Lawmakers Want Notice Before Iraq War

WASHINGTON (AP) - War against Iraq is likely, said a senator exploring U.S. options, and other lawmakers joined him Sunday in pressing the Bush administration to make the case to Congress before any attack.

Sen. Joseph Biden ( news, bio, voting record), D-Del., led hearings last week that highlighted both the gravity of the threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein ( news - web sites) and the difficulty of replacing him with stable leadership.

"I believe there probably will be a war with Iraq," said Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "The only question is, is it alone, is it with others and how long and how costly will it be?"

Similar sentiment was expressed by other lawmakers appearing on the talk shows. Like Biden, they said the administration must do far more to sell Americans, allies and Iraq's neighbors on the need for force.

They also said Bush must seek congressional approval if he decides on war and heal splits among his own advisers over how best to meet his goal of replacing Saddam.

Administration officials were absent from the airwaves, letting lawmakers drive the debate.

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin ( news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Saddam is not likely to launch an attack with biological or chemical weapons unless he is provoked by a U.S. move against him.

"Does he love himself more than he hates us?" he asked on CBS' "Face the Nation." "And I think the answer is probably yes.

"And if that's true, then it would be unlikely that he would initiate an attack with a weapon of mass destruction because it would be certain that he would be destroyed in response."

But Biden said divining the Iraqi leader's plans "is like reading the entrails of goats." What matters is his capacity to unleash the weapons, whatever his intentions, Biden said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle said Congress must weigh in before America goes to war. "I don't think the president has the authority to launch a full-force effort" without congressional approval, said Daschle, D-S.D.

"We all support strongly a regime change," Daschle said on ABC's "This Week." "But I think we have to get our ducks in order. Do we have the support of our allies? Do we have an appropriate plan?"

The administration has invited Iraqi opposition groups to Washington, possibly this month, to explore what they might be able to do to unseat Saddam. So far, they have not been considered an effective force.

Ahmed Chalabi, head of a London-based umbrella organization representing the fractious opposition figures, said thousands of lightly armed Iraqis in the north, south and Baghdad want to move against Saddam but need training and equipment.

Congress authorized Bush in the fall to use all necessary force against nations or groups that aided the Sept. 11 hijackers or harbored such terrorists.

Few if any solid leads have come out linking Saddam to the al-Qaida terrorist network and the debate remains unsettled over whether Bush must come to Congress specifically to get approval to attack Iraq.

Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., said earlier it would be ridiculous for Bush to lay out a war plan in public view. And he recalled the bitterness of some of the congressional debate that preceded the last war against Iraq.

But on Sunday he acknowledged, too, the need to engage the public. Lott said he would probably support a resolution urging the administration to bring the matter to Congress.

"While you may not have to come to Congress, America needs to be united," he said. "We need to understand what our problem is, what our goals are. We need to try to bring the world in."

Biden, citing expert testimony in his hearings, said it is clear Iraq has chemical and biological weapons of some sort. Less certain is whether Saddam has the means yet to use them effectively, he said.

"We have no choice but to eliminate the threat," he said. "This is a guy who's an extreme danger to the world."

He said the United States, acting alone if necessary, probably could oust Saddam but America would then face a long rebuilding job in Iraq.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman ( news, bio, voting record), who favors a hard line on Saddam, said leaks from the administration have betrayed splits among Bush's advisers over his tough policy.

"I think we're at a point where it's critically important for the president, as commander in chief, to take hold here," said Lieberman, D-Conn. "He's got obvious disagreement within his administration."

Lieberman told "Fox News Sunday" that "every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."

Like Bush, Biden brushed off an Iraqi offer to negotiate over the return of weapons inspectors. "I think it's important we push for real inspections," he said, and not negotiate over a faint offer.

Watching Senator Biden make a fool of himself Sunday on Meet The Press, I kept thinking to myself, 'thank God this guy ain't in charge'. It wasn't just that the Delaware Democrat was out of his league, it's how ridiculously obvious he made it.
On Iraq, he hemmed, he hawed, he bobbed, he weaved.
A case can be made for removing Hussein, he says in one breath.
Then, in the next, he complains the President has failed to make one.
He urges multilateralism, in whatever we do. We shouldn't go-it-alone, he insists. Our "allies" will be 'with us', he assures us.
Ah, one caveat (a big one): Provided the *evidence* is there. Evidence that Saddam possesses, or seeks to possess, deliverable weapons of mass destruction, and the intent to use them.
Well, does he possess WMD? Beyond "residuals", 'don't know', says Biden (or words to that effect). Okay, let's suppose he does, can he develop the means to deliver them effectively? 'Don't know', says Biden. If he could, would he use them? 'Don't know that either'.
Hearing this, me-jaws dropped to the floor.
Surely, he's got to be kidding, right?
Several facts:

1) This goofball, believe it or not, is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
2) The chairman has access to top-secret intellgence, and gets briefed on a regular basis.
3) Meet the Press is carried around the world.
4) Our enemies, as well as our allies, were watching -- and listening.
Connecting the dots, the top-ranking Democrat on foreign affairs, even after days of extensive hearings and years of CIA briefings, says ... what? That he doesn't know?
Let's go over Biden's incredible litany again.
On whether Saddam possesses WMD, beyond trace amounts, Biden says he doesn't know.
This begs the question why Saddam refuses to allow U.N. weapons inspectors back in? Answer: He's dirty. Otherwise, he'd roll out the welcome mat, if only to humiliate/discredit his accusers.
On Saddam's willingness to use WMD, Biden says he doesn't know. "It's like reading the entrails of goats", he lamely tells Russert.
Problem is, you don't need to read the entrails of goats, Mr. Biden, just a book of recent history. See the chapter on chemical weapons, Saddam and the Kurds, circa 1988.
On whether Iraq can develop the technical means to deliver WMD, Biden says he hasn't a clue.
Gee, must be them entrails again, or else he'd know something -- even a little -- about Scud missiles. They're nasty, and armed with chemical warheads, they're mighty dangerous.
Other observations:
-- Throughout the interview, Biden tries to play both sides of the fence, speaking from both sides of his mouth. On military action to topple Saddam, is he for or against? He allows that a case can be made, then moves to undercut that case, falsely alluding to internal divisions within the White House. Biden's message to Saddam: Keep your chin up, even the Great Satan is split. Hang on a little while longer, and you're home free.
-- Biden urges building global consensus first -- before any action; And if consensus isn't forthcoming? Well, don't ask Biden -- he's too busy reading 'entrails'.
-- "I think it's important we push for real inspections", says Biden. Gee, Senator, what part of 'regime change' don't you understand?
-- Biden hotly denies evidence exists linking Saddam to al-Qaeda, brushing off damning proof of Iraqi involvement in the first WTC bombing. New Yorker reporter Jeffery Goldberg already settled the question of linkage, his thoroughly documented report showing Iraqi intelligence working hand-in-glove for years with senior al-Qaeda officials.
From this interview, I can only draw one firm conclusion: Biden doesn't know diddley-squat.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents..
"JohnHuang2"

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.