Carol Moseley-Braun on War & Peace

Saddam capture has little to do with keeping Americans safe

Q: Do you agree that the Iraq war has removed a genocidal gangster, and we're installing a progressive government that will not be a threat to peace?

MOSELEY BRAUN: Well, removing the genocidal gangster-that's over, he's captured. But it had little to do with keeping the American people safe. We should have continued to search for bin Laden. We should have continued to break up Al Qaeda. We should have continued to work on breaking up the terrorist cells, some of which, operating out of northern Iraq right now, continue to threaten us.

The fact is, fear is power. We've seen a lack of focus on dealing with the fears of the American people, dealing with the real threats that we face, dealing with our domestic security in ways that will give us the ability to work with others around the world, with international organizations, to give us the law enforcement capacity to go after these criminals wherever they may be. We've lost focus on that while going off on a misadventure in Iraq.

Source: Democratic 2004 Presidential Primary Debate in Iowa Jan 4, 2004

Bush supports big contracts for friends, not troops

Q: Rumsfeld questions whether we are winning the war on terror, questions our intelligence. What is your plan for getting out of this mess?

MOSELEY-BRAUN: I opposed this war. Having said that, we have to do what we can to give troops support. Some are out there without basic supplies. And those who are injured are not getting the support they need when they come home. They're not supporting the troops, they're supporting their friends with big contracts to rebuild Iraq and make more money.

Source: Democratic Presidential 2004 Primary Debate in Detroit Oct 27, 2003

Yes on at least some of $87B for Iraq-don't cut and run

Q: [Bush asked for] $87 billion for the ongoing war on terrorism. Your vote, yes or no?

MOSELEY BRAUN: I stand with the mothers of the young men and women who are in the desert in Iraq and who right now are in the shooting gallery without even sufficient supplies to sustain themselves. It is absolutely critical that we not cut and run, that we provide our troops with what they need and that we just not blow up that country and leave it blown up. That responsibility means we will have to vote some money.

A year ago, I called on this president not to go into Iraq and I called on the Congress not to give him the authority to go into Iraq, and at the same time asked how much is this going to cost? He didn't answer the question then, he's not answering the question now. But I believe that it's going to be important for us to come up with the money to make certain that our young men & women and our reputation as leaders in the world is not permanently destroyed by the folly of preemptive war.

Source: Debate at Pace University in Lower Manhattan Sep 25, 2003

Involve UN troops in Iraq, but under US command

Q: How much authority should the US concede to win the UN mandate for a multinational force?

BRAUN: This problem was caused in the first place when Congress abdicated its Article 1, Section 8 authority under the Constitution and gave a president the right to go on a free-for-all with a preemptory attack in Iraq. But that's behind us. Bush frittered away international goodwill, our international institutions, our friends around the world. So now we're in a position of having to go back to those allies that that this administration thumbed its nose at and asked for help and burden-sharing. We need to go back and make up. We don't have to relinquish command and control. But at the same time, we have every responsibility to engage a multinational force to help us out of the quagmire in Iraq.

Source: Congressional Black Caucus Institute debate Sep 9, 2003

Strength against terrorism means focus, not bravura

Strength in the war on terrorism is not represented by bravura and bullying and striding around the world stage pushing people around. This administration will not work with others, will not ask directions. And they're spending like drunken sailors.

Strength in my mind would have been represented by a singular focus on getting the criminals who violated every American on 9/11, by working with others to hunt out these criminals wherever they might be found. And that's not what's happened under Bush.

Source: Congressional Black Caucus Institute debate Sep 9, 2003

Need to exit Iraq & focus on bin Laden

Let me mention a name that probably nobody has heard in a long time. And that's Osama bin Laden--"bin missing." We haven't been looking for him because we got off on the wrong track. And we got on the wrong track in large part because the Constitution calls on the Congress to declare war. That didn't happen in this case. And the resolution allowed this president to go off hell-bent for leather on this misadventure.

However, Americans don't cut and run. We have to support our troops in the field. So we are in a position now in which this administration has frittered away the goodwill of the international community, failed to go after Al Qaida and bin Laden, and left our troops in the field without the resources they need.

So I welcome the international community. I hope that it will allow us to extricate ourselves with honor but continue a viable war on terrorism that gets bin Laden and his pals and all the people who would do harm to the American people.

