Skip to comments.2002 IRAQ WAR RESOLUTION (For Reference and Rebuttal)
Posted on 05/19/2004 10:20:14 PM PDT by Howlin
|IRAQ WAR RESOLUTION|
H. J. RES. 114
October 10, 2002
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;
Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;
Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;
Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;
Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';
Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations; Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people; Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;
Whereas members of al Qaida, 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; Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);
Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677';
Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'; Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
One for reference.
And secondly to once and for all put in black and white the actual resolution that the members of Congress voted for, since apparently they are all now trying to mischaracterize the exact wording of the resolution that they claim they voted for at the time.
I am specifically referring to John Kerry and Fritz Hollings.
Here are the votes:
After his retirement will we learn that Cynthia McKinney is actually Hollings' daughter?
October 11, 2002
In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.
Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.
The measure passed the Senate and House by wider margins than the 1991 resolution that empowered the current president's father to go to war to expel Iraq from Kuwait. That measure passed 250-183 in the House and 52-47 in the Senate.
Reading that thread you linked is what made me go looking for this.
If he was misled, he's an idiot.
I just can't shed a tear watching a liar self-destruct.
I have had just about E-N-O-U-G-H.
You haven't reached that piont yet? I have!
LOL, I'm with you, except that the more they open their mouths the more they destroy themselves, IF we refute them. Which is why all of your research work, such as this thread, is invaluable and making a difference. Thanks for the diligence.
Oh and not only is there a paper trial .. there is also their speeches
Their own words will come back to haunt them
We just have to cram their own bilious words down their throats.Fight them WITH their own damning words and votes.
I'm game :0)
So am I! :-)
At some point I might, maybe when Kerry recites his concession speech on November 9th.
Tears of joy baby!
#1. In 1997, when Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act, Kerry wanted boots on the ground to force regime change.
#2. In 1997, Kerry told Cokie Roberts and guests on Crossfire that regime change might have to happen without UN approval and certainly without the approval of France and Russia, I think it was, and he was okay with that. When questioned whether that meant a lack of leadership on Clinton's part, that he couldn't get UN approval, Kerry said "Not at all".
#3. Then Kerry voted to approve to go to war in Iraq after 9/11.
#4. Then Kerry started to say it was a mistake but now that we're there, we have to finish the job and it would be a disaster to leave.
#5. Now Kerry says if he's president he'd pull the troops.
Uh...did clinton have a joint res when he deployed the US army in Bosnia-Hergovenia 10 years ago or loaned our air force to the albanian muslims in 1999??
Thanks for the ping, Howlin.
I remember at the time thinking that it was a brilliant bit of strategery on the President's part--forcing a vote BEFORE the elections of that year. That way the dims had to vote the way their constituents wanted them to, instead of grandstanding their partisanship for the cameras.
They know the media will not hold them accountable. Not even FoxNews.
Every Democratic politician who says that Hussein was not a threat should have to explain why firing missiles at American pilots didn't count as repeated acts of war. If they respond that the Iraqis' firing of missiles at American pilots didn't count because they were such bad shots, then they should be forced to stand down range from a trigger-happy firing squad composed of Senator Byrd, Senator Hollings and Janet Reno.
"That would be no, Bob." (Stolen from a George Carlin routine.)
Bumping to expose BOXER SHORTS LIES
Gosh, I had forgotten I even posted this.
She is FLAT OUT lying, isn't she?
Here is an old thread somebody found about the Senate vote; see if Boxer wasn't lying!
Here is the testimony from last week:
Condi: I refer you Sen. Boxer to president's speech before the war. He talks about the threat Saddam was, not just because of WMD, but because of his support for terrorists. He paid suicide bombers to bomb Israel. He used scuds against Israel. He attacked his neighbors before. We had gone to war against him in the past. It was the total picture, Senator.
Boxer: You should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not. IT was WMD.
Here's another one from tonight:
I had forgotten I posted this
Yes...she is. And I knew some good FReeper would have evidence posted on FR. (I wasn't surprised it would be you, Howlin, lol).
Guess what...........I posted that LAST WEEK during the testimony!
A good Freeper NEVER forgets or loses a bookmark they might need later!
From your keyboard to God's ears.
I hate this witch; she's going to pay for this.
good it's on that thread; and very good it's on this thread, by itself! Paper trails, paper trails, paper trails...it's one of the things that the Rats hate most.
"Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not, but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.
-- Boxer Shorts Quote from her Excoriation of Condoleezza Rice, January 19, 2005
BOXER SHORTS IS A LIAR
Reasons for going to war, as stated in resolution:
1. Iraq's harboring of Al-Queda terrorists.
2. Iraq's support for International Terrorism.
3. Iraq's "brutal repression" of its citizens.
4. Iraq's failure to repatriate or give information
on non-Iraqi citizens detained and captured during
Gulf War I, including an American serviceman.
5. Failing to properly return property wrongfully
seized during the Kuwait invasion.
6. The attempted assassination of former
President Bush in 1993.
7. America's national security interests in
restoring peace and stability to the Persian Gulf.
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement."
-- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
Since we're referencing stuff, let's keep it all together:
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
lol....just posted that but didn't want to keep pinging you; now we have it doubly for posterity. : )
Well, you never know; we had to "prove" that we were first with the CBS memos when the bloggers blew us off.
Boxer Backed Clinton's Iraq War
* * *
In December 1998, however, after Clinton launched four days of air strikes on Iraq's suspected WMD targets, the California Democrat had a different reaction.
In quotes unearthed Tuesday afternoon by radio host Sean Hannity, Boxer claimed that Saddam had forced Clinton's hand.
"The president had no choice but to act today," she said in a statement issued by her office. "Anyone who questions the timing of his decision ignores the fact that we committed a month ago to act if [chief U.N. weapons inspector] Richard Butler reported that Saddam was not cooperating."
"These critics are blinded by political considerations," Boxer added.
On several counts:
And I only caught bits and pieces of the exchanges and wasn't taking any notes. I'm sure there is more.
Yes...and thereafter, the "pajamahadeen" was born....little did they realize that their pejorative term would later be embraced as a badge of honor! : )
Boxer on Defense and National Security
Boxer 1991 Iraq Policy: Leave Kuwait at the mercy of Saddam - On the floor of the United States Senate in 1991, the same day she voted against removing Saddam from Kuwait by force of International coalition, Boxer suggested that the allies "hold the line at Saudi Arabia" with Kuwait being left to the mercy of Saddam Hussein.
Supported Clinton's Iraq policy, Voted for Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - In contrast to her radical and vocal opposition to the military policies of the two Bush Presidents, Boxer vigorously supported Bill Clinton in all phases of Clinton's Iraq policy, including military action, claiming that critics of Clinton's Iraq responses were "blinded by political considerations."
* * *
Boxer forgets that regime change in Iraq had been official U.S. policy in Iraq since 1998, when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act.
In 2003, Clinton phoned in to CNN's "Larry King Live" during a program honoring Bob Dole on his 80th birthday. In response to a question, he offered the following commentary on Iraq and WMD:
"Let me tell you what I know. When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. That is, at the end of the first Gulf War, we knew what he had. We knew what was destroyed in the inspection process, and that was a lot. And then we bombed with the British for four days in 1998. We might have gotten it all; we might have gotten half of it; we might have gotten none of it. But we didn't know."
We didn't know. U.N. Resolution 1441 demanded that WMD be accounted for or there would be "serious consequences."
That's why we went to war, and that's why the war was justified.
Speaking of words coming back to haunt her!!! An excellent find!
She lies every time she opens her mouth; her rightous indignation is ill-founded.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.