Did Hillary Clinton Suggest Al-Qaeda Was a Reason to Invade Iraq?

[DrFunkenstein]

"I come to this decision from the perspective of a Senator from New York who has seen all too closely the consequences of last year's terrible attacks on our nation." - Hillary Clinton voting to give Bush authority to attack Al Qaeda in Iraq. 10/10/02

Now, Hillary Clinton was in a very unusual position when she made this statement, which was the final note of her rationale for putting the authority to invade out of the hands of Congress and into the hands of George W. Bush, who had spent the year banging on the war drums.

As she always reminds us, a large part of her experience is being "part" of the Clinton administration during the 90's. This is a crucial point - unlike Bush, Clinton was not at all in the dark about the nature of Al Qaeda and the actual threat that Iraq posed. This was well documented by Richard Clarke, the famously bipartisan anti-terrorist guy.

With Hillary Clinton about to cast what may have been the single most decisive vote in her political life, don't you think that the former first couple might have discussed whether or not it was appropriate to suggest that a reason for invading Iraq would be fighting those who were responsible for "terrible attacks on our nation" in 2001?

As a longtime member of DU, I have heard countless Democrats almost literally flip their wig about the efforts of the Bush administration to conflate 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq. I hope that my fellow DUers will not turn a blind eye to such misleading statements or - dare we say? - lies when they are spoken by a Democrat.

If Hillary Clinton was counting on a cakewalk, she was a terrible judge of asymmetrical warfare in the Middle East. If she knew that hundreds of thousands of people would die, she should never have made that vote. If she believed that George Bush was really just going to push for inspections, she is unforgivably gullible.

Whatever she felt in her private heart, she had no business suggesting that giving authority to Bush to invade or not invade was somehow related to the attacks of 9/11.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. Yes, and it was really lame

[AtomicKitten]

2. And she used her omnipotent skills to make that assessment without reading the NIE.

[zulchzulu]

5. Experience The Magic World of ... Really Bad Decisions!

Plenty of material for a show...who needs writers...

[AtomicKitten]

8. I'll bet some 3895+ U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would think it was hilarious

... except they are dead. The IWR was the golden key to all the ugly that came afterwards (torture featuring waterboarding, rendition, Abu Ghraib and Gitmo abuses, shock & awe, warantless wire-tapping in a 'one nation under surveillance' kind of way, the demise of habeas corpus, etc.)

[zulchzulu]

3. You betcha..

Here are her words linking Saddam to Al Qaeda...

"He (Saddam) has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

As I wrote in a relevant post on this subject recently, her speech would make for a hilarious one-person comedy show if it wasn't so tragically incorrect:

Saddam was a threat that must be stopped at all costs,

... yet we should do nothing much about it,

... except we should do something about it,

... while perhaps just letting the UN do its think would be great,

... however we can't wait for the UN,

... yet we should wait for the UN,

... which will do nothing to stop this...this...madman...

... who the UN can take care of and all that

... except people are scared and they want me to be forceful,

..yet I want the other people to like me too

..so I'll say just about anything.

God Bless America!

...except we shouldn't inject religion...

[K Gardner]

13. Yowza... :-)

[CoffeeCat]

14. Hillary is the Princess of Parsing (nt)

[WCGreen]

4. That's why I have trouble with HRC...

Perhaps she thinks she is above doing the homework needed to be an effective legislator...

Perhaps she beleives campaigning is more important than slogging through the real work...

She has the candidate thing down pretty good...

[sniffa]

6. now that's just silly

do i have to show you a poll?

[BeyondGeography]

7. If you want a bookend for that disgraceful statement, here it is

==Now, we can argue about the past, or we can answer the question you asked about the National Guard. Our troops did the job they were asked to do. They got rid of Saddam Hussein. They conducted the search for weapons of mass destruction. They gave the Iraqi people a chance for elections and to have a government. It is the Iraqis who have failed to take advantage of that opportunity.==

http://primarynumber.blogspot.com/2007/06/blitzer-blitzes-in-cnn-dem-debate.html

[earthlover]

9. Hillary's vote for IWR will make it impossible to campaign against the Iraq War

If McCain, or another Republican gets the nomination Hillary will not be able to attack their support for the surge or for Iraq. Quite the opposite: the Reps would be able to mock Hillary for endorsing the war and later, due to polls, changing her tune. Game. Set. Match. to the Reps.

Same story for Edwards.

Obama, on the other hand will not have this problem to contend with, he opposed Iraq from the start. Not only this, Obama (unlike Hillary or Edwards) can take Iraq to McCain or the other Rep and attack them for supporting Iraq. This is something Hillary or Edwards cannot do effectively.

So one of the most pressing issues facing America....and neither Hillary nor Edwards can effectively bring it up, and the Reps could actually paint their positions as flip flops.

Gee...can it be any clearer that Obama has the best chance of winning of the top three?

[Yuugal]

24. Different story for Edwards

He has admitted past mistakes and is very strong on pulling every troop out whereas Obama's camp has talked about keeping alot of troops there to defend those useless mega-bases we've built. I don't think the reps are going to be cheering for the Iraq war much in the GE with 65% of the country dead set against it continuing.

Both Obama and Edwards are making populist noises and deserve our attention. I think the white southern guy has a better chance than the black guy who's name rhymes with Osama but I'm pulling the lever for either if they get the nom and people are so pissed off at reps this time around that we should be able to win with either.

I figure the only way this party could screw up a sure thing in 2008 is to go for a corporatist and show that there is no difference between either party. That would be SHillary.

