Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats Push to Slow Vote on U.S. Force in Iraq
Reuters via NYTimes.com ^ | 9/13/02

Posted on 09/13/2002 4:17:21 PM PDT by GeneD

Filed at 7:01 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Despite President Bush's call for quick action, several Senate Democrats maneuvered on Friday to put the brakes on a vote to give congressional backing to a possible military strike on Iraq.

Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the Senate president pro tempore and chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee, said in a floor speech he would object to a vote on the use of force against Iraq before the Nov. 5 congressional election.

``This senator is not, now or ever, going to be stampeded. Has to be voted on before the election? Forget it,'' Byrd, a master of the Senate's rules and procedures, said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin said that before voting to authorize a U.S. military strike, Congress should pass a resolution calling on the United Nations to enforce its own requirements that Iraq disarm.

``We should speak with one voice as a Congress to the U.N. urging them to act, to set a deadline and to authorize force to enforce those (weapons) inspections if Iraq does not voluntarily comply,'' Levin, a Michigan Democrat, said.

``For us to get engaged in a distraction, a debate as to what will happen if the U.N. doesn't do that, is to take away from the strength of our urging the U.N. to act,'' he said.

Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said he favored a resolution similar to Levin's proposal. A spokeswoman for Senate Majority leader Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, said he had not yet evaluated the plan.

BUSH CRITICIZES LAWMAKERS

Bush, who was at the United Nations on Friday after addressing its General Assembly on Thursday, criticized lawmakers who want the United Nations to act first on Iraq before they vote to authorize U.S. military force.

``If I were running for office, I'm not sure how I'd explain to the American people -- say, vote for me, and, oh, by the way, on a matter of national security, I think I'm going to wait for somebody else to act,'' Bush said.

``I don't imagine Saddam Hussein sitting around, saying, 'Gosh, I think I'm going to wait for some resolution.' He's a threat that we must deal with as quickly as possible.''

On Thursday, Bush told the United Nations that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was amassing weapons of mass destruction that threaten the United States and its allies. He challenged the United Nations to make Iraq comply with U.S. disarmament demands, and said action was inevitable if Baghdad failed to do so.

A number of Democrats and some Republicans argue Congress should give the United Nations a chance to enforce its requirements for Saddam to disarm before authorizing a unilateral U.S. military strike.

They also say Bush has not made a compelling case that Iraq poses an immediate threat, and that lawmakers should not have to vote on a resolution that could lead to war in the tense period before elections where control of the Senate and the House of Representatives will be decided by a few seats.

``No convincing case has been made in the press or in this body that we must act to give the president authority to invade a sovereign body now, or before the election,'' Byrd said.

Other senators said Iraq's rejection on Friday of an unconditional return of U.N. weapons inspectors showed that Congress must quickly give Bush the military clout he wants against Baghdad.

``The Congress needs to go ahead and give the president the authority he needs,'' Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican, said.

Lott dismissed the plan floated by Levin.

``How many times do you have to say you've got to do something?'' Lott said. ``We've got language stronger than that on the books right now.''


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: carllevin; georgewbush; iraq; johnkerry; robertbyrd; saddamhussein; tomdaschle; trentlott
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: GeneD
I saw Byrd on the senate floor today bellowing
It was pure blovation. He was some pizzed because
no Senator would take a seat so he could give
a speech. Rules say at least one Senator must be
seated and he was stompin rocks flat pizzed no one
would take a seat....Hillary popped in for a colloque
as well, Reid from Nevada, but they too hauled
agenda. Blowhard Byrd still yammered about who
and how long he was/is. Here is a biscuit for
all.....Byrd called Dubya a priveledged BRAT
21 posted on 09/13/2002 5:38:19 PM PDT by cactusSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
``This senator is not, now or ever, going to be stampeded. Has to be voted on before the election? Forget it,'' Byrd, a master of the Senate's rules and procedures, said.

So why, Senator Byrd, is there a very large hoof sticking out of your butt?

22 posted on 09/13/2002 5:41:05 PM PDT by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
DEMOCRATS FLIP BYRD TO NATIONAL SECURITY INSURING REPUBLICAN SENATE IN 2003

A Pyrrhic victory.

A victory gained at too great a cost: like that of the Greek leader Pyrrhus over the Romans in 279BC.

23 posted on 09/13/2002 5:47:05 PM PDT by PhilDragoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
lol!
24 posted on 09/13/2002 5:48:41 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
The Rats are hoist on their own petard. They were the ones who demanded a debate and a vote. Now they want to wait til after the election so they don't have to go on the record and tell voters if they stand with the President. The President should keep pressuring them to give their blessings or he will act on the basis of existing congressional approval. Its high time Robert Turd and Tommy Daschund made up their minds since we can't be hand-cuffed to an election schedule in protecting our country. To the Rats its all about politics but to our President its about making sure another 9-11 never happens again. Simply put, its put up or shut up time for the Democrats and they have to decide NOW if they want to be on the right side of history.
25 posted on 09/13/2002 6:04:10 PM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
and you support the UN?
26 posted on 09/13/2002 9:57:28 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
Nope, not any more I don't. Haven't for years. And their stupid resolutions are a big reason why. That along with their elitism (eating lobster and caviar at a conference on world hunger), they are absolutely out of touch with reality.
27 posted on 09/13/2002 10:06:06 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Utah Girl
My point was that you talk of Iraq breaking UN resolutions, as though that is a reason to attack Iraq. Thus, you're giving legitimacy to the UN through their treaties.

