While Bush and friends continue their sleight of hand tricks on Iraq policy (don’t look until September) and the presidential debates seem to only give bullhorns to a few MSM favored “frontrunners,” it’s important that we stay focused on the task of ending the occupation. September will come (and go) with more hype and maneuvers and equivocation but one candidate is asking for our help – now – Bill Richardson.
Gov. Richardson has launched a campaign to de-authorize the war before the summer recess:
Article 1 of the US Constitution gives the Congress, not the President, the right to declare war. And the War Powers Act specifies that the President may not continue a war without Congressional authorization. In 2002 Congress passed a resolution authorizing the Iraq war because the administration claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and links to Al Qaeda.
Saddam is dead. There never were any WMDs or ties to Al Qaeda. The basis for the 2002 war authorization is gone.
If Congress passes a resolution de-authorizing the war, the President has no legal authority to continue. De-authorization cannot be vetoed, and it would legally require Bush to begin bringing the troops home.If the President stalled on redeployment, Congress could pass funding legislation requiring him to withdraw. If Congress de-authorizes the war before the summer recess, our troops could be home in six months.
The time for waiting is over. People are dying every day. We cannot wait until this fall to start bringing our troops home. If Congress doesn’t act before they leave for the summer, the only thing that will change between now and the end of the year is the body count.
Congress has a public mandate and the Constitutional authority to end this war. If you de-authorize, we could have our ALL troops home in six months.
It is time to stand up to Bush. No more waiting, no more compromises. De-authorize the Iraq war before you leave for summer break.
Now that’s a breath of fresh air … and it seems like the right strategy to me. It moves the discussion away from “funding for the troops” and to the heart of the matter – why are we in Iraq at all? Whether our reps and “front-runners” voted for or against authorization the first time around, here’s a chance for them all to stand up and say “No More!” (and for us to see how many do stand up!)
I haven’t picked a presidential candidate but this very clear approach from Gov Richardson sure has my attention, as has the recent work of Sen. Dodd. And I’m not ready to roll over and pick “lesser of … ” for my support this time around and certainly not this early. As netroots activists, I think it’s our job to encourage the best – not only those candidates the MSM has anointed but the ones showing real leadership on the issues that matter most to us.
Whether you have already chosen or are still waiting for Gore or are just undecided, you can still support this very solid call from Richardson by signing up in support of de-authorization here and putting a little FDL netroots muscle (in honor of the Sopranos’ finale) on the rest of the field and your own Senators and Congressional representatives.
The photo this week is of children lighting memorial candles along a street in a Baghdad neighborhood which has been repeatedly hit by US air strikes. For an important report on the “secret” air war in Iraq, don’t miss The Air War in Iraq Uncovered by Nick Turse over at TomDispatch.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

errr
HEY!!!
my post reads number one, WHAT’S UP WITH THAT?
Thanks, Siun.
I’ve heard various things about what de-authorization would and wouldn’t accomplish. I’d certainly like to hear more wonky types discussing the details of this.
Siun, I was just talking about this downstairs
here is my prediction if we vote to de authorise;
cheney will claim congress has no authority to de authorize since congress gave the administration unlimited power to fight terrorism
no kidding, that’s what he will claim
then, even if we finally get the repukelicans to impeach they will claim there is still no authority
why, they might even declare martial law suspend congress and senate
no kidding
so what do we do then?
perris @ 1
It means no more zed. Zed is dead. Long live UNO!
this is a great post, it’s a shame some of the firedogs have the suprano addiction going on
Going back up to read.
if Congress passes a resolution de-authorizing the war,
Is that the same thing as repealing the AUMF?
perris @ 3
Arrest him and charge him with treason and high crimes and misdemeanors, and whatever else we can. Impeach him once and for all. Show them what We the People will no longer put up with. End it. Use the “Goddamn piece of paper” they called our Constitution. That’s what we do.
End the Madness, Now!!! Right on, Siun!!!
I am very pessimistic that this has even a ghost of a chance in congress. I would like to believe it, but I just can’t.
perris @ 5
this is a great post, it’s a shame some of the firedogs have the suprano addiction going on
It’s a shame some of us don’t have HBO – *s*
perris @ 3
This congress has no spine and would back down. We need to elect representatives who will support us and not get sucked into the corporate, K Street, DC bubble.
LS @ 8
arrest him?
who will do that, he IS the commander in chief of the armed forces and under oath they MUST follow his orders
correct me if I’m wrong but I believe there is no provision for a military agent to disobey the president
am I wrong?
if I am not then it doesn’t matter who we get to “arrest” them, they will ahve military authority and that power to resist
I’ve said this before (before the “Dem” leadership caved) that they need to show up and stop EVERYTHING IN CONGRESS…EVERYTHING. No bills, no debate, no negotiation. Take control of what you can take control of. You want electricity in the WH, well…BITE ME!
