US hints at Edward Snowden plea bargain to allow return from Russia.

[karynnj]

75. When did she give that speech? It wasn't before Bush invaded.

If you mean her IWR speech - the fact is MOST Democratic Senators who voted for the IWR in their speech spoke of the process that Bush had proposed - which would have gone to war only as a last resort. At minimum, Kerry's IWR speech was more "antiwar" than hers - and he DID speak out against rushing to war in January 2003 - unlike Clinton. Harkin, who voted yes, spoke out before the war as well. In fact many could have given the SAME speech as to why they were voting NO. They were asked to put politics aside and give the President leverage to diplomatically deal with Iraq. However, the IWR allowed Bush to define if the conditions to go to war were met. The problem with the IWR is that it gave authority to go to war - and that meant trusting Bush - and they should have refused to vote authority until a case could be made that war was justified. (In fact, by March 2003, there was NO reason to defend attacking - because the inspections were proving there were no WMDs. At the time of the vote, inspectors had not been in Iraq for 4 years. If the resolution did not give approval prematurely - very few Democrats would have voted yes for it in March 2003.)

(Note that under Obama, without a resolution from Congress, but with a Presidential declaration of intent to do a targeted strike, the administration was able to use that leverage to get chemical weapons out of Syria. This shows that the idea of giving a President leverage COULD allow him to accomplish things not likely without it. In fact, it did create invasive inspections the results of which could have enabled the US having comfort in allowing the harmful Iraq sanctions to end. (Biden has explained that their scheduled ending was part of what was happening at that point. That, of course would have assumed that Bush was acting in good faith. )

Just as it was - to his obvious, painful regret - always a fact that Kerry did vote for the IWR - no matter what his motives were, so it is with Hillary Clinton.

This is not to say that she will not be the nominee if she runs. It is very hard to see how she loses - either the nomination or the Presidency. The vote was a very long time ago. The real question is whether we know - even now - what her philosophy is as to when we should take military actions and especially when she would commit troops. Consider that this WAS one of the questions asked of Kerry in a debate with Bush. (His answer was the the one that spoke of teh global test, but which really boiled down to a secular stating of St Augustine's just war.) I assume that this will be one of many areas where she might have a major speech. (alternatively, it may well be something she addresses in her forthcoming book on her years as Secretary of State.)