama and scared witless by the Bush's State of the Union address.

Meanwhile there was more than enough reason, even then, to seriously question Bush's drive to war. The amorphous arguments for war floated then were and still are wrought with illogic. I watched CSpan, I listened to the UN debates (I was particularly affected by one in which nearly 100 non-security-council states made their arguments against a U.S. invasion), read the papers both here and abroad, and considered the will of the millions of protesters worldwide. It was enough to convince me that we had no business going in. Why give Kerry and Edwards give a pass? Ted Kennedy had the nerve to stand up and oppose Bush's war. Why couldn't they join him? The day of the vote when I saw so many of my fellow Democrats kowtowing to the Bush administration's war agenda, turning their backs on logic and reason and seemingly selling out for re-election bids, well, it just made me want to drop out of the party.

Thank God for Howard Dean! Suddenly there was a voice, a public figure willing to say that the emperor is naked! No excuses! If Edwards believed that Iraq was an imminent threat then he is too gullible to be my President.

[newyawker99]

42. Hi melv!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[economic justice]

29. delete (mistake)

[PurityOfEssence]

34. I'm probably the longest-running avid supporter on the board

That's a fatuous statement, I know, especially since he's finally getting some support, but I'll bet that AP and Chimpymustgo will back me up on that. I can't say that I'm the best or the most vigorous, but I typify lots of the characteristics of those who support him. You'll find a lot of similar traits among his supporters.

The answer is a resounding "no".

His "wholehearted" support is a gross misrepresentation. His essential take on it is that he based his decision on the information given.

Regardless what Howard Dean says about "we all had the same information", those in Congress got a very special snow job. Some believed it (some very good people, like Waxman, Harkin and Kerry) and some didn't (Kucinich, Levin, Wellstone, Stark, Schakowsky, etc.).

Any response Edwards gives on the subject will cause him grief, and his essential response is that, BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN HIM, he made the decision he thought best.

Why do you think he's calling for an investigation into whether they were misled? Is this something a warmonger or political weasel would do?

I hate the war resolution, I hate war in general. I was very active in working on my rep (Becerra, who voted against it) and my two Senators (the wonderful Boxer and the oblivious Feinstein). It is the sorest point I have with Edwards, and yet his positives override this, and it's not just electability.

There's only one real hero on this subject among the candidates, and that's Dennis Kucinich. If that's a trip-wire make-or-break issue for anyone, that's the person they should be voting for.

[AP]

40. Clinton says he would have voted the same way based on info he'd seen

up to Jan 2001.

How do people who disagree with yes voters resolve that bit of data?

[dawn]

37. No

I think Edwards, Kerry and Gephart were mislead. But I agree with Edwards on domestic issues. And I just plain like the guy.

I was against the war from the beginning, but we are stuck there now. There's nothing that can be done about their votes! Do I think he or Kerry, if they end up as President, would send troops to Syria, Iran, or other countries? No. Sorry, I don't.

[ShaneGR]

39. NO, I do not support the war... but Edwards voted against the 80 billion..

And being on the Senate Intelligence Committee affords him the perfect opportunity to bring up the LIES he was presented with.