Hillary: We gave the Iraqis an opportunity and they have failed

[BeyondGeography]

From last night's debate:

<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://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/us/politics/03demsdebate_transcript.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

So, let's get this straight. We invade a country under false pretenses, purge all the trained professionals in public life from government, fire an army, fail to set up adequate security in cities across the country, torture, kill people indiscriminately, open the floodgates for sectarian conflict and it's the Iraqis who have blown a precious opportunity.

Right then.

[gratuitous]

1. "Opportunity"?

I don't hold any brief for or against Hillary (way too early for me to make up my mind), but "opportunity" is not the first word that pops into my mind when a small, defenseless country is invaded and decimated by a superpower, its government and social structure obliterated, and an army of occupation sets up shop and engages in indiscriminate killing of civilians for four years.

Maybe it was an utterance made in the heat of a debate, and excusable. But a clarification should be made right quick, if that's so.

[BOSSHOG]

5. Agreed

I think they'd the "opportunity" to turn back the clock and have Saddam back in charge. There can be no argument that Iraqi's were better off with Saddam then with bush's christian love.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. There will be no clarification, because this is what she believes.

We've all heard it a hundred times, in bits and pieces in other venues.

This is why I will vote for her only if the rest of the party is foolish enough to make her our candidate - even with this stuff, she's better than the best of the republicans.

[Nederland]

54. I don't know

I might take Ron Paul over Hillary. Then again, Ron Paul has no chance...

[MindPilot]

9. I think Hillary has made it quite clear

that she thinks invading Iraq was and still is a good idea.

That comment coupled with her statement that we are safer under Bush, but not safe enough indicates to me that she believes that the Bush doctrine is flawed only in its execution.

[Lerkfish]

18. that appears clear to me, as well. Her objections were always that the war was waged

inefficiently, not that it was an unjust war in the first place.

[closeupready]

2. I know. She just sounds so opportunistic.

Well, "opportunistic" in terms of making political hay by kicking people when they are down.

[partylessinOhio]

3. Blame our victims for our failure. Won't fly!

We need to apologize to the Iraqi people and get the hell out.

We owe them big time for all the damage we did to their people, their environment and their infrastructure.

Step up to the plate - pay them for the damages - get our mitts off their oil.

[MindPilot]

4. Bunch of ungrateful a-holes, those Iraqis.

Maybe the US should just LEAVE.

[dave_p]

7. That is an utter scum comment

i haven't been so hard on her to date, I appreciate the inevitable candidacy BS.

But "It is the Iraqis who have failed to take advantage of that opportunity" is an utter scum comment.

Shame.

[pretty_lies]

8. Do Any Of The Likely Nominees Disagree?

There doesn't seem to be any evidence that Obama or Edwards have substantially different positions.

For that matter, these candidates all want to keep the war going indefinitely, despite misleading noise about drawing down "combat troops".

Perhaps Hillary's honest and open support for imperialism is better.

At least we know what we're getting.

-lie

[MindPilot]

11. I think you nailed it -- and welcome to DU!!

None of them have any intention of actually ending the war. If they did they wouldn't have told Bush it was OK to start it and wouldn't have given him the blank checks to keep it going.

The exceptions being those which you excluded in your subject line, those who will not get the nomination.

[pretty_lies]

16. I Was Being Overly Simplistic

It's quite possible that Hillary, Edwards and Obama want to end the war.

What I meant was that they are unlikely to take this action if elected.

Presidents don't like losing wars on their watch, and the Republicans and conservative media are already enthusiastically blaming all setbacks on Democrats.

Like Matt Taibbi said in "A Timetable for Politics as Usual" (Rolling Stone, March 2007):

My sense of this whole ballet from the start has been that with each passing season, as the antiwar rhetoric increases both among the public and in Washington, we'll see a corresponding increase in both financial and personnel commitment in the Iraq theater. The logic here is irresistible; Bush will not preside over what he perceives to be a surrender, and the Democrats will not cast a vote "against the troops" in an election season. So what we'll get is a lot of what we just saw -- non-binding antiwar votes hitched to troop increases and/or "short-term" funding boosts. It's worth noting that the same political logic that led the Bush White House to fund the war as an emergency long after it ceased to be an unexpected expenditure will now appeal to the Democrats, and for the same reason; so long as the money is in an "emergency" bill, they will be able to pretend, before voters, that the commitment is temporary.

What worries me about this state of affairs is that presidents don't like to see military losses land on their watch. If a Democrat wins in '08, bet on it, an excuse will be found to keep the troops there. The first day after her inauguration, when Hillary Clinton wakes up with a champagne hangover to hear Mark Daley (or whoever her chief of staff ends up being) tell her that 67 Marines have been slaughtered in a raid outside Ramadi, she is going to be powerfully tempted to prove that she has the stones to deal out the necessary payback. She'll ask for 10,000 extra troops and six months to "stabilize" the situation before initiating a withdrawal.

