Was the first Gulf War justified?

[ButterflyBlood]

Poll question: Was the first Gulf War justified?

while this doesn't directly relate to the primary apparentely it was brought up due to Kerry and thus locked in GD and belongs here.

so anyway, was Kerry right or wrong to vote against it?

[lcordero]

1. NO

Saddam had his beef with Kuwait because Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq's territory. Saddam went, on his knees and with hat in hand, and grovelled, "mother may I?" to April Glaspie, Glaspie said "yes you may."

Saddam is a federal employee that got stabbed in the back.

Kerry was right on his first vote.

[ButterflyBlood]

6. not that I agree with the war but

Saddam getting approval from Poppy's corrupt adminstration doesn't make it right.

[lcordero]

12. the point to this was that Saddam was set up, stabbed in the

back, and bent over without the benefit of KY.

[poskonig]

2. The poll is vague.

You ask if the Gulf War is justified for the lead question.

Then you ask if Kerry was right or wrong for some unspecified vote.

[ButterflyBlood]

7. I could've made it a little more clear

basically some people here are attacking him for voting against the first Gulf War and voting for the recent invasion. So I'm asking if the first one was justified, and therefore, was Kerry right or wrong to vote against it.

[Wonk]

16. Remove or reword the final sentence. That's what muddles it.

Either that or reword the subject line.

[Warpy]

3. Hussein had offered to pull out of Kuwait

...in exchange for a middle east peace summit two weeks before the war started. Daddy Bush wanted the glory of sending working class kids to waste a couple of third world countries, had already assembled an impressive coalition, and didn't want to keep fighting what at the time was called the "wimp factor," something he'd been stuck with all through his presidency, rightly or wrongly.

Gulf War I was unnecessary. The only positive thing about it was that it had been largely funded by the Saudis and other allies, so it didn't fall as heavily on the backs of taxpayers as Gulf War II.

[auburnblu]

17. Well if Saddam said it, damn I trust him

Hell, Saddam even double crossed an "enlightened" one, remember the Sean Penn trip. Why do people think that you can trust a dictator. I am sure anyone who lived in Kuwait was probably pretty thrilled to see the U.S. attack.

Heck, was U.S. involvement in Bosnia justified. Maybe we should all celebrate that the U.S. did nothing in Rwanda, oh sure a lot of people were butchered, but hey non-involvement was the "enlightened" thing to do.

[eridani]

29. Who said you had to trust him?

If he doesn't leave, then you attack. BTW, you might google 'Highway of Death' to see the American destruction of the fleeing conscripts on their way to join the anti-Saddam rebellion.

[mmm]

21. you are correct, that war never should have happened

[John_H]

4. Kerry Supporters: save me a google.

What was his rationale for voting against it?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

32. No rush to war

He wanted to build support for and maybe even avoid it somehow.

[hellhathnofury]

5. Yes, aggression against another nation is unacceptable except...

in cases of self-defense or pre-emption of an imminent attack.

Kerry was dead wrong.

Did we learn nothing from WWII? Appeasement doesn't work.

[eridani]

9. Saddam tried everything in the appeasment line

and it damn well didn't keep the world bully from trashing his country anyway. So yes, appeasement sure doesn't work.

[auburnblu]

19. Tried everything

Care to explain that to the Clinton administration that had to put up with Saddam kicking inspectors out in 1998.

I guess in your world Saddam is an enlightened hero, but he did not go out of his way to appease anyone. The U.S. appeased Europe and Russia and did not overthrow Saddam in 1991. That appeasement cost the lives of who knows how many in Iraq at Saddam's hands.

[eridani]

27. Saddam did not kick out any inspectors

They left so that they didn't get bombed by Clinton.

He's no hero, though he did offer twice to withdraw from Kuwait. That's appeasement. (BTW, that was li'l Donnie Rumsfeld who visited Saddam in 1984 with the gold spurs as a gift from Ronnie Raygun, not me. I did my bit writing to congresscritters to pass legislation to block aid to Saddam in the 80s--they did, and Reagan and Bush I vetoed it--and human vegetables who couldn't be bothered to put their remotes long enough to do the same have no right to an opinion on the subject.)

Saddam was well on his way to being overthrown by his own people in 1991, and the reason that did not happen was that the US intervened directly on his side.

[RummyTheDummy]

33. Correction:

It wasn't Sadam's country. Iraq belonged to the people of Iraq, or it did before Hussein stole it from them. Or was he elected?

[eridani]

34. Only in the sense that Paul Bremer was elected n/t

[isbister]

14. Huh?

"aggression against another nation is unacceptable except in cases of self-defense or pre-emption of an imminent attack. Kerry was dead wrong."

If you believe this

aggression against another nation is unacceptable except in cases of self-defense or pre-emption of an imminent attack.

Then you believe Kerry was dead right.

[isbister]

18. Re: Did we learn nothing from WWII?

Yes we learned the bush's were selling out the best interests of America for money as far back as WWII.

[joshcryer]

8. Yes, but... sort of no.

We should've never given Saddam any indication that we wouldn't care if he invaded. That was our problem there, not that we invaded with support from other countries.

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. People actually voted YES????

OMG! What has happened here? I'm speechless, :cry:

[lcordero]

15. and there were protests all over the place back then

the difference in between now and then is that we have the internet and we can find the truth by using it.

