Huff Post: The Truth About the War in Iraq and Al Gore

[Pirate Smile]

Huffington Post:

The Truth About the War in Iraq and Al Gore

by Trudi Loh

It is sometimes said that good ideas have many fathers but bad ideas are always orphans. And so it is with the retrospective of the decision to go to war in Iraq. As everyone from the White House and Secretary of Defense to members of Congress and the media engage in revisionist history concerning who said what and who knew what about the decision to invade Iraq, it is important to hold everyone's feet to the fire.

The integrity of our democracy requires it. The American people should demand it. Joe Scarborough, the self-styled straight-talking host of Scarborough Country, contributed to annuals of revisionism last Thursday (May 4, 2006) when he suggested that Al Gore was a Johnny-come-lately in his opposition to the War in Iraq. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The truth is that, on September 23, 2002, in a speech at the Commonwealth Club -- long before the invasion of Iraq and before members of Congress voted to give President Bush authority to invade -- Vice President Al Gore unequivocally and emphatically stated his opposition to a War in Iraq and set forth a multitude of reasons why.

Among his reasons were that 1) We should focus our efforts on building a multinational coalition to fight terrorism and the enemies who were responsible for 9/11 and not become distracted; 2) A war with Iraq had the potential to seriously damage our ability to win the war against terrorism and weaken our ability to lead the world in this new century; 3) Although Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction would continue for as long as Saddam was in power, the existing U.N. resolutions passed 11 years ago were completely sufficient to contain that potential threat; and, 4) We should focus on stabilizing Afghanistan so that terrorists would not be able to slip back across the border and set up camp there again. Al Gore told the truth despite the political costs. In contrast, members of Congress checked President Bush's poll numbers before deciding whether to vote to authorize a war in Iraq. Al Gore took the unpopular position, but clearly the correct one. He took no small amount of flak from his own party for raising the pressure on them not to issue a blank check and to at least require the administration to put forth the an assessment of how it thought the course of a war would run. Instead, Congress rushed to vote yes, to show its patriotic bona fides -- just in time for the November election. Not that you would know any of this by reading or listening to the mainstream press such as Scarborough Country. They gloss over or ignore Al Gore's courageous and insightful (and early) opposition to the War. So it is up to Blogworld to set the record straight. Blog on.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trudi-loh/the-truth-about-the-war-i_b_20645.html

[TransitJohn]

1. Totally nominated.

I remember that, and it is one of the reasons why Gore is one of my favorites. There is a reason he endorsed Dean after it looked like his run for the nomination was getting sunk.

[durrrty libby]

2. Keep the buzz going Gore in 08 n/t

[mom cat]

26. Bingo!

[janx]

3. I remember it well! n/t

[IndyOp]

4. Look what I just found tonight:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=260">Al Gore '08 Group

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Admiral Loinpresser]

7. If we build it, he will come! n/t

[Uncle Joe]

29. It' says the page cannot be displayed IndyOp. n/t

[IndyOp]

36. Sorry UncaJoe --

:hi:

It is a link to the DU Forum on: Al Gore '08

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[Uncle Joe]

37. Thanks IndyOp!

:hi:

[Admiral Loinpresser]

5. Another reason he gave in the same speech

was both courageous and savvy. Namely that BushCo was politicizing the vote:

Fifth, President George H. W. Bush purposely waited until after the mid-term elections of 1990 to push for a vote at the beginning of the new Congress in January of 1991. President George W. Bush, by contrast, is pushing for a vote in this Congress immediately before the election.

Rather than making efforts to dispel concern at home an abroad about the role of politics in the timing of his policy, the President is publicly taunting Democrats with the political consequences of a "no" vote - - even as the Republican National Committee runs pre-packaged advertising based on the same theme - - in keeping with the political strategy clearly described in a White House aide's misplaced computer disk, which advised Republican operatives that their principal game plan for success in the election a few weeks away was to "focus on the war." Vice President Cheney, meanwhile indignantly described suggestions of political motivation "reprehensible." The following week he took his discussion of war strategy to the Rush Limbaugh show.