I'm against an Iraq attack, as I haven't seen the evidence that Iraq is developing Weapons of Mass Destruction. Don't you think that if there were evidence, the government would have those images or statments all over television. All this time and no clear evidence, talks of deadlines that evidence will be shown? Come on, something is not right.

I'm hearing talks of nukes and attacking Baghdad. What about the innocent people, men, women and children, who will be killed. That's wrong. I don't care if the U.S. is saying that it's okay. I do not see the evidence, and I'm suspicious of the whole thing.

28 posted on 09/13/2002 10:13:16 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
I'm going to bed right now, let me sleep on my answer back to you.
29 posted on 09/13/2002 10:18:45 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
They'll be getting a slow boat out of town with the vote going against them.
30 posted on 09/13/2002 10:19:35 PM PDT by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
" Innocent " men, women, and children get killed in wars. Does that mean that we should just roll over and play dead, instead of attacking anyone, at any time, even when, as in the 9/11 attacks, here, we have nbeen attacked ?

Would you also have been against attacking Germany,say, in 1940, when we knew what was going on there ?

31 posted on 09/13/2002 10:21:55 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Hitler was a war monger. He was a threat to all of Europe. He manipulated his people to get behind the war movement through the bombing of the Reichstag. He blamed it on the Communists, then incrementally and gradually started taking over every facet of the government. Hey, they even had "Fatherland Security" to protect the people from the "enemy". Later, the Jews were rounded up into concentration camps, as well as Christians and anyone who didn't go along with the Fatherland's program of "destiny".

Thankfully, that warmonger was put to rest. However, do you see any connections from above to today's present situation?

32 posted on 09/13/2002 10:52:50 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
Yes, I do and wonder why you don't.

Saddam moved on Kewait, gassed his own ( but different ethic group ) Kurds, gassed and bioterrorized those of another Muslim sect, put a " hit " on his own son ( it didn't kill him; failed attempt ... just paralized him ), aides and abets al Qaeda members, rules ( if you care to call it that ) with an iron fist, kills anyone he even imagines is his enemy, has set up a cult of person, like Hitler, he looks back in history, and makes that his country's focus, holds the same kind of spectales as the Nazis and Hitler did, has " secret police squads ", manipulates his people ( jails, tortures, and / or kills them, if they don't act as he wants them to ), threatens our safety and the rest of the world's as well. I could go on ; however, maybe you should really do the scut work and find out for yourself. The similarities are there; you just don't know enough about them. :-)

33 posted on 09/13/2002 11:03:44 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
You didn't look at the similarities that I was mentioning.

Hey, I don't think that Saddam is a good guy, but where is the evidence that the administration is claiming that he has?

34 posted on 09/13/2002 11:06:41 PM PDT by FreedomFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
It was there, when Clinton was president and he, like you , ignored it.
35 posted on 09/13/2002 11:16:06 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
``No convincing case has been made in the press or in this body that we must act to give the president authority to invade a sovereign body now, or before the election,'' Byrd said.

Senator Byrd had better hope that his 'convincing case' does not happen before the election. If Saddam gets one off while these guys are wringing their hands -- and while Bush is urging them to act fast -- they will have killed thousands of Americans with their big mouths.


36 posted on 09/13/2002 11:44:36 PM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arkfreepdom
The only problem is, is that these individuals in the Senate that are being balky about this; don't seem to be afraid of most of the American people. Someone, somewhere is bolstering them up and supporting them, and they are sticking to their belligerent attitude no matter what happens. Just why they are, is a mystery. But one thing is apparent, they are not afraid of the American people, or they are plumb crazy!
37 posted on 09/14/2002 12:03:10 AM PDT by dsutah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nick Danger
What worries me is Saddam knows we are coming after him. In his position, he might think - "well, maybe I ought to get off my best shot at them BEFORE they get over here with the guns.

The congress is playing a really risky game when they delay getting this done.

38 posted on 09/14/2002 12:05:24 AM PDT by ClancyJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFriend
Maybe you should have seen On the Record with Greta tonight. A woman who had been involved in the attempted coup in Iraq in the 90's was on there. She is now out of Iraq and talked about how he treated his own people.

She advised she saw the prisons and the equipment there that was used for torture of prisoners. One item was some kind of meat grinder (large size for humans). She mentioned something about the acid vats he used to get rid of the bodies - or for torture.

She also said that citizens are killed weekly. They will kill all the prisoners in jail to make room for the next week's prisoners. People are accused at random, tortured, raped and killed.

When asked what about the citizens if we did go to war - she stated "they are being killed now." She had family there and still wanted Saddam taken out even with the risks.

Also indicated that Saddam allowed his people to starve while he used the money from oil for building his palaces. That the inspectors did not find his weapons and that he would hide them - even in his palace if he had to. There were many ways he hid them.

39 posted on 09/14/2002 12:14:48 AM PDT by ClancyJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ClancyJ
I saw that program, the woman said the people would be happy to be rid of saddam. She also said that he kills prisoners 3 days a week, 50 to 100 at a time. About the meat grinder thing, I had this horrible thought that maybe this "meat" is sold to the people in the market. I know it's gross, but saddam is a sick pervert.
40 posted on 09/14/2002 12:18:21 AM PDT by seeker41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson