Posted on 01/18/2007 4:49:43 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
By Jonathan Beale
BBC News, Washington
Democrats say Mr Bush is not engaging with Iran
A bipartisan group of US congressmen have put forward legislation to prevent the president attacking Iran without the authorisation of Congress.
The move comes amid concern at George W Bush's attitude towards Iran.
He has recently decided to ratchet up the pressure on Tehran over what he calls unhelpful behaviour in Iraq.
A second navy task force has recently been sent to the Persian Gulf and last week US forces arrested Iranian officials in northern Iraq.
Democrats have already expressed concern about Mr Bush's decision to confront Iran rather than to engage it diplomatically.
Recent events have only heightened fears about his intentions.
Containing ambition
The bipartisan group of 11 congressmen, led by a Republican, have put forward legislation that states that no previous resolution passed by Congress authorises a US attack on Iran.
One of the Democrats who supports the legislation said that a new resolution was needed because the Bush administration had lied so many times in the run up to the Iraq war.
But it may prove more of a symbolic move as, to become law, it would need the support of the Senate and the House of Representatives and to be signed by the president himself.
US officials have been playing down of attacking Iran.
The US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, who has been meeting Arab leaders, said that no-one wanted another military conflict in the region.
But Mr Gates defended the US military build-up as a way of containing Iran's ambitions.
Oh this will really help.....NOT!
No names mentioned...haven't checked Drudge....maybe Walter Jones of North Carolina....
Maybe Bush ought to call Congress's bluff on these non binding resolutions and publically declare that he will treat them as binding. Put the ball in the Democrats court.
"But it may prove more of a symbolic move as, to become law, it would need the support of the Senate and the House of Representatives and to be signed by the president himself."
And the chances of that happening are lessee....zero, nil, nonexistent, zip, nada, etc.
You know, President Bush could have a very fruitful, productive, and yes.... highly enjoyable.... last two years in office if he would recognize that you can't sing kumbayah with people who have a visceral hatred for you.
The Prez knows he doesn't need to attack Iran. All he has to do is take the shackles off our buddies in Israel.
Hagel??
When I see Congressman I think member of the House ....but since the author is BBC ...it could be Senator Hagel.
..wonder why they didn't include the name....that is what leads me to believe this is another effort..
War Powers Act, no block possible. Only after the fact does Congress get to weigh in. But I agree, call their bluff, make them go on record.
..wonder why they didn't include the name....that is what leads me to believe this is another effort..
There was another article on this yesterday but I can't remember the title of the thread. I said Hagel because he was on TV whining about the war in Iraq.
George Bush persuasion "walk quietly but carry a big stick".
The "no names" persuasion "walk quietly and hope for the best".
They don't seem to be getting the message.....
Absolutely and in front of all of us!
After all, we don't need any more paper stuffed socks and paper stuffed trousers in Washington.
U.S. lawmakers seek to bar U.S. attack on Iran
Fri 19 Jan 2007 1:07:28 GMT
(
By Richard Cowan
WASHINGTON, Jan 18 (Reuters) - A bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives pushed legislation on Thursday to prohibit a U.S. attack on Iran without congressional permission.
The effort, led by Rep. Walter Jones, a North Carolina Republican who in 2005 joined calls from many Democrats for a phased U.S. withdrawal from the Iraq war, came as lawmakers voiced concerns the Bush administration might provoke a confrontation with neighboring Iran.
"The resolution makes crystal clear that no previous resolution passed by Congress" authorizes a U.S. attack on Iran, Jones told reporters, referring to the 2002 vote by Congress authorizing the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
The joint resolution would have to be passed by the House and Senate and signed by President George W. Bush to acquire the force of law. It would waive the congressional authorization only if Iran attacked the United States or its armed forces, or if such an attack was "demonstrably" imminent.
So far, Jones' resolution has 11 co-sponsors in the 435-member House.
At the White House, Bush, asked whether there were any U.S. plans to take action against Iran, told Sinclair Broadcasting: "I have made it clear that if they're moving weapons inside Iraq that will hurt the cause of democracy and more particularly hurt our soldiers, we'll take care of business there.
We're not going to let them," he said on Thursday. "I made that abundantly clear the other day in my speech."
Bush's comment echoed remarks last week when he accused Iran and Syria of allowing the use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq.
The White House has since made clear the plan was to disrupt weapons supply lines inside Iraq and that the United States was not preparing for military action against Iran or Syria.