And once that happens, we'll be right back where we are now -- pretending we're against it, but without a way to actually make it happen while covering the requisite number of Washington asses. That's always what it comes down to, after all. And no matter how encouraged everyone seems to be by this withdrawal vote, I still haven't heard anyone tell me how the real pullout is going to work, politically that is. Because it's not enough that everyone knows it's necessary.

[AndyA]

10. I didn't watch the debate, so I don't know in what context that statement was made,

but it is pretty obvious we had no business going over there in the first place.

Given that fact, what she said is true in the sense that since we did start the war, the Iraqi government has been somewhat lax in getting its act together.

I wonder how the Iraqi people would respond if asked, "Would you be better off with Saddam?" The result could be interesting.

[Marnieworld]

12. wow that's so sensitive

When the streets are paved with blood, electricity is iffy, and the populace is fleeing how do you set up a gov't? It's like we crippled them and she expects them to run marathons?

Let them eat Hummus. :eyes:

[jenmito]

13. Bill O'Lielly says the same thing...

He said it during a "debate" with Carville, that we tried to "do the right thing and give the Iraqis democracy but they're not willing to fight for it." Funny-I thought we invaded Iraq to disarm them of their WMD which were a direct threat to us. NOW we invaded Iraq to give them democracy??? Right-and we're there at their invitation, too. :eyes: Oh-and we're safer but not yet safe, too.

[Judge_Mental]

14. That is a good comparison.

[jenmito]

15. Sadly, other RWers are saying the same thing...

Hillary and RWers...all saying the same things...

[pretty_lies]

17. Let's Think About This Strategically

What are your priorities?

If you want to end the war, it makes sense to support right-wing and left-wing arguments against it, to build an effective coalition.

The war is a failure, and it is contrary to the national interest and an irrelevance to the fight against Islamic terrorism - as the nascent, anti-war, right wing narrative goes. The extreme version of this is to state that the US should be non-interventionist and to allege that the war was waged on behalf of Israel, as Pat Buchanan has said.

As the left-wing antiwar narrative goes - the war is a deeply immoral, imperial crime, waged for control of resources by an elite, and perhaps supported by sectors of the public for reasons of anti-Arab racism.

Both of these criticisms contain compelling truths. And they are not mutually exclusive.

What do you believe?

[jenmito]

27. I'll tell you...

I want to end the war. But the end does NOT justify the means IMO, if it means to blame the "failure of the Iraqis" as to why we have to leave. I agree with RWers like Buchanan and Tucker who have been against the invasion from the start. When I said "Hillary and RWers" I should've clarified that I meant RWers who were FOR the invasion, like O'Reilly, Bush, etc. They're starting to blame the victims for "our" failure. I don't accept that. We were NOT in Iraq at the request of the Iraqis. They didn't ASK to be "democratized."

So I believe we shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place, I believe some neocons wanted to go in there to protect Israel and to "own" part of the Middle East (or their oil, at least), and I believe it is NOT the fault of the Iraqis at all that our govt. chose to invade their country. I believe we should get out citing that our presence is making their now-civil war worse.

[pretty_lies]

33. Let's Think About That

Is it not a good thing that people who supported the war now want to withdraw...

...even if it is under a rationale we consider immoral?

Let's take our allies where we find them, shall we?

[jenmito]

36. It IS a good thing...

that people who supported the war now want to withdraw. I just don't think it's right to blame it on the Iraqis. And Hillary wants to withdraw. The others who say the same thing she said last night DON'T want to withdraw yet. They still call it "cut and run" or "surrender."

[Phrogman]

50. Hillary is Bush in drag, expect nothing to change with her in office

and deep inside, most people know it.

[Mojambo]

19. Unbelievable ignorance and arrogance! n/t

[thereismore]

20. Repugs are trying to lay it on Iraqis, and she is doing the same. Did

they screw up the invasion of their own country? What did I miss.

[Lerkfish]

21. apparently, there is a proper way to be invaded: throwing flowers at the feet of the occupiers

and if you don't, your daughters get raped and your family is tortured and assasinated. Oh, and we take the only valuable resource you have and give it to ourselves.

[beachmom]

22. Put it this way: Maliki and Bush deserve each other.

I think she was referring to Iraqi politicians, who are just horrid, but her soundbite doesn't come out quite right. It isn't the Iraqi "people's" fault, BUT there has been a failure of leadership in the Iraqi parliament. Still, America laid the groundwork for this failure.

So what am I saying -- it was a mini-gaffe, but to say Iraqi politicians are blameless isn't the truth either.

[BeyondGeography]

23. She doesn't even narrow it down to politicians

Apparently, it's the "Iraqi people," and the "Iraqis" who get the blame in her book.

