First Gulf War Resolution

[angus]

Question comes from a John Kerry vote.

well, it was 48-52 in the senate I believe, and the arguments offered by the opposition were economic in nature.  and we did hit a recession which cost Bush the election a year and a half later.  So, it's not like Kerry was out there by himself.  This resolution was much more controversial than the one eleven years later.  And the senate votes reflect that.  I voted NO on your poll, because I misread the question.  I felt at the time it was a bad idea, and, in fact, wrote my senator, LLoyd Bentsen about it, and he promptly wrote me back saying he'd definitely vote against authorizing force against Iraq at the time.

Things have changed since then, and many democrats who voted against Gulf I, voted in favor of Gulf II.  Try to keep these things in context.  I hope Bush wins, but I hope he wins for the right reasons and not out of a sense of paranoia.  Kerry is not the right man at this time, but he's not a lunatic or a coward. 

[angus]

The UN provides fascinating statistics, and badly needed food redistriubution.  I think a few dollars a year from every rich person in every rich nation is a small price to pay for the wonderful statistics and social research opportunities.  Not to mention food and drug aid.  Why is everyone so suddenly down on the United Nations?  Clearly, it was an invention of Churchhill and Roosevelt as a means to legitimize Anglo-American hegemony and control in the world.  But it has evolved into a fact-gathering and humanitarian aid body since then, with a mind of its own.  I'd agree that the UN should never involve itself in policing.  Leave that to the US marines or the British Army, or coalitions thereof.  Also, it should stay out of politics.  But, as a body dedicated to social research and feeding the poor and providing medicine to the infirm, and statistics to the rich, it has earned its keep, IMHO.