No Sopranos here!
Signed the Richardson petition, Siun. Thanks so much for bringing it to our attention. Has he Congressional sponsors for this, and where stand our PrezCandis in Congress?
Writing to Feinstein and Boxer on this right now. De-authorization makes constitutional, legal, and moral sense. Military as well, when you think about it: goals achieved, mission accomplished. Bring them home, have a parade, pass a GI Bill.
perris @ 13
Just follow the Contitution. If they defy Congress, well then they are a rogue government. It would be our duty to stop that. We rule. Not the Military. Not the President. Not the Vice President. We rule.
Jayt – this is like repealling the AUMF and that’s why I think it has such promise.
Who were the authors of the AUMF????
jayt @ 7
It’s even better, it stops all funding, at a specified date!!! Look back to the Rethug’s denial for Clinton in Solmalia, ‘98!!! BlackHawk Down!!!
The military upholds the constitution, not the personal presidency … so I think their correct action would be clear.
LS @ 8
A nice fantasy, but no more than that. The political reality is that we don’t have the votes to override, much less to impeach. We don’t have the back bone to stand up to this prez. All we have is a razor thin majority, lead by moral and intellectual cowards. And on top of that the media spews nothing but GOP propaganda night and day.
Siun @ 20
there would be those that would uphold the constitution, there would be those that would think “obey their comander in cheif” is upholding the constitution
a civil war
(and no spoilers on Sopranos please! I missed the first 20 minutes so I’m waiting for the rerun)
Teddy – yeah, it does make sense … good clear thinking on Richardson’s part. Would he get the votes – who knows, but it sure puts the question in the most real way to Congress.
Great post Siun, I signed the petition and will put something up on my blog about it.
I am still away from home and have no HBO so I will be missing the East Coast run of the ‘Pranos, but hope to catch it later tonight in LA at a friend’s place.
PLEASE, NO SPOILERS.
noen @ 21
I know!!!! I was just enjoying my fantasy for two minutes!!! Can’t I have even that??? ;>
perris @ 3
let’s have that problem! That would mean that congress actually had voted to de-authorize. That’d be a real different position to be talking from than the current we’re-going-to-make-a-stand-er-oops-whatever-you-want
stance.
LS @ 8
ohhhh, be still my heart!
“Please no spoilers”
I believe that was the topic of the previous thread [Lieberman]
What are the chances that Gov. Richardson’s proposal has a chance in hell? Any count on how many supporters he has been able to gather? He can get all the signatures he likes but inside the beltway this will be seen as little more than grandstanding by a prez. candidate.
How many votes does he have? My guess is that so far he has little more than a handful (I’d love to be wrong).
siun, you once posted a great excerp from “the art of war” by Sun Tzu where he decries a long military engagement
I can’t find the exact excerp, it is time to break that baby out and perhaps do a nice treatment for blog, no?
Boxer
Feinstein
My email:
noen @ 21
I am sick of this malarky. It is based on the notion that ALL Republicans will FOREVER remain loyal to Bush AND Cheney NO MATTER WHAT. That may have been true when Tom Delay was The Hammer.
However, every member of the House and one third of the Senate are up for re-election next year, and sooner or later they will come to the conclusion that unlimited loyalty to BushCo has limited value to their electoral health.
Bob in HI
Congress is afraid to de-authorize the war, because they are afraid that Bush will ignore it if they do;
then what will they do?
It’s a question we should all be asking ourselves: what will we do when Congress finally sorta stands up to Bush, and he defies them?
I think there’s already a subpoena from Waxman’s House Oversight Committee to Sec. State Rice; she seems disinclined to comply. So far Waxman hasn’t done anything about it except to send a series of increasingly testy letters.
What do you think Bush would do if Rove were declared in contempt of the House for failing to comply with a subpoena? I’m terribly afraid he’d defy the Congress. And then what would they do? What would we do?
And that’s why, seven years after the Unpleasantness of 2000, the Dems are still cowed. They still believe that Bush is so intransigent, so devoid of honor, so lawless, that he would fail to accede to the Constitutional authority of Congress.
And maybe they’re right.
So far, no one’s willing to call him on it to find out.
We can’t deal with fantasy. We have to deal with where we are today and where to go from here. That is a fact – like it or not.
Bob Schacht @ 32
I agree 100%
that’s why we need to deal, we can give them what they need, we can help get them re elected by promising no support for people that challenge their seat
we can deal and we must deal, this America cannot wait, the world can’t wait
TeddySanFran @ 31
Teddy, you da best! (((((returns hug)))))
noen …. if we don’t try, we’ll never know.
Richardson has been taking some really stellar positions and I think we should support the ones that we agree with. Will it get enough support? well, maybe not … but it will put the Congress on record and give us a platform where we can demand straight up answers from the candidates and our reps.
