Only 5 democrats refuse to follow the neocon Sessions on Iran -

[Mass]

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00245

.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Sessions Amdt. No. 2024, as Modified )
Vote Number: 245 Vote Date: July 12, 2007, 04:10 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Agreed to
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2024 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 )
Statement of Purpose: To state the policy of the United States on the protection of the United States and its allies against Iranian ballistic missiles.
NAYs ---5
Feinstein (D-CA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Sanders (I-VT)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)

Not Voting - 5
Biden (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Obama (D-IL)
Vitter (R-LA)

Kudos to Feinstein, unlikely in this list.

Biden, Dodd, and Obama decided it was good not to take a position, which is at least better than Hillary's YES.

For background, Sessions's PR on the amendment:
http://sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=278929

Senate Adopts Sessions' Missile Defense Amendment

Thursday, July 12, 2007



WASHINGTON – By a vote of 90-5, the U.S. Senate adopted today an amendment to the defense authorization bill stating that the policy of the United States is to develop and deploy an effective defense system against the threat of an Iranian nuclear missile attack against the U.S. and European allies.

The amendment was offered by U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL).

“It is important that we acknowledge the growing threat to peace and security that arises from Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Iran’s government has continued developing weapons of increasing sophistication and range, in defiance of the international community’s requests. Iran’s government has openly declared hostilities on America, and we have traced explosives and weapons found in Iraq back to Iran,” Sessions said. “The Senate today acknowledged that we must build missile defense systems that ensure we are able to protect our country and our allies against a potential Iranian attack.”

[MalloyLiberal]

1. Vitter is a little preoccupied

LOL.

[wyldwolf]

2. Feingold - YES. Kennedy - YES. Boxer - YES

Kudos to those who see the importance of protecting us from hostile nations.

[Mass]

3. So, we are going to spend billions to develop StarWars, because this is the implication

of this amendment, if it means something.

If not, it is just some more noises to justify a war with Iran, and most democrats fell for it.

I somehow doubt that Feinstein and Webb do not see the importance of protecting the country. Neither of them is a dove and both voted NO.

[wyldwolf]

5. a defense system does not necessarily mean "star wars."

the fact that Feinstein and Webb voted against it only means they disagree with the method. By the way, one of the guys in your avatar voted yes.

[cui bono]

6. What happened to the defense system we had against possible

USSR attacks? Iran doesn't have nuclear capabilities. Why are they specifically naming Iran? I agree with the person who just said it could be a ploy to gear up for an invasion of Iran.

[wyldwolf]

8. ask the "progressive" senators who voted for it.

[cui bono]

10. What? Voted for the defense system against USSR attacks?

Huh?

[some guy]

13. Why can't you answer the questions posed in post 6?

Your Presidential candidate voted for this, you're on this thread in support of it.

The question asked in post 6 seem valid, why won't you make an effort to answer them?

[wyldwolf]

14. as soon as I finish my stint at the Pentagon, confer with the joint chiefs...

...and gaze into my crystal ball, I'll answer that question.

[Mass]

9. I know and disagree with him on that.

This measure is a useless and unecessary provocative bill. I would expect the US Senate to be ready to protect the US and their allies whoever is the ennemy.

The fact that the bill NAMES Iran is what troubles me. Does that mean that if North Korea attacks us, we will not protect ourselves?

Sorry, Sessions proposed another of these "Iran is the ennemy" bill and the Democrats were afraid to be seen as unpatriotic.

[cui bono]

4. So you want to up the defense budget to build a missile system

against a nuclear attack that cannot happen?

I'm confused.

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

7. no, I want to up the defense budget to build a defense system

against a nuclear attack that could happen. And with John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, and Russ Feingold, I must be in good company.

[cui bono]

11. Nobody's right all the time. n/t

[Ian David]

12. Vitter didn't vote because he had to change his diaper. n/t