[earthlover]

27. Edwards has admitted past mistakes, but still obama would be better able to use Iraq as an issue

Hillary's positions on Iraq, however, would really kick US in the butt in november. She voted for IWR, never apologized, then later talked as is she was anti-Iraq. Her policy would be untenable in the general election, not only would she not be able to make Iraq an issue, the Reps would likely call her a panderer and flip flopper on iraq.

[calteacherguy]

10. That is my recollection. nt

[niceypoo]

11. Edwards and Kerry also voted for this.....rant about them too please...

Selective outrage?

[annie1]

22. Didn't Biden as well?

[maximusveritas]

25. Did they conflate 9/11 and Iraq like this?

I'm not saying they didn't, but I haven't see evidence of it.
They should be held accountable for their votes, but this is a different story.

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. In that speech she also said this about Saddam:

"there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."

Clinton's speech was no more militaristic than that of most of the Democrats who voted for the IWR, and less so than some others. Yes she then viewed Hussein as a greater potential threat than it turned out he was, which again is true of many Democratic Senators at the time including our last Presidential ticket and most of those now running. As a Senator for New York State it was inevitable for Clinton to make some reference to 9/11, when the over arching context of the debate was over what if any steps needed to be tens of thousands of New Yorkers who either personally lost loved ones or were severely traumatized by the events of 9/11, were still trying to come to grips with.

[DrFunkenstein]

30. Yes, She Should Have Made a Reference to 9/11

Something along the lines of "the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other," which was something she knew very well from her relationship with Bill Clinton. I'm glad that she was able to have it both ways in her speech, but that doesn't have any relation to reality. She clearly made TWO references to 9/11: one where she faintly denied the connection, and one where she connected the dots through powerfully emotionally language.

Especially considering that she was dealing with the raw emotions of New Yorkers such as myself, she should have not abused those emotions by playing them for political gain in the face of her own awareness about the misdirection.

[niceypoo]

12. I just read the speech to which you refer......

...and you left out the part where she said there is no connection between Saddam and 911. More long winded deception....sigh.

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html">Here is the link that you conveniently didnt post
The speech you refer contradicts your claim:

"there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001"

[papau]

15. you are correct - the charge against HRC in this thread is baseless - but the next 6 weeks will be

throwing anything against the wall and see if it sticks time.

Obama does get points for reading Bush as a possible/likely liar when others gave the office the benefit of any doubts - but I am afraid we must anticipate a bit of spinning for a while until Feb 5th.

Indeed I'd expect all to do spinning and have others do it for them - the dump on Hillary folks of course will be more numerous on DU - but I doubt any candidate will be spared.

[DrFunkenstein]

28. How Do You Explain Her Final Note - What Would It Even Mean?

Are you suggesting that she is somehow not suggesting a connection despite no apparent evidence?

[IndianaGreen]

16. Hillary did say that Al-Qaeda is justification for keeping US troops and bases in Iraq

Hillary gave the NY Times a neocon/neolib rationale for continuing the occupation of Iraq:

"The United States’ security would be undermined if parts of Iraq turned into a failed state that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda. It is right in the heart of the oil region. It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel’s interests."

-- Hillary Clinton
Thursday, March 15, 2007
as told to the New York Times

[CoffeeCat]

17. And PLEASE don't forget this about Hillary & Iraq...

When Bill Clinton was President, the neocons approached
Bill and asked him for war with Iraq--on January 26, 1998.

The neocons made their case for war, in person and in a letter
to then-President Clinton. This letter was signed by Richard L. Armitage,
John Bolton, William Kristol, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz--among others.

President Clinton declined the neocon's war with Iraq. He refused to play.

Flash forward to 2002. These same neocons hock the SAME war--only this time it's packaged
as a response to 9/11. Hillary Clinton knew damn well that these were the
very same people who asked her husband for an Iraq war when he was President.

She knew what the neocon game was and that they wanted this war for a long time.
She knew they were using 9/11 to get their foot in the sand.

It's so very important to remember that not only did she aid in the marketing
of this war---she kept silent on the real truth and she absolutely knew about
the neocons and their PNAC plans. She could have stopped this war singlehandedly
by standing on the Senate floor and saying, "These are the same cast of characters
who tried to get my husband to attack Iraq. It's wrong that they are exploiting
Sept 11 and using our fear as a springboard into the Middle East."

She said NOTHING...and she knew it was a con, because she had a front-row seat to
these shenanigans since her husband's White House days.

We can argue all day long about her Senate speeches. She parses every word
she says, so people like us talk in circles for hours--completely discombobulated
by her contradictions and doublespeak.

What she said isn't nearly as important as what she failed to say.

[K Gardner]

18. If I ever knew that, I forgot it. Thanks for posting it. Bookmarking !

[CoffeeCat]

19. Here's the neocons' letter to President Clinton...

...this really is worth a read.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

[K Gardner]

20. I had to do a double take when I looked at the date. Jeez.. again, thank you.

[robinlynne]

21. Thank-you. And that goes for all of them, even (sigh) my beloved candidate.

The crap that "we did not know then what we rknow now" is crap. I knew. We all knew. It was as obvious as obvious can be.

[TeamJordan23]

23. Obama and Kuchinich came out against the war when it was considered political suicide. nm

[wyldwolf]

26. yeah, as a part-time state senator in a blue state - and even then he had to have a motive...

...and even after he was elected to the US senate he hid his early opposition. REEAL courageous!