| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Democrats vow new challenge to Bush over Iraq | |
| 2007-02-19 | |
Leading U.S. Democrats vowed on Sunday to seek a revision in President George W. Bush's 2002 authorization to wage war in Iraq, as a way to raise pressure for a change in strategy. Undeterred by Senate Republicans who blocked a resolution opposing Bush's troop buildup in Iraq, Democrats in control of Congress pledged to challenge Bush anew by seeking a mandate that the mission of U.S. troops does not include interceding in a civil war. "We'll be looking at modification of that (war) authorization in order to limit the mission of American troops to a support mission instead of a combat mission," Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat told "Fox News Sunday."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, called the Iraq war "the worst foreign policy mistake in the history of this country." "We find ourselves in a very deep hole. We need to find a way to dig out of it," Reid told CNN's "Late Edition." Last week the House of Representatives passed a nonbinding resolution against Bush's plans to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq to enhance security in Baghdad and Anbar province. But Bush's fellow Republicans in the Senate used procedural tactics to block the measure on Saturday. In October 2002, Congress authorized Bush to take military action in Iraq primarily because of what the administration charged was a threat of weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons were found after the March 2003 invasion, but the administration said U.S. troops would remain to help Iraq become a democracy. | |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #7 OP, could you post the specific section and article you're citing for the ex post facto statement? I can't seem to find it all of a sudden (stupid law library search engines). However, some other interesting tidbits that Congress ought to know (and most of 'em probably don't), Section 6 Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall...in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. Section 9 Clause 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. Those in Congress who think they are immune from arrest for their treason had better think twice about that. |
| Posted by: FOTSGreg 2007-02-19 20:13 |
| #6 Congress really needs to read the Constitution once in a while. It'll keep them from being so stupid. "The Congress of the United States... shall make no ex post facto laws", which is exactly what rewording the 2002 act would be. We either need to educate some congresscritters, or exclude them from ever holding office again. Stupidity should NOT be rewarded. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-02-19 16:12 |
| #5 Dig deeper, dig faster. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-02-19 08:13 |
| #4 Jimmy Carter acting as the midwife for the birth of the Islamic Revolution was certainly the worst foreign policy mistake in my memory. |
| Posted by: Sic_Semper_Tyrannus 2007-02-19 02:24 |
| #3 With the safety of U.S. troops already in Iraq at stake, Levin said there was little appetite in Congress to end funding for the unpopular war. I believe he's got the words jumbled a bit. I believe he meant to say; "U.S. troops have little appetite for Congress." |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2007-02-19 01:18 |
| #2 Worst mistake, Harry? Jimmuah Peanut's non-response to a brazen act of war sorta stands out in my mind... |
| Posted by: PBMcL 2007-02-19 00:47 |
| #1 FOX/RIGHTNATION.com > Col. David Hunt > WE CAN'T OR WE NO LONGER HAVE THE WILL TO FIGHT article; plus RIGHTNATION > MARK STEYN > Why the Iraq war may end in US defeat, aka MURTHA. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-02-19 00:43 |