Rep. Martin Meehan, a Massachusetts Democrat, said that while he did not trust Iran or its intentions in the Middle East, he also did not trust the White House.
Meehan said the resolution on Iran was needed because the Bush administration had "lied so many times" in the run-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Concerns about a U.S. attack against Iran increased after the United States moved an additional aircraft carrier into the Gulf region and the Bush administration told Arab allies it would do more to contain Tehran.
The legislation's backers said they hoped Democratic leaders in the House would advance their resolution in coming months, possibly as part of Iraq war funding legislation or other Iraq-related measures.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/CrisesArticle.aspx?storyId=N18212722&WTmodLoc=World-R5-Alertnet-3
Task Force 16 Takes On Iranian Influence
Links there.
I guessed right...Walter Jones....
There's something very unnerving about your statement.... ; (
US Lawmakers Press Bush Administration Officials on Iran
By Dan Robinson
Washington
19 January 2007
Robinson report - Download 492k
Listen to Robinson report
The Bush administration is coming under increasing pressure from members of Congress regarding any possible moves against Iran because of its role in Iraq. VOA's Dan Robinson reports, concerns intensified after the president's speech last week in which he said U.S troops will be moving to interrupt support from Iran and Syria for insurgents in Iraq.
US Capitol, Washington DC
Although the administration has downplayed suggestions the U.S. would take military action against Iran or Syria, concern about a possible escalation across Iraq's borders with Iran and Syria is shared by Republicans as well as Democrats.
On Thursday, a group of House lawmakers introduced legislation designed to force the president to obtain specific approval from Congress before any such move could be taken.
North Carolina Republican Walter Jones, the most outspoken anti-war Republican in the House:
"If the president is contemplating committing our blood and treasure in another war, then he and his administration must come to Congress and make their case," said Walter Jones. "The Congress answers to the American people and must justify why it would be in our national security interests to engage militarily with Iran."
Referring to what he called lies by the administration regarding the need to act militarily in Iraq, Massachusetts Democrat Marty Meehan:
"It sends a strong message that Congress won't stand by idly, and won't be railroaded into another war, that will only make America and the world less safe," said Marty Meehan.
Legislative steps in the House mirror those in the Senate, and come against the background of warnings by key Senate Democrats that President Bush should not consider the 2002 congressional authorization for military action in Iraq justification for any move against Iran.
Speaking in Bahrain (Thursday) Defense Secretary Robert Gates said U.S. difficulties in Iraq have given Iran, what he called, a tactical opportunity in the short-term, but added there are many alternatives to military conflict:
"Nobody wants another conflict in this region," said Secretary Gates. "My view is that these matters, that there are many courses of action available that do not involve an open conflict with Iran. There is no need for that."
At the same time, Gates said Gulf states have made clear their hope that the U.S. will take steps to contain Iranian ambitions.
His additional comment that Iran has been emboldened by events in Iraq was echoed by other U.S. officials testifying before the House Intelligence Committee.
Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, says Iran is looking at the region in what he called a much more assertive way:
"They have been providing, through their intelligence services, lethal assistance to some of the extremist Shia groups in Iraq, which is a factor contributing to the instability," he said.
The Bush administration has never taken the military option off the table when it comes to the impasse with Tehran over Iranian nuclear ambitions, while emphasizing its commitment to a diplomatic solution.
Members of Congress who favor an outreach to Iran express frustration, meanwhile, with the Iranian government's refusal to allow them to travel there for discussions.
Congressman Tom Lantos, Democratic chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, says he is ready to lead a congressional delegation to Tehran, if only Iran would approve visas:
"The Iranian authorities in Tehran have denied visas to members of Congress, who have sought to visit there, for a conversation," said Tom Lantos.
Lantos says Iranian authorities bear what he called a very heavy share of the responsibility in preventing a dialogue with members of Congress.
On Thursday, the bipartisan House (of Representatives) Iran Working Group, held its first meeting in the new Congress.
Tom Friedman, author and New York Times columnist, told the group the U.S. needs to consider carefully what its objectives are regarding Iran.
"What is our objective, regime change or change of behavior? We really do have to make up our mind on that," said Tom Friedman. "If it is truly regime change, then is moving another aircraft carrier in[to] the Gulf, is that going to do it? What are the tools, if that is our goal, do we have the tools to achieve that? And do we have the allies to achieve that, and I don't think we do."
Two lawmakers on the House Iran Working Group, Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Steve Israel, recently met with Iran's Ambassador to the United Nations.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-01-18-voa77.cfm
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.