That seems a battle worth engaging.
LS @ 25
Sure. You can. It’s just that whenever I see comments like this I want to guide the discussion back to pragmatic solutions. I understand the sentiment and share it too.
Siun @ 37
If we are all wobbly here in virtual reality, think how tough it must be for the congresscritters to muster up some nerve.
joel hanes @ 33
Stop them. Arrest them. Cut off their funding for their buildings – even torture author Yoo said to do that. Just use the power of the purse and take control. What is the problem with doing what they are elected to do. Protect the Constitution. What is everybody afraid of. Is anybody really afraid of W? Get real. Karl Rove is a puss, and Cheney is an old coot. Really, it is the Wizard of Oz that we are living.
Kathryn, can you tell I’m getting a *little* tired of the Senatorial intern pressing the Iraq button for my email response? I ask specific questions about specific proposals and all I get in return is the blah-blah-blah from them both. We deserve real answers from our legislators — and their “people” need to press them for those answers.
The canned email responses that “we’re pedalling as fast as we can” don’t cut it. If we are ever to reach a tipping point, we must push for actual answers and real representation.
Siun, what are the odds Governor Richardson might come to the Lake for a chat about his idea?
noen @ 38
I know. Pragmatic hasn’t worked so far though. It’s bigger than that, I’m afraid.
perris @ 30
When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming,
[…] you will exhaust your strength, and if the campaign is
protracted, the resources of the state will not be equal to the
strain. […] In all history, there is no instance of a country
having benefited from prolonged warfare. Only one who knows the
distasterous effects of a long war can realize the supreme
importance of rapidity in bringing it to a close.
[Sun Tzu, The Art of War, 400BC]
Considering 70% of the country is against the war, it doesn’t matter what the MSM whores have to say. They are becoming less relevant every day.
Bob Schacht @ 32
I would like to believe that Bob but I see no evidence of that. Do you have any? The GOP is going to try to purge Chuck Hagel and they may succeed at that. If they do, you will see the rest of the members falling in lock step and marching off a cliff.
If nothing else, I see no reason that the GOP cannot be successful in stalling and obstructing until ‘08.
Actually I agree with Bob Schacht @ June 10th, 2007 at 6:27 pm.
It is malarkey it’s people in the club being all cosy and collegiate. It’s way past time that people stopped pretending that the republicans, and a hell of a lot of the democrats come to that, are anything more than cynical and that they’ll do anything to hang on to office.
They’re vulneralbe and they’re scared. Attack and don’t let up and once you’ve got them down keep kicking because that’s how the republicans and their collegial buddies will do to you.
wigwam @ 43
that’s it
man that is great, that is aprapos and that needs to be quoted by the progressives
time to break it out
OMG. Sopranos is great…maybe it should be live blogged!!! I hate it when a show ends or when I get to the end of a book.
LS @ 42
I don’t understand. “What works”, or in other words pragmatism, is all we have. Is there something else?
We can pass this with a simple majority right? In the Senate we need to worry about filibusters from Holy Joe…but if we keep the Senate open with a rotating minium of Senators over the summer like I heard Reid was thinking about doing to stop Bush recess appointments. Then Joe and the Republicans filibusters would be volunteering in a sense to keep the Senate staffed over the Summer Freeing up more but proably not all Democrats to enjoy the summer!
They cannot be arrested. Constitutionally, the President and Vice President are immune from arrest.
That is Fitzgerald’s dilemma.
The only thing that can be done is Impeachment by the House of Representatives, and conviction at trial in the Senate. At that point, they are removed from office.
And then they can be arrested.
It makes me crazy, but I am so devoted to the Constitution of the United States that I have accepted this.
Just once, when a filibuster is threatened, I’d like to see someone call the bluff. Make ‘em *do* it. Then, when they wear out, have the damn vote.
Reid may be from Nevada, but he’s no p*ker player.
LS @ 48
Oh MY!
tbsa @ 44
Ain’t that the truth!!! The MSM’s credibility is sinking faster than the Congressional Dem’s poll numbers, maybe, ‘We the People’ will finally wake up from our six year slumber!!! One can only hope!!! *g*
raw story has a lead on the new york times monday headlines and a snippet;
Monday’s New York Times will lead with a story by veteran Iraq correspondent John Burns revealing that the U.S. military has confirmed that it is arming Sunni insurgent factions to try to contain al-Qaida in Mesopotamia, RAW STORY has learned.
Would the duty editor please drop the firetongs and report to the nearest keyboard :-)
Oh my God. I’m feeling an attack of radicalism coming on.
perris @ 47
Here’s my favorite:
It’s my favorite because I’m sick and tired of hearing people talk about what warriors Republicans are and what wusses democrats are. The objective for which Bush invaded Iran had already been achieved by Bill Clinton without spilling American blood and with spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. That is what “the ancients called a ‘clever fighter’ “.
