There is an absurd notion floating (or perhaps burning wild-fire-like) throughout the anti-war camp that Iraq is some invention of the Bush Administration.  Now, while I have professed many times to having been a critic of our entrance into Iraq due to what I perceived as poor (and avoidable) timing, I take offense at the notion that somehow this is Bush’s war, pawned off on the American public and the US Congress alike in some epic hoodwinking–as though there was no lead-up whatsoever during the Clinton years.

This ignores history, of course, and parces quite selectively the situation in Iraq in ways that are utterly untrue.

In fact, a great deal of time was spent by the Democrats during Clinton’s years in office (and subsequently during Bush’s years in office) in an attempt to spur one President and then encourage the next into military action against Iraq.  Mr. Clinton ordered rocket attacks, while Mr. Bush took things a little further.

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and the majority of Democrat repeatably condemned Saddam Hussein as a tyrant, a war-monger, and a supporter of international Muslim terrorism; warned that he was intent on conquering the Middle East and imposing his will on the rest of the world; and did nothing about it!

This from What Do You Believe, a rather informative blog I recently stumbled across.  The above quote is taken from a rather sprawling account of the Democratic support for action in Iraq, long before (and during) the Bush Presidency.

There are many videos.  I highly recommend them.

I also highly recommend any and all to read Mr. Clinton’s statement on Iraq, upon the signing of the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998″ which did a great deal less to actually liberate the Iraqi people than Bush’s action.  I guess action is less popular than a whole lot of hot air.  Still….

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT:

Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998.” This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are: The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq’s history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else. The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council’s efforts to keep the current regime’s behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participa–tory political system that will include all of Iraq’s diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq’s current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq’s weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well. Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 31, 1998.

It is absurd to think that the current conflict in Iraq is Bush’s war.  It is an American war against a despotic ruler that has gone horribly wrong, but is finally improving in more ways than one.

Thanks to shifts in strategy, the surge, and a new willingness to fight the bad guys by local sheiks in Iraq, we might be reaching at least a stable Iraq, if not one which will succeed right away without American troops.  So let’s keep it up.  Let’s not withdraw and send everything back into the dismal spiral it was before.  Probably things would be a whole lot worse if American troops left, and the militias were allowed to murder and make war on whoever they chose.

It is a common mistake of the anti-war crowd to spend so much time complaining about Bush, chanting peace slogans, and so forth, without honestly assessing the fallout our withdrawal would precipitate.  In the end, what does it matter if this was Bush’s war or Congress’s war or an American war?  It’s ours now, and we owe it to the world to finish the job.

So this is the introduction to a new series here on NeoConstant: The Iraq War.  This series will take a historical look at the lead-up to the war in Iraq, beginning with the Baath coup, and leading up to the 2003 invasion.

I have yet to gather the writers together, but I’m sure this will be an interesting series indeed!

Kain's major subjects of focus at NeoConstant are international strategy; support of Israel; the failure of the international community to stop genocide; the spread of American power and democracy; historical analysis; and current events both domestically and abroad. He writes here, Newsvine and his blog, IndiePundit.