Let's recap some of the antiwar sentiments, shall we?
On the eve of battle, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., declared himself "saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war; saddened that we have to give up one life because this president couldn't create the kind of diplomatic effort that was so critical for our country."
On April 2, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said: "I'm not going to get into the operational details of the war, except to say we should get out. The appropriate action right now to spare the lives or our men and women who serve, to spare the lives of innocent Iraqis, is for the U.N. to come in, the U.S. to step back ..."
Presidential candidate Howard Dean said, "I don't think we can win the White House if we vote for the president's unilateral attack on Iraq and then come to California and say we're against the war."
Eric Alterman, writing in the Nation magazine, asked just days before Iraqis began celebrating in the streets, "Is Wolfowitz really so ignorant of history as to believe the Iraqis welcome us as their ‘hoped-for liberators'?"
Former NBC correspondent Peter Arnett said: "The first plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance. Now they are trying to write another war plan. Clearly the American war planners misjudged the determination of Iraqi forces. And I personally do not understand how that happened, because I've been here many times and in my commentaries on television I would tell the Americans about the determination of the Iraqi forces. ... But me, and others who felt the same way, were not listened to by the Bush administration."
Columnist Joe Klein offered on April 6: "The military campaign has been a success, but it is far from clear that victory in Iraq will be a net positive in the larger war on terrorism or even, ultimately, that it will be seen as an American foreign policy success. Indeed, two of the basic rationales for the war -- that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that the Iraqi people were eager to be liberated -- have proved more complicated on the ground."
David R. Henderson of the Independent Institute warned, "The way to make it more likely that weapons of mass destruction will be used on the U.S. is to have our government continue poking its military stick in hornets' nests around the world."
On Aug. 25, 2002, columnist and television host Chris Matthews predicted, "This invasion of Iraq, if it goes off, will join the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Desert One, Beirut and Somalia in the history of military catastrophe."
Nelson Mandela said: "If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don't care for human beings. ... One power with a president who has no foresight and cannot think properly, is now wanting to plunge the world into a holocaust."
Professor and peace activist Keith Watenpaugh traveled to Baghdad before the war as a part of a campaign to drop the sanctions. He was opposed, he explained, "to the arrogant American position that we know what's best for the Iraqi people."
Columbia Professor of Anthropology Nicholas DeGenova said, "The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military." He added that he'd like to see "a million Mogadishus." Joel Engel of The Weekly Standard reports seeing a banner held aloft at an antiwar rally: "We support our troops when they shoot their officers."
And last week, Robert Wright said this in the online magazine Slate: "As the war drags on, any stifled sympathy for the American invasion will tend to evaporate. As more civilians die and more Iraqis see their ‘resistance' hailed across the Arab world as a watershed in the struggle against Western imperialism, the traditionally despised Saddam could gain appreciable support among his people. So the Pentagon's failure to send enough troops to take Baghdad fairly quickly could complicate the postwar occupation to say nothing of the war itself."