General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A tip of the hat to DU's The Magistrate. [View all]The Magistrate
(95,247 posts)This?
"Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that the proposed resolution had been rejected by all Democrats in the Senate plus Jeffords. Do you really thnk this would have halted the thing? The preparations, the deployments, all would have gone on on the same schedule. The '02 election would have been fought on the slogan "Voting for a Democrat is voting for Saddam!" The losses in the Senate would have been far worse than they actually were, and the first business of the new Congress would have been the triumphant passage of the enabling reolution. The invasion would have taken place on the same day planned for the previous autumn; there would not even have been a delay. We both know this would have been the outcome."
That is flat accurate analysis of what anyone with the sense to come in out of the rain knows would have happened. It certainly does not reflect support for invading Iraq; you would not be able to find any expression of support for that by me. But that resolution was a political trap, and was intended to be a political trap, and as with any well constructed trap, there really were no good moves for people caught in it.