Source: Democratic Primary Debate, Albuquerque New Mexico Sep 4, 2003

Congress has the power to declare war, not President

Q: Will you repeal Bush's pre-emptive war doctrine?

A: Since WWII the Congress has essentially abdicated the power to declare war by passing resolutions authorizing the President to decide. The Congress erred in giving Bush that authority. Repealing the resolution is a bit like closing the barn door too late, but I believe that Bush's claim of a right to start a war based not on aggression but on suspicion is dangerous and ought to be rejected by the American people.

Source: MoveOn.org interview Jun 17, 2003

Iraq war costs too much when Americans are suffering

We ought to talk about the cost of this war, and how we can rebuild America. If we can have job fairs in Iraq, we ought to be able to have job fairs in South Carolina. The unemployment rate is up at 6% under this president. The budget deficits have exploded. They have ruined this economy. We are not creating new jobs or new wealth in this country. There's a health care crisis. We have all of these issues.

[The war has cost] in excess of $200 billion dollars the last time we looked. And the American people are hurting. So I think the question in this race is whether or not Democrats can steer a course for America that is more in keeping with America's interests and America's values: Building our relations, working well with others in the world, building international institutions, trying to address those problems that cause war in the first place and undermine our security in the first place.

Source: Democratic Debate in Columbia SC May 3, 2003

Voted YES on ending the Bosnian arms embargo.

Ending the Bosnian arms embargo.
Status: Bill Passed Y)69; N)29; NV)2
Reference: Bosnia Herzegovina Self-Defense Act of '95; Bill S. 21 ; vote number 1995-331 on Jul 26, 1995

Move the US Embassy to Jerusalem.

Moseley-Braun sponsored the Jerusalem Embassy Act

Corresponding House bill is H.R.1595. Became Public Law No: 104-45.
Source: Bill sponsored by 77 Senators and 78 Reps 95-S1322 on Oct 13, 1995

  • Click here for definitions & background information on War & Peace.
  • Click here for policy papers on War & Peace.
  • Click here for SenateMatch answers by Carol Moseley-Braun.
  • Agree? Disagree? Voice your opinions on War & Peace in The Forum.
Other candidates on War & Peace: Carol Moseley-Braun on other issues:
IL Gubernatorial:
Rod Blagojevich
IL Senatorial:
Alan Keyes
Barack Obama
Jack Ryan
James Durkin
Paul Simon
Peter Fitzgerald
Richard Durbin

George W. Bush
(Republican for President)
V.P.Dick Cheney
(Republican for V.P.)
Sen.John Kerry
(Democratic nominee for Pres.)
Sen.John Edwards
(Democratic nominee for V.P.)
Ralph Nader
(Reform nominee for Pres.)
Peter Camejo
(Reform nominee for V.P.)
David Cobb
(Green nominee for Pres.)
Michael Badnarik
(Libertarian nominee for Pres.)
Michael Peroutka
(Constitution nominee for Pres.)
2004 Senate Races:
(AK)Knowles v.Murkowski v.Sykes
(AR)Holt v.Lincoln
(AZ)McCain v.Starky
(CA)Boxer v.Jones v.Gray
(CO)Coors v.Salazar v.Randall v.Acosta
(CT)Dodd v.Orchulli
(FL)Castor v.Martinez
(GA)Isakson v.Majette v.Buckley
(IA)Grassley v.Small v.Northrop
(IL)Obama v.Keyes
(IN)Bayh v.Scott
(KY)Bunning v.Mongiardo
(LA)John v.Vitter
(MD)Mikulski v.Pipkin
(MO)Bond v.Farmer
(NC)Bowles v.Burr
(ND)Dorgan v.Liffrig
(NH)Granny D v.Gregg
(NV)Reid v.Ziser
(NY)Schumer v.Mills v.McReynolds
(OH)Fingerhut v.Voinovich
(OK)Carson v.Coburn
(OR)Wyden v.King
(PA)Hoeffel v.Specter
(SC)DeMint v.Tenenbaum
(SD)Daschle v.Thune
(UT)Bennett v.Van Dam
(VT)Leahy v.McMullen
(WA)Murray v.Nethercutt
(WI)Feingold v.Michels
Civil Rights
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Social Security
Tax Reform

Other Senators
House of Representatives
SenateMatch (matching quiz)
Senate Votes (analysis)
House Votes