I've seen Hillary's decision to support the Iraq War Resolution criticized here many times. I was asked why I support her, despite this vote (given my moniker), so I wanted to address my support for her candidacy.
As someone who was looking out for the viability of Hillary’s Presidential candidacy, I would have recommended her vote for the Iraq War Resolution for three reasons:
The United States, following the British example since the end of World War I, had a history of supporting military strongmen in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein was just one example of this kind of recipient of American support, and the Shah of Iran was another. For most of the twentieth century, this worked to the benefit of American interests, specifically energy interests.
Whereas members of al Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;
Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to "work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge" posed by Iraq and to "work for the necessary resolutions," while also making clear that "the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable";
In retrospect, I think most Americans understand that the Bush Administration’s invasion of Iraq was much less about the alleged War on Terror than it was a settling of old scores by Neocons, despite the above (in retrospect rather Machiavellian) enumeration. When Bush was elected in 2000, I expected an invasion of Iraq during his presidency. I was amongst the demonstrators in San Francisco during the buildup to the military effort to liberate Kuwait.
October 2002:
"While 67 percent of respondents in the Times/CBS poll said they supported the use of military force to remove Saddam Hussein. . ."
February 2003:
Only 27% opposed military action, the smallest percentage since the polls began in April of 2002.
March 2003:
"An ABC News/Washington Post poll taken after the beginning of the war showed a 62% support for the war. . ."
Graphic of the dynamic:
Hindsight is 20/20. If the question is: Why do I support Hillary when I should oppose anyone who signed onto the Iraq War Resolution? The answer is that I was a supporter before the Iraq War, and while I did not agree with the decision, I was sympathetic to her reasoning behind the decision.