Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Judgment, Lest We Forget
It is ironic that the subject of trust in a leader's judgment, especially on the decision to wage war on Iraq, was in fact breached by Bill Clinton himself. Prior to invasion, his Gardian editorial, Trust Tony's Judgment the US ex-president turned advisor to the British PM clearly left to posterity a clear record about his own judgment was on war with Iraq. According to his own words, he states that "Saddam has destroyed some missiles but beyond that he has done only what he thinks is necessary to keep the UN divided on the use of force. The really important issues relating to chemical and biological weapons remain unresolved." "Post-war" weapons searches confirm that he misjudged the situation quite wrongly.
He also writes of the hawks, "Some of them want regime change for reasons other than disarmament, and, therefore, they have discredited the inspection process from the beginning; they did not want it to succeed." One could only wonder why, granted his recognition of the deceit in their intentions, would his wife in the Senate trust them with an authorization for the use of force. Could it be because Mrs Clinton feared opposing what Mr Clinton describes as what would be successful and swift military action when he writes, "Because military action probably will require only a few days, they believe the world community will quickly unite on rebuilding Iraq as soon as Saddam is deposed." This time, his judgment on the situation would be echoed by the infamous "Mission Accomplished" banner that was so eagerly hoisted on the USS Abraham Lincoln. Indeed, had Mr Clinton's judgment, inspite of his unmatched foreign policy experience, been better than that of George Bush and the hawks, Tony Blair would have been better advised, and so would the American people.
In all fairness, his column seems to corroborate that his wish was not an invasion as much as to put pressure on Saddam to keep the inspections under Hans Blix going. However, good intentions were indeed blinded by mis-judgment of the weapons situation in Iraq, of the behavior of the administration, and of the way the war and post-war would unfold. Ironically, at the time, it was Blair's judgment, shaped by his counsel, that he asked the public to trust. The costly consequences of such mis-judgment in countless lives, destruction of our military, loss of prestige of our nation, and trillions of dollars in cost must all be weighed against the experience the Clintons are currently boasting in the campaign.
Comments (8)
Totally bullshit! No one is born with good judgement. Your form good judgements through experience. Decision made without evidence is not judgement. It is hunch, instinct. If Barack has such good judgement, why did he get himself into the bed of Rezko? How do you know his next judgement is the one like what he made in regard to the Iraq war or the one with Rezko?
do you seriously think the people voted for the war, Kerry, Biden, Dodd, Lieberman, Edwards, Clinton, and Obama's red state buddies, all just have inferior judgement than Obama? Maybe. but a lot of your Moveon.org fellows were against the war to begin with, you think they all made better Senators or presidents than them? Gimme a break!!!
You are out of your mind!
February 1, 2008 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lest you forget that Hillary has taken money from Rezko as well. --as well as every other sleazeball lobbyist who would write her a check.
February 2, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a substantial difference between not checking out every bozo who sends you a check and Obama's being a 15 year long pal of said Bozo and when Rezko gets investigated asking him if he is a crook and believing the answer. Judgement?
March 22, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
“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.”
“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..”
- Hillary Clinton 2002, floor speech right before the war authorization.
"I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
"I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.”
– Obama 2002
Now I ask you - Where did Obama get his information about "Iraq economy in shambles"? How did he find out that its military was "a fraction of its former self"? Why did he think that the international community could contain him?
I'll tell you why - because he does independent research to find out these things!
Hillary did not read the NIE. Her floor speech was peppered with the same rhetoric that the Bush Administration spoon fed her.
This is of course just like the Tony Blair situation mentioned in this article. Hillary put faith in the CIA and her husband. Her experience as first lady CLOUDED HER JUDGMENT. This is the experience she is touting in this campaign.
Many, many dem senators did not vote for the war. Considering this is the BIGGEST MISTAKE A SENATOR COULD MAKE, and it COST THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN LIVES, not to mention MILLION IRAQIS, I would think she should be ASHAMED to even run for president.
But she is, and unlike her former opponent John Edwards, SHE WILL NOT APOLOGIZE FOR IT NOR ADMIT IT WAS A HORRIBLE MISTAKE
February 2, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, they all had inferior judgment. The majority of Congressional Democrats had good judgement--just as Obama did. Apparently a significant number of the Democrats who had bad judgement also believed they should throw a hat in the nomination ring.
Sad, really. What that means is that they view the American voter as "forgiving" the unforgivable and even rewarding it. If we, as a people, live up to this cynical assessment, then we simply deserve the leader we elect and our own decline as a nation and as a positive force in the world.
Judgment matters. Vote Obama.
February 2, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I listened online to all of the rhetoric of the House Critters prior to going to war with Iraq.
In short - all of those finely elected congress persons only had one thing to say:
I am scared of the boogeyman Saddam. Please, Messer Bush. save me.
Elected position does not equal good judgement.
And as for Lieberman...who brought him up to provide legitimacy?
February 3, 2008 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Complete BS, elliottness. Like my poem? The majority of Democratic Congress folk voted AGAINST the war and gave the same reasons Obama did--it was "dumb", there was no imminent threat, etc., etc. That's good judgment.
If you think the Iraq War was "good" judgment, then you're a Republican. :)
February 8, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary did not read the NIE
Really, is this not sufficient in and of itself?
(That the admission of misfeasance was volunteered because she found herself, at long last, cornered and bereft of any additional meretricious excuses is a nice bit of instant karma)
April 6, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment