HeadlinesWe pick, you click.

Tom Hayden

On behalf of anti-war activists: You’re welcome, America

As the United States completes its withdrawal from Iraq, it is worth pausing to remember the determined peace activists who opposed the war from the start, including one who took up their cause and became president.

On Friday, some of them will gather in Chicago at the Federal Plaza, where in October 2002 Barack Obama, then a member of the Illinois Senate, stepped onto the stage to oppose the looming Iraq war. The plaza should be remembered as the place where the long march to peace began…

Some peace activists view the fact that thousands of advisors and contractors will remain in Iraq on the U.S. Embassy payroll as evidence of a secret plan to continue the war by other means. But the war is as over as a war can be, and the peace movement should celebrate. Removing troops from Iraq will save tens of billions of dollars a year, and it will also save lives.

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Yawn. Fortunately most Americans understand the world is not a peaceful place in spite of all your wishing it were so Tom.

Peace through strength.

prodigalson on December 16, 2011 at 9:06 PM

Hey, Tom Hayden! How’s the douche business doing these days, Tom?

Scribbler on December 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM

On behalf of folks who actually served overseas: go f$@#! yourself.

While I’m not a fan of the US attempting to bring democracy to backwards savages, we got rid of a disgusting dictator that previous administrations had actually helped. Se it was more like righting a wrong.

Living4Him5534 on December 16, 2011 at 9:09 PM

^^^Can’t believe some of you imbeciles are still defending the disastrous Iraq War.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Thank you? You mean all of the radicals are keeping their promise and moving Canada?

Smedley on December 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM

I’ll never forget that we liberated a prison filled with little boys and girls. Sends a shudder through me even after all these years, just thinking about it.

Saddam Hussein did some bad things too.

Hayden, what a knob!

Scribbler on December 16, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Tom’s fellow travelers sure got quiet after November 4, 2008.

Christien on December 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Now that`s how you win people over to your side of the issue. :-P

ThePrez on December 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Yes, it was the anti-war activists who brought democracy to Iraq. Good job pacifists; now get to work on Iran. And NorKo.

BKeyser on December 16, 2011 at 9:19 PM

I may be mistaken, but wasn’t it the Bush administration that negotiated the SOFA that set the end of this year as the withdrawal date for U.S. forces?

Mitoch55 on December 16, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Now that`s how you win people over to your side of the issue.
ThePrez on December 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM

:)
- entered on a lie (Iraq had no WMDs)
- More American soldiers dead in Iraq than those dead on 9/11.
- Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead. (I know you don’t care about civilian deaths, but the equivalent to thirty 9/11s happening to one country in less than a decade means something to me.)
- Still an Islamic republic not significantly more friendly than Hussein.
- Power vacuum in the region that benefits Iran.
- Cost somewhere between $1 and $4 trillion dollars.
- et cetera

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Bugger off, commie.

rbj on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Tom’s fellow travelers sure got quiet after November 4, 2008.

Christien on December 16, 2011 at 9:17 PM

Not so much, they inhabit the White House, as czars of this and that and numerous Cabinet positions.

tommy-t on December 16, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

So that makes an uncalled for insult of people you don`t know o.k? I`m not arguing against your position, just you being, well let`s say, tactless.

ThePrez on December 16, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Go to hell.

Blake on December 16, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Still pushing the lie on WMDs, I see. The Left has no shame!

OldEnglish on December 16, 2011 at 9:32 PM

So that makes an uncalled for insult of people you don`t know o.k? I`m not arguing against your position, just you being, well let`s say, tactless.
ThePrez on December 16, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Eh, I apologize. It was more towards the second and third commenters who were a bit more tactless than my original comment, calling Tom Hayden a “douche” and telling him to go “go f$@#! yourself.”

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:34 PM

BTW, the mistake was made in 1991. We should not have stopped short of Saddam’s palace.

OldEnglish on December 16, 2011 at 9:36 PM

America owes a debt of gratitude to the activists who opposed the Iraq war from the start, and who kept the pressure on.

On behalf of my military husband… You’re all asses!

melle1228 on December 16, 2011 at 9:37 PM

They should throw themselves a victory parade, since no one else will.

Christien on December 16, 2011 at 9:39 PM

Ummmm, Mr. Hayden? The war in Iraq ended on the timetable set by George W. Bush, not Barack Obama. It was Bush who set the 2011 date. Obama campaigned on a faster withdrawal and closing Gitmo.
How’s that working out for you?

Curmudgeon on December 16, 2011 at 9:48 PM

The last I heard, Tom Hayden was sucking dicks against his will in prison, or something. When did he get out?

jaime on December 16, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Eh, I apologize. It was more towards the second and third commenters who were a bit more tactless than my original comment, calling Tom Hayden a “douche” and telling him to go “go f$@#! yourself.”

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:34 PM

When I first saw your comment it irritated me as typical leftie drivel—not worthy of response. However, if you have no problem with Tom SDS Hayden and his history well that is very telling. In fact comments two and three were a little too mild for my tastes.

arnold ziffel on December 16, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Tom Hayden? He is alive too? I thought he and Billy Ayers should have been dead by now.

BL@KBIRD on December 16, 2011 at 9:59 PM

^^^Can’t believe some of you imbeciles are still defending the disastrous Iraq War.

No we are responding to a bunch of idiot protestors who think that they did something significant. Tom Hayden is a douche, and can go &*^% himself.

Some of us know what was lost in the war. We went to funerals; we watched friends families torn apart by loss. That doesn’t mean that some idiot who sat on his a$$ in America can claim victory for griping and make political points!

melle1228 on December 16, 2011 at 10:00 PM

FUTH

turfmann on December 16, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Nothing deserves the gratitude of a thankful nation more than disloyal opposition.

/

Christien on December 16, 2011 at 10:00 PM

I have plenty of problems with Tom Hayden, I don’t like him very much at all. I’m still opposed to the Iraq War though; Hayden’s views are irrelevant to me.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:01 PM

- et cetera

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

Too early to tell. It may have been a brilliant stroke of adventurism.

John the Libertarian on December 16, 2011 at 10:01 PM

Good job lefties. How many years did it take?

Some peace activists view the fact that thousands of advisors and contractors will remain in Iraq on the U.S. Embassy payroll as evidence of a secret plan to continue the war by other means. But the war is as over as a war can be

Thousands of Americans are still there. It is not over.
Spin all you want lefties.

–

Lord….you do realize your bullshit about the “WMD lie” is a lie…you now know what that makes you right?

CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:06 PM

There is no point in responding to “lord.” Open registration brought along some imbeciles that throw up keith olbermann talking points to this great site. Think of it as accidently stepping on sh*t while at the park, you don’t go back and argue w/ it…..

As far as Hayden goes, the man is still desperate for attention. Being an idiot decades ago brought him what he was lacking in childhood.

irishinfidel on December 16, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Lord….you do realize your bullshit about the “WMD lie” is a lie…you now know what that makes you right?
CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:06 PM

What part am I lying about?
“Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs, but asserted Iraq had an intention to pursue those programs if UN sanctions were ever lifted.[15] Bush later said that the biggest regret of his presidency was “the intelligence failure” in Iraq,[16] while the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration “misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq”.[17] A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, “then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war”.[18]“

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:11 PM

What do you mean, kept the pressure on! Once the O-hole was in office the pink people disappeared! They were even less in evidence over Libya! Also, what about our involvement in Africa (Uganda) killing Christians? Where are the protest marches?

Bulletchaser on December 16, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Open registration brought along some imbeciles that throw up keith olbermann talking points to this great site.
irishinfidel on December 16, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Tehe. At least use a more original insult — I already used the ‘imbecile’ insult earlier this thread. But seriously though, if you disagree with anything I say, feel free to provide a rebuttal rather than call me names.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:14 PM

Lord so because one person claims he himself lied they all did and Bush did? The reality is that we entered Iraq for more reasons than just WMDs. Of course you know that. I can tall you are a smart cookie. Again you know what that makes you right?

You’re a scumbag and a liar.

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]
Iraq’s noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a “threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region.”
Iraq’s “brutal repression of its civilian population.”
Iraq’s “capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people”.
Iraq’s hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
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.
Iraq’s “continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations,” including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.
The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:15 PM

Lord no we did not enter on a lie and just because one guy claims he lied does not make it so and we both know there were other reasons for the war. Of course you knew that. You’re as dishonest as they come.