The foreshortening of deliberation in the Congress robs the country of the time it needs for careful analysis of what may lie before it. Such consideration is all the more important because of the Administration's failure thus far to lay out an assessment of how it thinks the course of a war will run - - even while it has given free run to persons both within and close to the administration to suggest that this will be an easy conquest. Neither has the Administration said much to clarify its idea of what is to follow regime change or of the degree of engagement it is prepared to accept for the United States in Iraq in the months and years after a regime change has taken place.

http://algore-08.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48&Itemid=84

That was a real profile-in-courage moment. Damn, I am proud of him. K & R!!!

[Us vs Them]

6. Vote for Al Gore in this AOL poll

http://news.aol.com/dailypulse/050806/_a/will-he-run-again/20060508101609990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

[janx]

8. Link to the September 23, 2002 speech is here:

http://www.commonwealthclub.org/archive/02/02-09gore-speech.html


Some great parts of the speech, especially when viewed in hindsight (but they were also great at the time):

Specifically, the Congress should establish why the president believes that unilateral action would not severely damage the fight against terrorist networks. The resolution that the president has asked Congress to pass is much too broad in the authority it grants and needs to be narrowed severely. The president should be authorized to take action to deal with Saddam Hussein as being in material breach of the terms of the truce and, therefore, a continuing threat to the security of the region. To this should be added that his continued pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially a threat to the vital interests of the United States. But Congress should also urge the president to make every effort to obtain a fresh demand from the Security Council for prompt, unconditional compliance by Iraq within a definite period of time. If the Council will not provide such language, then other choices remain open. In any event, the president should be urged to take the time to assemble the broadest possible international support for his course of action. Anticipating that the president will probably still move toward unilateral action, the Congress should establish now what the administration's thinking is regarding the aftermath of a U.S. attack for the purpose of regime change. I believe that the congressional resolution should also make explicitly clear that authorities for taking these actions are to be presented as derivatives from existing Security Council resolutions and from international law, not requiring any formal new doctrine of preemption, which remains to be discussed subsequently in view of its great gravity.

[glitch]

9. Most excellent. K & R nt

[NYCGirl]

10. Yep, he was right about it before the war started, and he's still right.

Recommended

[dalaigh lllama]

11. Here's another positive article speculating on a Gore run in '08

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.page05may05,0,7958783.story?coll=bal-oped-headlines

Good timing for another Gore run
By Clarence Page
Originally published May 5, 2006
WASHINGTON // If Al Gore is not planning to throw his hat in the ring for president in 2008, he's doing an excellent imitation of someone who is.
The former vice president officially has discouraged the notion that he will run for the White House again. But he is a man on a mission. And his cause is beginning to bear more than a passing resemblance to a national political crusade that, with a little tweaking here and there, could be transformed overnight into a weapons-grade presidential campaign.

If ever there was a time for the author of Earth in the Balance, Mr. Gore's powerful 1992 book on global warming and other environmental threats, to say, "I tried to warn you," this is it.

<snip>

Mr. Gore's book drew ridicule from George H. W. Bush, who called Mr. Gore "Ozone Man" in 1992, and from George W. Bush, who admitted without embarrassment that he had never read it.

Today, with the media carrying poignant stories about people struggling with rising gas prices, polar bears drowning amid crumbling glaciers and Republican congressional leaders proposing a laughable $100 rebate check to compensate taxpayers for higher gasoline prices, Mr. Gore's push for fuel efficiency and environmental protection sounds right on time.

More...

[Mabus]

17. There seems to be a number of positve Gore articles lately

From The American Prospect article to this one. Last month when the Vanity Fair "Green Issue" came out I got a copy of it. A couple of days later I went back and there was only one copy left. He's hot, in more ways than one. ;)

[AtomicKitten]

12. Brilliant find -- k&r

I always knew his opposition to the Iraq war was timely, but had no idea he was ahead of the curve. I hope this tidbit quashes the naysayers calling him a DLC war-monger. Couldn't be further from the truth. This guy has 2008 written all over him.

[janx]

13. Oh yeah--

Just think about where things stood on September 23, 2002. He was vehemently and vocally opposed to the idea, expressing as much, very eloquently and forcefully, on national television. He also warned Congress.

Gore was one of the only people at that early time that kept us sane as we watched in horror at what the Bush administration was doing. We still watched in horror, but we knew we weren't crazy because Gore saw what we saw--and much more.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

21. No wonder we didn't know...

since after the press trashed him in 2000, they tried to ignore him. Now that pundits are "discovering" Gore as his momentum grows, they stupidly repeat the memes created in 2000, that had little (or more often no) relation to reality in that campaign. Here's Somerby nailing another one:

Burleigh’s “Reason 3" is fairly harmless—but its simple-mindedness is annoying. It suggests a familiar but silly notion—that the Gore of today is a whole different person from the guy who ran in 2000. Many liberals now voice this notion; it doesn’t seem to occur to them that Gore ran as he did during Campaign 2000 because he was trying to win an election—that he’s the very “same person” today, in a different circumstance.

To us, Reason 3 is basically silly. By contrast, Reason 5 shows the way our liberal leaders can bungle the simplest, most helpful facts:

REASON 5: The Iraq War will be universally understood to be a disaster by 2008. Gore opposed the Iraq War first among his peers, and forcefully, in 2004.

Pathetic. Gore came out against war with Iraq in a major speech on September 23, 2002, when the debate on Iraq was nearing its peak (news report, below). Predictably, Gore was savaged as “unhinged”—and Burleigh failed to defend him. Gore was called every name in the book. Burleigh stared off into air.

http://dailyhowler.com/ (5/8/06)

[AuntiBush]

14. Gore Gets my Vote in 2008

Hope he does some seriously thinking about running. If we ever needed anyone, its Gore.

[janx]

15. I'v e never seen such unanimous support for any potential

candidate on this board. It's incredible and encouraging. If only he'll DO IT...!

We have to get through 2006 first, but at least in my neck of the woods, things look fairly good so far.

[AtomicKitten]

18. sweet, huh?

He unites ALL factions with a passion and fervor I haven't seen, well, ever.

[janx]

24. Yes!

It is so encouraging. And I think it will extend to more independents, moderates, and libertarians should he decide to run.

People are just demoralized and fed up. They want the truth. "Wooden" Al does not exist anymore, because he refuses to be handled.

[dansolo]

45. It isn't a question of whether he'd do it

The question is whether certain Democrats will stab him in the back to prevent him from running.

[jonnyblitz]

16. he is my favorite high profile DEM. like I said in another thread

I lose my "purism" when it comes to Al Gore. I am sure there is something i disagree with him about but I can't think of it at the moment.
If he runs I pick him hands down.

[Stephanie]

19. Al's my man. Al '08.

AL 08

[PDX Bara]

20. A REAL President

Ms. Loh Describes a REAL, thinking president, Al Gore, whose daddy didn't buy him the Presidency of the United States to play with. It is a travesty that we may never know how much better off this country would have been these eight years of President Dunderhead had we had our rightful and true president.

[KoKo]

22. Good Article. I hope he runs. I hope we can draft him...

[welshTerrier2]

23. Gore's speech was great BUT ...

it seems he's offered absolutely nothing about an exit strategy ... that's unfortunate ...

if Gore wants the anti-war vote WHEN he runs, he'll need to add an Act II to his great speech against the war ... Too many Democrats have offered us "I was against it before it started but now that we're there ..."

Gore needs to clarify his CURRENT position ...

