I am having trouble understanding why Edwards is getting so much traction on kos. He seems to be considered by many to be the "anti-Iraq" candidate. It simply can't be overlooked that he made a huge "Iraq" like error on Iraq.
That in itself disqualifies him from being considered someone who can have the judgement to make the right decision on a critical issue (as in the most critical issue of our time). His apologies and admitting of mistakes just aren't good enough. He was a STAUNCH supporter of the war (see quotes below). Like a lot of candidates his whole premise was wrong. He deemed it necessary to attack Iraq because they had nukes and were going to attack us.
This premise is dead wrong. Iraq is country with a military budget 1/3 of 1% of ours. They were clearly not an imminent threat (as myself and millions of other anti-war demonstrators tried to tell people like Edwards). What makes it worse is he was on the Senate Intelligence Committee. And, even if Iraq had "nukes" of some sort, we could still contain them without having to attack. We had 2/3rds of the country under no-fly zones, inspectors on the ground, and the whole international community watching and willing to help us contain Iraq (without a pre-emptive war). Edwards not only wanted to give Bush the authority to go to war as a "last resort," he actually wanted Bush to go to war. He was happy we launched the war, and openly cheered it on when Bush did.
Edwards campaigned for the war while running for President in 2004. He attacked Dean and other "anti-war" candidates during the campaign. Now he simply washes his hands and says he was "wrong" and everyone should appreciate the fact that he can "recognize his mistakes." Pretty big mistake if you ask me, like a $500 billion one, plus many thousands of lives. In my book this disqualifies Edwards from being viewed as a serious candidate who has the correct judgement to run this country.
Here are a few quotes from Edwards:
October 8, 2004: Edwards doesn't regret his vote.
``The vote on the resolution was the right vote, even in hindsight,'' Edwards, a first-term U.S. senator from North Carolina, said in an interview aboard his campaign plane on Oct. 8 (2004). ``It was the right vote to give the president the authority to confront Saddam Hussein,'' he said.
Edwards Supported Action Against Iraq Regardless Of Any Ties To 9/11:
"But I think, separate and apart from 9/11, we have Saddam Hussein, a man who invaded another country, who started a war in 1991, who lost the war, and has, since that time, flaunted numerous, what, 16, 17 U.N. Security resolutions. He’s got weapons of mass destruction. He’s trying to get nuclear capability. This is a very serious situation, and I think it’s incumbent on us to take the action necessary to rid the world of this threat."
It is unbelievable that so many anti-war progressives now follow Edwards. He stinks of Washington to me.