Posted on 03/02/2007 9:16:13 PM PST by FairOpinion
Opposition Democrats are drafting a Senate bill that would prevent the Bush administration from launching a military strike against Iran without congressional approval.
Observers say that move reflects the fear that President George W. Bush may be preparing a military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and military installations.
Freshman Senator Jim Webb, who defeated a veteran Republican and possible 2008 presidential candidate George Allen in November’s elections, is leading the effort to draft the new legislation.
Senator Webb is a former Republican Navy secretary and decorated Vietnam veteran who opposes the Iraq war.
He intends to introduce his measure next week as an amendment to the $93.4 billion war spending bill.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Thursday that he would support the proposed legislation to put breaks on President Bush’s powers to go to war.
"I have not read this (amendment), but I'm confident, in real generality ... that I can support” the move, Senator Reid told reporters.
Mr Webb's amendment would prohibit President Bush from spending any money on a "unilateral military action in Iran without the express consent of the Congress”.
He said there would be some exceptions, but did not detail them.
Later this month, the Senate could take up debate on a $100 billion bill to pay for continued combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But even before the war spending bill comes up, the Senate could hold a debate in mid-March on Iraq war policy which could be used for pushing the legislation on Iran.
Democrats say that they aren't satisfied with assurances from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Peter Pace that there are no plans to attack Iran.
President Bush has deployed two aircraft-carrier battle groups off Iran's coast. He also frequently denounces Iran's alleged supply of weapons to militias in Iraq, and he has issued orders to US troops there to hunt those Iranians who are causing trouble.
Besides, there are persistent reports in the US media quoting senior administration sources that an attack on Iran is under consideration, both to inhibit Iran's nuclear programme and to try to undermine its leaders.
The Bush administration, however, describes these reports as speculative, pointing out that the State Department announced this week that the US will attend a regional conference on Iraq that will include representatives from Iran and Syria.
Some observers see this as the reversal of the administration’s previous policy of not talking to either regime.
Many Democrats, however, remain sceptical about the Bush administration’s commitment to solving its problems with Iran diplomatically.
They see similarities to the build-up to the Iraq war and want to leave no doubt that the 2002 authorisation to use force in Iraq doesn't extend to Iran.
Talk about unilateral surrender to the terrorists!!!!!!!
Grandstanding.
Bush won't sign anything he doesn't want to.
Democrat Surrender Monkeys are headed for defeat in 08.
The Allen defeat was an utter disgrace to American politics.
Senate 'Pubs need to filibuster this crap. Jim Webb is not Commander in Chief.
ping
Let this be a lesson to those who say they'll sit out the '08 election if they don't get their perfect conservative candidate because there's no difference between the Republicans and the dems. The dems will destroy the Constitution and get us all killed. The Republicans will just make us mad.
This was President Reagan's Secretary of the Navy? Is BDS an airborne disease? What in the world is happening inside the beltway? When I was in military intelligence during the Carter and Reagan administrations, EVERYBODY I knew at the 'puzzle palace' (aka 'Fort Fumble') was pro-American. What happened?
But then, Bush is all for amnesty and open borders, while Webb came out in a Wall St Journal op-ed opposing illegal immigration.
There is some probability, Webb's grandstanding will increase the probability of a war. Simply, by making a lot of noise about opposing military action, Webb will convince the Iranian government an attack is imminient. The Iranian president, amanajeud, is a known loose cannon, who is very likely to do something stupid.
If they had the votes, it wouldn't matter if he signed it or not.
Problem is they don't, but they do have enough to keep passing appropriations bills with the restrictive language as long as the President keeps vetoing them. Of course when he vetoes them, the DoD will be denied funding, across the board, not just for a putative invasion of Iran.
Under the Constitution it is supposed to be Congress which declares War, not the President. Bush made a terrible blunder immediately after 9/11 by not asking Congress for an official Declaration of War. Had he done so, it would have provided a firm legal foundation for subsequent military actions.
Of course some people argue that the military authorization which Congress did pass was in effect a Declaration of War. This seems somewhat questionable to me, since it would have been easy for Congress to make an explicit declaration and it didn't. Still, there are plausible legal arguments on both sides.
However, even if one grants that the military authorization was sufficient for the actions subsequently undertaken (e.g., in Afghanistan), it has now been over five years. It seems perfectly reasonable that Congress might wish to limit that authorization and restore to itself the power to make war (or not make war) against other nations such as Iran. Senator Webb's proposal would do just that.
Now you may believe there are good reasons for going to war with Iran. If so, it's up to those who share that viewpoint to convince a majority of Representatives and Senators (or else elect their replacements) to vote for war. But, especially in the absence of some imminent threat or attack which does not allow enough time for Congress to respond, it should not be a unilateral decision by the President.
Liberman needs to change over quick.
The War Pwers Act gives the President 60 days to initiate and end a military conflict if deemed necessary to protect the Nation.
After sixty days the President must either desist action or seek Congressional approval.
Clinton in Kosovo completely disregarded the law on all counts, and Congress didn't say boo. McCain, that idiot, wanted to send in ground troops!
It shouldn't take 60 days to bring the Mullahs and their nuclear wet dream to ruin. And it is long overdue.
The President will have to expend his political capital soon--the danger is very great. He has nothing to lose. We can not afford to be Gulliver tied up by the Lilliputians.
Iran is the head of international terrorism, and is engaged in military action against our troops. They have sworn their regime to our death.
So if we hit them, would the world hate us any less?
Screw them all! They were all in bed with Hussein, even the UN.
Whatever we do or fail to do in Iran will not be lost on Syria,North Korea,Pakistan and Al-Qaeda. Or those b@stard Russians and Chinese either.
Somebody better stand up for America soon. If we lose an American city because we diddled on Iran getting the bomb, there will be hell to pay, all the way around.
One 9/11 is all I will ever stand for.
BTTT
How did Webb ever graduate from Annapolis? I am dumbfounded by this guy. I actually feel sorry for the Persian people. They will suffer the consequences when Israel is forced to deliver a nuke strike to preempt the mullah's weapon program.
I like George Allen, I would have voted for him if I could have, but that stupid brainless "macaca" comment did him in. The dems and the media were able to successfully, and unfairly, label him a racist. I hear from friends in the Old Dominion that Allen's gearing up to run for Governor in 09'. I hope he does run and I hope he wins.
Webb is a mongoloid.
.....Grandstanding. .....
Exactly.... The insecure one is seeking to be seen.
The President need obey nothing from the Senate regarding the conduct of war. He can act and then present a fait accompli and they know it.
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.