http://www.counterpunch.org/byrd1004.htmlOctober 4, 2002
Bush War Plan:
"Blind and Improvident"
by SENATOR ROBERT BYRD
The great Roman historian, Titus Livius, said, "All things will be clear and distinct to the man who does not hurry; haste is blind and improvident."
"Blind and improvident," Mr. President. "Blind and improvident." Congress would be wise to heed those words today, for as sure as the sun rises in the east, we are embarking on a course of action with regard to Iraq that, in its haste, is both blind and improvident. We are rushing into war without fully discussing why, without thoroughly considering the consequences, or without making any attempt to explore what steps we might take to avert conflict.
The newly bellicose mood that permeates this White House is unfortunate, all the moreso because it is clearly motivated by campaign politics. Republicans are already running attack ads against Democrats on Iraq.
Democrats favor fast approval of a resolution so they can change the subject to domestic economic problems. (NY Times 9/20/2002)Before risking the lives of American troops, all members of Congress - Democrats and Republicans alike - must overcome the siren song of political polls and focus strictly on the merits, not the politics, of this most serious issue.
The resolution before us today is not only a product of haste; it is also a product of presidential hubris.
This resolution is breathtaking in its scope. It redefines the nature of defense, and reinterprets the Constitution to suit the will of the Executive Branch.
It would give the President blanket authority to launch a unilateral preemptive attack on a sovereign nation that is perceived to be a threat to the United States. This is an unprecedented and unfounded interpretation of the President's authority under the Constitution, not to mention the fact that it stands the charter of the United Nations on its head.
(snip)
Congress has a responsibility to exercise with extreme care the power to declare war. There is no weightier matter to be considered. A war against Iraq will affect thousands if not tens of thousands of lives, and perhaps alter the course of history. It will surely affect the balance of power in the Middle East.
It is not a decision to be taken in haste, under the glare of election year politics and the pressure of artificial deadlines. And yet any observer can see that that is exactly what the Senate is proposing to do.The Senate is rushing to vote on whether to declare war on Iraq without pausing to ask why. Why is war being dealt with not as a last resort but as a first resort? Why is Congress being pressured to act now, as of today, 33 days before a general election when a third of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives are in the final, highly politicized, weeks of election campaigns? As recently as Tuesday (Oct. 1), the President said he had not yet made up his mind about whether to go to war with Iraq.
And yet Congress is being exhorted to give the President open-ended authority now, to exercise whenever he pleases, in the event that he decides to invade Iraq. Why is Congress elbowing past the President to authorize a military campaign that the President may or may not even decide to pursue? Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves?
(snip)
The President is using the Oval Office as a bully pulpit to sound the call to arms,
but it is from Capitol Hill that such orders must flow. The people, through their elected representatives, must make that decision. It is here that debate must take place and where the full spectrum of the public's desires, concerns, and misgivings must be heard. We should not allow ourselves to be pushed into one course or another in the face of a full court publicity press from the White House. We have, rather, a duty to the nation and her sons and daughters to carefully examine all possible courses of action and to consider the long term consequences of any decision to act.
(snip)
The questions surrounding the wisdom of declaring war on Iraq are many and serious. The answers are too few and too glib.
This is no way to embark on war. The Senate must address these questions before acting on this kind of sweeping use of force resolution. We don't need more rhetoric. We don't need more campaign slogans or fund raising letters. We need - the American people need - information and informed debate.
(snip)
Robert Byrd is the senior senator from West Virginia. This is the text of his remarks to the senate on the Bush war resolution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess someone forgot to tell Sen. Byrd, who has been in the Senate for multiple decades, and was around for the authorization of the Vietnam War, that this really wasn't a vote for war :sarcasm:
I hope this puts to bed the silly ideas that:
(1) the IWR was not a vote to authorize war, and
(2) the IWR was not a blank check.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
