War With Gore?
I wrote here earlier that it was arguably true that we might not have invaded Iraq had Al Gore won the presidency back during that disputed election. Reason magazine seems to make a good argument against me in an article that starts out describing efforts by the Democrats to discredit LP candidate Gary Johnson.
More specifically, pointing to the Gore/Bush election to show how voting third party can lead to war. I'm glad Reason staff recall Gore's warlike history, which isn't unlike Clinton's. He voted to invade Iraq and has a history of threatening Iraq:
"In September of 2002, Al Gore, then still a possible Democratic presidential contender, warned of the perils of acting unilaterally against Iraq. He urged Bush to take his case to the Security Council and ask for a resolution demanding "prompt, unconditional compliance by Iraq within a definite period of time." And if the Security Council failed? "Other choices"—Gore meant force—"remain open." After all, "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
In other words, Bush did pretty much what Gore recommended in seeking a Security Council resolution and used Gore's "other choices" after the resolutions failed.
Al Gore, as well as Democrats in general, have proven to be anything but dovish in world affairs.