After reading the recent diaries about where John Edwards and Wesley Clark stood on the issue of the Iraq War prior to its launch, I figured I would write one about Barack Obama's pre-war statements. I agree with the previous diarists that the Iraq War is one of most important issues of our time and where our candidates stood on it before it started should be an important consideration when it comes time to choose who should lead us in 2008.
The best expression of Senator Obama's views on the Iraq War comes from the speech he gave at an anti-war rally on October 26, 2002 at the Federal Plaza in Chicago. To this day, I have not heard a better speech given on this subject.
Here is the full text of his speech, which can also be found at this link:
http://www.barackobama.com/...
I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.
I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.
I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.
I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...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.
I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.
Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.
"A dumb war. A rash war". You don't get much clearer than that.
That speech was given just two weeks after the Senate voted to give President Bush the authority to use force against Iraq. I know there are those who will say that since Obama wasn't in the Senate at the time and wasn't forced to vote on the resolution, his objection is less meaningful. It's important to remember, however, that Obama was preparing to run for his Senate seat at the time he gave this speech. Not many other candidates were willing to take such a stand, so it was certainly meaningful. In the end, it was what helped thrust him into his seat, but it could have just as easily ended his political future.
I liked the way Salim Muwakkil, an editor at In These Times, described the speech on Democracy Now: "I think he gained a lot of supporters from that particular speech. He was so clear in his opposition and yet not in any way negative or he didn't -- he didn't use, you know, the traditional kind of code words that people who oppose the war were using. He did it in a way that attracted people who normally would be, you know, gung ho for military action . He said he wasn't against all wars and he kind of went against much of what was being said on the podium, but he did it in such a considerate and intelligent way that even those who wanted more raw meat were satisfied with his speech. In fact, were captivated by the way he presented himself."
I think that describes Obama's style almost perfectly, perhaps even more so now than at the time of the speech.