[isbister]

11. Kerry was right

on Gulf I

[TexasPatriot]

13. Considering i almost got arrested

protesting that thing... and for all intents and purposes committed an act of sedition calling for people to burn things (i was rather young and fiery in those days)...

no. sorry. it was total bs.

and when Gore voted for that thing it pissed me off to no end. In fact - it was the reason i didnt support him for president.

Kerry gets points from me for opposing it.

[youngred]

20. justified maybe

was it political too, you bet.

[Bucky]

22. Despite Kuwait's tyranny, we needed to stop Saddam and his masters

The BFEE who armed that madman in Iraq had to be stopped. They told that bastard he could only steal a thin strip of the Kuwaiti oil patch and the SOB took the whole dang country! Like, what if I hired some thug to steal my neighbor's rose bushes and the hoodlum ended up swiping their TV set as well. Such mad men MUST be stopped.

[goodhue]

23. No

But at least it was technically legal unlike the current war which is illegal under basic international law.

John Kerry was in good company with that vote. I was very proud that my then Senator Paul Wellstone voted against the first Iraq war as well. I wish Dean would stop saying he supported that war. It wins him no points in my book.

[On the Road]

24. The Reason I Voted "Yes"

is that when a nation invades another nation with the relatively small provocation that Kuwait gave (slant drilling), it is justified for the international community to repel the invading force.

I agree that Bush (at the very least) gave ambiguous messages to Saddam about the US attitude toward an invasion. I also agree that Bush wanted a war and made sure Saddam did NOT withdraw or negotiate a settlement (Bush did not even guarantee that retreating Iraq troops would be safe from attack).

So while a war was justified in that situation, Bush Sr. should still be faulted for his conduct. The war was probably unnecessary.

[HuskerDem]

25. I voted yes, but BARELY

I felt it was primarily about oil then and I haven't seen spit to change my mind since.

[GreenArrow]

26. No

It was not justified; it was trumped up bullshit just like the one currently ongoing. Kerry was right to vote against it. And he was wrong to vote in favor of IWR.

[Metrix]

28. These were the nay votes on Persian Gulf resolution

January 12, 1991
Nays (47)

Democrats (45 or 82%)
Adams, Akaka, Baucus, Bentsen, Biden, Bingaman, Boren, Bradley, Bumpers, Burdick, Byrd, Conrad, Daschle, DeConcini, Dixon, Dodd, Exon, Ford, Fowler, Glenn, Harkin, Hollings, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerrey, Kerry, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Metzenbaum, Mikulski, Mitchell, Moynihan, Nunn, Pell, Pryor, Riegle, Rockefeller, Sanford, Sarbanes, Sasser, Simon, Wellstone, Wirth

Republicans (2 or 5%)
Grassley, Hatfield

[HazMat]

31. tells you something about Howard

He held a position contrary to most of the party and it's values. Only the most conservative Dems voted for the Gulf War (Gore was very conservative back then), which was far less justified than the Iraq War.

Kerry voted no to avoid the appearance of American agression in Iraq. After all, the situation had nothing to do with American national security, so therefore was a UN issue. BFEE wanted that war in a big way for many reasons - oil, re-election, neocon agenda, etc. Saddam became a real threat to the US only AFTER the Gulf War. Clinton and the Dems were left with the mess, and had no choice to deal with it. Kerry supported Clinton's action in '98, which is consistent with his yes vote in 2001.

[mvd]

30. Kerry was right

A war might have been justified, but we shouldn't have been involved yet. Oil interests were at stake. It was a Middle Eastern thing. I've only supported one of the last three major conflicts: the Afghanistan one.

[ConsAreLiars]

35. I opposed all three

because each was led by people who were completely amoral in their objectives and methods. Eviscerating the Taliban was a worthy goal, but these Cons aided and supported them until the pipeline negotiations broke down, and the fundie's base of support now is as strong as ever, even though they do not now occupy the palace in Kabul. De-fanging Al Qaeda is worthwhile, but that war built them up, enhanced their prestige and recruiting campaign, and validated their accusations against the US. Ideological fanaticism is not defeated by bombing campaigns.

[mvd]

39. We did weaken them temporarily

And took away a country where they controlled things. I buy your prestige and organization comments more in regards to Saddam than Al Qaeda, because our goal really is war against Al Qaeda. We just seemed to forget about Al Qaeda afterwards, and now they are strengthening again.

[Terwilliger]

36. No...Saddam was given no warning that the US would react to Kuwait

I believe the threat to Saudi Arabia was also exagerrated in that conflict, and myriad other reasons why it should never have happened.

[ConcernedCanuk]

37. Suggestion, lock and repost ? only 30% of the voters have posted

.
.

and I answered NO, but THEN, after I voted

- I noticed the SECOND Question, was Kerry right to vote against it (I suppose that means against the war)

I sorta doubt that DUers are almost divided 50 /50 on this issue

but that what it appears to be - -

Confused Canuk

[ConsAreLiars]

38. Indeed. What was the Poll question.

Iraq War #1 right (Y/N)]
or
No vote right (Y/N)
or
Kerry right or wrong (Y/N) ... huh?


And the results mean what?

ButterflyBlood, go back, figure out which question you want to ask, and re-post the poll.