[AlGore-08.com]

25. Kicking it up for President Gore

:kick: :patriot: :kick:

[ms liberty]

27. K&R for my President - ReElect Al Gore '08! n/t

[bajamary]

28. Restore Gore

Restore Gore. Re-elect Gore in 2008.

He's brilliant, passionate and committed to restoring our beleaguered democracy and improving our global environment.

[0007]

30. Nominated and kicked

[Uncle Joe]

31. It's that vision thing,

whether it be championing the internet for the people, long before most anyone else knew what it could be. Warning of the impending crisis from global warming decades before most anyone else knew what it could do. Warning of the folly of going to war with Iraq months or years before most of the brainwashed people and integrity challenged political leaders came to this same conclusion.

The choice is yours America, we can keep stumbling along wrecking our bike, trashing the planet, alienating our allies and waging war for profit by staying the course with the corporate supremacy crowd and their media enablers, or we can have a real President for the American people and restore Al Gore to the White House where he belongs.


:kick:

[pberq]

32. K&R

[EVDebs]

33. Hmmm. I remember Scott Ritter saying Gore would have gone along

with the war in Iraq, from a C-Span panel discussion. Looks like Ritter isn't 100% reliable; he also said June '05 we'd be attacking Iran and that didn't pan out (yet) either.

I'd love a Gore/Feingold or vice-versa ticket in '08. Web-downloadable books like Lester Brown's Plan B 2.0 at Earth Policy Institute and Amory Lovin's Winning the Oil End Game at www.oilendgame.com show that Al Gore is already leading the way across that bridge to the 21st Century, albeit unacknowledged by the media still.

[NYCGirl]

42. Scott Ritter was certainly wrong about that. NT

[Clark2008]

34. Al Gore, Wes Clark and Russ Feingold

The only people I would consider supporting in 2008: all were dead against the Iraqi War.

[AtomicKitten]

35. me too

BUT I will support the Dem nominee in the general election regardless.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

48. I'd back Gore-Clark in a heartbeat.

Gore-Feingold also, although I think that is less likely. But major props to Russ for *leading* in Congress. He is one of the best. Right up there with Wellstone for my money.

[mousie]

38. kicked/recommended! :)

[faithnotgreed]

39. kick for that

[Hatalles]

40. Now is the time to get this sort of info out there...

It's been reported here that there are rumors Al Gore has been weighing the pros and cons of making another run for the White House. IMHO, he's testing the waters. At a time when Bush and GOP approval has sunk to dismal lows, this is the perfect time to help reconstruct Al Gore's image with the public.

[Vox_Reason]

41. I would be more than happy to cast another vote for Al Gore

And I hope he'll give me the chance.

His speeches in the last few years have been phenomenal.

[Chomp]

43. KICK nt

[Doctor_J]

44. Would have been one of the top 5 presidents ever

Brilliant, moderate, engaged, engaging, with a granite-strong moral center, in his personal life and in the global setting. We would at this point be an admired world leader instead of scorned, ridiculed, hated, and broke.

[NYCGirl]

46. And will be. NT

[Admiral Loinpresser]

47. Washington, Lincoln, Gore.

Washington: 1) crossing the Delaware (& Valley Forge); and 2) declining to be king when elected the first president.

Lincon: 1) emancipation; and 2) saving the union.

Gore: 1) advancing the development of the Internet by perhaps decades (biggest thing since Gutenberg); and 2) leading the world on climate change (i.e. saving civilization as we know it).

JFK & RFK get honorable mention for the Cuban missile crisis.

FDR gets honorable mention for the New Deal and Lend Lease.

Teddy Roosevelt gets honorable mention for saving the buffalo from extinction and trust busting.

[Doctor_J]

49. I would give Clinton honorable mention as well

he managed to resuscitate our world standing, balance the budget, and create a bonanza of jobs despite dealing with a viscious, hostile, anti-American Congress and media. Tkae his policies without the personal failings and that's Gore. Man, what a president he would have made.