[Disturbed]

24. America doesn't fail. It's always someone else's fault.

America stands for "Truth, Justice and Freedom". If any country that is invaded doesn't accept America's values it is their fault. This will be the prevailing "Truth" coming from America's two political parties.

[IndianaGreen]

26. Sociopaths always blame someone else for their troubles

and we have a bipartisan sociopathic foreign policy.

[arewenotdemo]

42. Well put and I fully agree

Herr Wolfowitz once made a similar statement, likening Amerika's forced "democratization" of Iraq to a "test", one which he noted they may or may not "pass".

The Third Reich would have proudly employed such great thinkers.

[Tom Joad]

45. I see your point, but she is proposing that America went into help

and the Iraqi people (or leadership) blew it.
NO HILLARY. It was a war of aggression you supported from the very beginning, and the US is losing.

[IndianaGreen]

25. It's like blaming the rape victim for getting raped

Hillary panders to the jingoists among us.

[IndyOp]

32. My standard for whether it was "her" fault -

Did she rape herself? No? Then it wasn't her fault.

Did the Iraqi people do anything to deserve the occupation & genocide? No.

ALL of the people in Congress using the morally bankrupt frame provided by the GOP - the Iraqis must "stand up", the Iraqis must "meet benchmarks", the Iraqis are "having a civil war" -- this is all bullshit.

Hillary and everyone else using that frame are pandering to the jingoists among us, pandering to the ultimate vision of America - we are superior and have to sacrifice to help THOSE pitiful people...

:(

[Crunchy Frog]

28. Sort of like blaming a rape victim for not enjoying it.

:puke:

[IndyOp]

29. Exactly. Horrifying. Exactly. (n/t)

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tom Joad]

30. &**&(**(&^&^% And the horse she rode in on, too.

[NMDemDist2]

34. yeah, she pissed me off a couple times last night and that was one of them

my hubby (who isn't a junkie like me) said "I won't be voting in the primaries for any of them (he refused to designate a party and only party members can vote in primaries in this state) but I was hoping I could vote for a woman or a black in the General. If she's it, I'll pull the lever, but she's not my first choice with an attitude like that."

and he's a true moderate!

me, I'm a flaming Liberal with a capitol L and she's just pissing me off big time.

[mopinko]

35. yup, just feckin amazing.

she should try this-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1040939

[tuvor]

37. Makes me recall this cartoon.

[sojourner]

38. yup........sick isn't it?

[eridani]

39. Getting rid of Saddam Hussein---

--was a lot like chopping off someone's head to cure their migraine headaches. Those who survive the process are supposed to be grateful? Jeebus.

[welshTerrier2]

40. bush imposed a puppet gov't on Iraq and Hillary knows it

to endorse the notion bush has sold to the American people that any semblance of power has been handed over to the Iraqi people is a very, very clear indication of complicity. the only place the Iraqis have failed is that the puppet regime bush installed was not able to enforce US demands on the Iraqi Parliament or on any of the regional factions. and what are those demands? the passage of the OIL LAW that will give most of Iraq's oil revenues to private oil corporations for the next 30 years ...

one might ask Hillary why she thinks they should do that ... or has she called for all Iraqi oil revenues to go solely to the Iraqi people? I must have missed that ...

[calteacherguy]

41. That statement is indeed problematic. I'd like to hear other candidates respond to it. nt

[Tom Joad]

43. I suspect most of them would say the same thing. Because they support US imperialism

they have this orientalist racist perspective. That is why the US has gone in one military adventure after another after another.

[Tom Joad]

44. LBJ probably blamed the Vietnamese with "losing" the war.

[Tom Joad]

46. The US is losing in Iraq and the Iraqi people are going to win

They will force the US military into a retreat. and that is a wonderful thing for our world.

[fujiyama]

47. Same old shit...

I'm now convinced that NOT ONLY will she make a terrible candidate - but a crappy president as well.

Her judgment sucks. This sort of callousness is disgusting. What an opportunistic #%$^#^#.

[antiimperialist]

48. You heard it: If the Chinese invade us it's an "opportunity" not an invasion

hehe. These imperialists are funny. It's the white man's burden, you know.

[madfloridian]

49. My Republican relative said she is appealing to their side.

It makes him angry that she doesn't go for her own base. He may be Republican, but he is so over Bush now....and he is serious about Democrats looking out for their base.

That statement was meant for the 30% who still love Bush.

[JNelson6563]

51. We set the stage for anarchy

Those ingrateful bastards just don't appreciate what we have done for them! Just for that we oughta take their oil! Oh wait.....nevermind.

Julie

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuffleClaw]

53. 'the search for weapons of mass destruction' ???

meep

and she is called the DEMOCRATIC 'frontrunner' ?

[Jack Rabbit]

55. Why does that sound like a focus group talking?

Anybody want to give an opinion?