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]
Iraq’s noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a “threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region.”
Iraq’s “brutal repression of its civilian population.”
Iraq’s “capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people”.
Iraq’s hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
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.
Iraq’s “continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations,” including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.
The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:17 PM

- More American soldiers dead in Iraq than those dead on 9/11.
- Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead. (I know you don’t care about civilian deaths, but the equivalent to thirty 9/11s happening to one country in less than a decade means something to me.)
- Still an Islamic republic not significantly more friendly than Hussein.
- Power vacuum in the region that benefits Iran.
- Cost somewhere between $1 and $4 trillion dollars.
- et cetera

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

You really lack logic. It is not a numbers game it is about defending our country and interests. You’re thinking is quite simplistic. Gotta love your range of the costs . You must be an awesome accountant.
Oh and et cetera….well you got us there. Good job.

You are the talking point king. Congrats!!

CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:21 PM

The war was won when Bush gave the hippies the middle finger and hit the gas. Sure, Maliki is corrupt, but look at Obama. You’re welcome.

The Count on December 16, 2011 at 10:22 PM

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:14 PM

and of course you know there were many reasons for going to war. Of course if you are just playing dumb just google 2002 Iraq Resolution.

Your dishonest and it doesn’t bother you. Why is that? You just dig in deeper.

CW on December 16, 2011 at 10:23 PM

As the United States completes its withdrawal from Iraq, it is worth pausing to remember the determined peace activists who opposed the war from the start, including one who took up their cause and became president.

…enabling death, destruction, and tyranny the world over.

Count to 10 on December 16, 2011 at 10:27 PM

You really lack logic. It is not a numbers game it is about defending our country and interests.

Of course. But how was invading Iraq to the tune of trillions of dollars defending our country and interests?

Gotta love your range of the costs . You must be an awesome accountant.

There’s a lot of different estimates, it’s not like there’s a definitive number cost. The DoD, Brown University, Joseph Stiglitz, and the CBO are a few agencies that have all released reports that have different results (between $1 trillion and $4 trillion).

Oh and et cetera….well you got us there. Good job.

Thanks bro. It was to indicate that the list wasn’t exhaustive.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:29 PM

The Left has no shame!

OldEnglish on December 16, 2011 at 9:32 PM

It was (and still is) the left that emboldened the enemy, lengthened the war, and increased the number of deaths of American and coalition forces. And you’re right. They have no shame.

Connie on December 16, 2011 at 10:34 PM

^^^Can’t believe some of you imbeciles are still defending the disastrous Iraq War.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Hey…a new Obama-lapping nitwit on HotAir. Great…

Jaibones on December 16, 2011 at 10:34 PM

I guess you can say Kerry and Hillary lied our way into Iraq too, since they had access to the same intel. And, I guess we’re supposed to believe that Obama, who thinks nothing of unauthorized assassinations in Pakistan or illegal wars in Libya, would have been steadfast in his opposition to the Iraq war had he not been community agitating in Chicago while code pink was only beginning to organize.

The Count on December 16, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Hey…a new Obama-lapping nitwit on HotAir. Great…
Jaibones on December 16, 2011 at 10:34 PM

anti-Iraq War = pro-Obama

Interesting conclusion.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:43 PM

- entered on a lie (Iraq had no WMDs)

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 9:25 PM

I guess that would make all of those congressional democrats, not the least of which include John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and Joe Biden, who had access to the same intel and endorsed the operation liars also, right?

And, I guess we’re also supposed to believe that Obama, who thinks nothing of unauthorized assassinations in Pakistan or shirking congress to invade Libya, would have been steadfast in his opposition to the Iraq war had he not been community agitating in Chicago when the anti-war movement was only beginning to organize.

The Count on December 16, 2011 at 10:48 PM

anti-Iraq War = pro-Obama

Interesting conclusion.

Lord on December 16, 2011 at 10:43 PM

You might not be an Obama sycophant, but I very much disagree w/your logic about the Iraq war.

Let me ask you something. If someone says they have weapons, they hate you, and they will use those weapons the first chance they get against you,—-and your brother just got killed by a surrogate of said a-hole, how much more do you need?

arnold ziffel on December 16, 2011 at 10:53 PM

The left only opposed Vietnam when the draft kicked in and rich kids were at risk of going to war. The left hated Bush and Iraq was a fig leaf, hiding their anti-Americanism. With no draft and their candidate in office, this is the best they can come up with. Figures.

Chockblock on December 16, 2011 at 11:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2