Great Speech by Hilary Clinton Options

[impala454]

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

Today we are asked whether to give the President of the United States authority to use force in Iraq should diplomatic efforts fail to dismantle Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons and his nuclear program.

...

Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power. He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20 thousand people.

...

As a condition for ending the conflict [1st Gulf War], the United Nations imposed a number of requirements on Iraq, among them disarmament of all weapons of mass destruction, stocks used to make such weapons, and laboratories necessary to do the work. Saddam Hussein agreed, and an inspection system was set up to ensure compliance. And though he repeatedly lied, delayed, and obstructed the inspections work, the inspectors found and destroyed far more weapons of mass destruction capability than were destroyed in the Gulf War, including thousands of chemical weapons, large volumes of chemical and biological stocks, a number of missiles and warheads, a major lab equipped to produce anthrax and other bio-weapons, as well as substantial nuclear facilities.

...

In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.

...

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He 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.

...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

Now this much is undisputed. The open questions are: what should we do about it? How, when, and with whom?

...

Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause, I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go way with delay will oppose any UN resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.

...

Over eleven years have passed since the UN called on Saddam Hussein to rid himself of weapons of mass destruction as a condition of returning to the world community. Time and time again he has frustrated and denied these conditions. This matter cannot be left hanging forever with consequences we would all live to regret. War can yet be avoided, but our responsibility to global security and to the integrity of United Nations resolutions protecting it cannot. I urge the President to spare no effort to secure a clear, unambiguous demand by the United Nations for unlimited inspections.

And finally, on another personal note, 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. In balancing the risks of action versus inaction, I think New Yorkers who have gone through the fires of hell may be more attuned to the risk of not acting. I know that I am.

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.

Thank you, Mr. President.

/applause (well, except the parts where she completely contradicts herself, but other than that, /applause)

[Mommy]

hmm interesting. I never in a million years would have thought about voting for Hillary, but the past month or so I have been starting to change my mind. Im going to have read more up on this silly woman.

[JRockTTU]

hmm interesting. I never in a million years would have thought about voting for Hillary, but the past month or so I have been starting to change my mind. Im going to have read more up on this silly woman.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not. In the event that you are not, the above speech is from 2002 and Impala is pointing out how she was totally for invading Iraq when she voted to do so, but now that the majority of Americans are not satisfied with the results in Iraq she takes the opposite stance and pretends that she always thought it was a bad idea and she was mislead into voting to invade.

[Mommy]

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not. In the event that you are not, the above speech is from 2002 and Impala is pointing out how she was totally for invading Iraq when she voted to do so, but now that the majority of Americans are not satisfied with the results in Iraq she takes the opposite stance and pretends that she always thought it was a bad idea and she was mislead into voting to invade.

I know... i read that it was 02. I clicked the link to find that out because some of the info seemed outdated. Im not that ignorant. I want to vote republican this election, but Im not liking the candidates too much. if I went democrat, i would take hillary over obama anyday. I probably just wont vote. Im sick of this bipartisan bullshit.

[Seeker]

I know... i read that it was 02. I clicked the link to find that out because some of the info seemed outdated. Im not that ignorant. I want to vote republican this election, but Im not liking the candidates too much. if I went democrat, i would take hillary over obama anyday. I probably just wont vote. Im sick of this bipartisan bullshit.

vote for ron paul unless you're an absolute fucking moron

[Mommy]

vote for ron paul unless you're an absolute fucking moron

I havent done my own research on him yet, but the little I have heard about him from random people, he sounds like a damn moron.