Suin –
Those links you recommended — The Air War in Iraq Uncovered by Nick Turse over at TomDispatch are breathtaking. It does remind me of when Sy Hersh broke the My Lai story. It was in Dispatch News Service. Very few papers bought in (the only MSM was the Chicago Sun-Times.) So it must be like rolling that boulder up the hill, but that’s where the blogs, and the stories you cited, somehow are finally building momentum — drop after drop. And while it seems like a thunderstorm to me, maybe turning on one person at a time, make for real change. I hope like hell I’m not just whistling past the cemetery, De-authorize might start to get people’s undivided attention.
MfI … I’m sharpening my pointy toes boots!
This is not about impeachment – it’s about taking a very clear right step. De-Authorize the occupation now. Not taking those steps because we are afraid we might see the reality of the lawlessness of this administration makes us complicit … and makes the members of Congress who refuse to act complicit.
(ps, No live blogging Soprano’s please – some of us want to see the whole thing with no spoilers later this evening.)
wigwam @ 43
it goes on though doesn’t it?
something to the effect of no great victory from protracted engagement
that’s a great part of the excerp
CTuttle @ 54
I don’t see it. Fox is still the most popular network isn’t it? Are there thousands protesting in the streets? No. Are a majority of the masses of people calling and writing to end this war now? No. Does a majority even vote? No, they do not. They are too busy with their own lives or else they’re watching Paris Hilton throwing a tantrum.
Most people don’t even know who their representative is.
jayt @ 52
They changed the rules on filibuster back about 20-30 years ago so that the Senators calling for the “filibuster” no longer have to stand and talk non-stop for forever. At the same time, they changed it from a 2/3 (67 votes) for cloture to the 60 votes for cloture. THAT’S why the 60 vote mark is so important. And as long as Toothless Mitch is running the Republics, they’ll block anything that reasonable people want to see. THAT is part of the reality until after the 11/08 election.
Yes Sir! correcting typo now … tongs at parade rest.
> Arrest them.
I’d like to point out, as gently as possible, that the Department of Justice is currently taking orders from someone named Gonzales. Why do you think he’s still there?
Do you think that Gonzales is going to issue orders to arrest anyone at the White House?
Nonsense.
Everyone in the White House is currently Exempt, and they know it.
perris @ 5
Here’s a question as far as a resolution in Congress goes: What are the chances of such a resolution standing up to a challenge under Chadra? IANAL, but I thought that case ended the congressional veto.
beth meacham @ 51
… provided that they haven’t pardoned each other on the way out the door.
Thanks Siun, I’ll be sure to share this with some friends.
I like Richardson, this got my attention Diplomacy, Not Attacks, and his record on gay rights as govenor is impressive, which I hope he would take to the federal level.
And Senator Dodd with his stand up support for Ned, along with his overall record should receive serious attention.
dakine01 @ 63
damn – didn’t know that. (’course, that whole period of 20-30 years ago has some long, hazy holes in it on my part.) ahem.
Senate website on filibuster/cloture
James – link please? I’d be interested in seeing more on that.
Richardson’s team points out that the de-authorization does not require a presidential signature, hence the whole veto issue is moot.
And Lew – thanks for pointing to those links on the air war. They are very important stories and it would be great if folks would spread them around.
While you’re at it go after the mercenaries. No mercenaries no war in Irak – for which you can thank Rummy’s “reforms”. Most of that money comes from the monies allocated to Kindofsleazy Rice because it’s “aid” (try not to puke)
Senator Tom Coburn has an amendment planned for the Abu no-confidence vote tomorrow afternoon: It takes one to know one.
dakine01 @ 63
How often do they have to talk at least once every day? What about Weekends? I could live with Joe and a few Republicans not going home to campaign and raise money over the summer.
jayt @ 69
jayt:
This is from wiki:
In current practice, Senate Rule 22 permits procedural filibusters, in which actual continuous floor speeches are not required, although the Senate Majority Leader may require an actual traditional filibuster if he or she so chooses. This threat of a filibuster can be just as powerful as an actual filibuster.
While it may seem premature at the moment, it would be nice is some of the candidates discuss the specific qualities they would like to see in their nomination for Attorney General. If the election turn out the way I would hope, aggressive attention from Congressional investigators, together with a hard nosed look from the Justice Department might set out on a two year “special” look at White House illegalities (which also would include the past DOJ leadership as well as the Beebe’s and the Yoo’s.) More light, more light.
TeddySanFran @ 73
I think the vote needs to be postponed one more time till we get more from this;
(think progress)
One of the advantages to supporting Richardson’t de-authorization is that it allows us to put the issue to the candidates very directly. HRC can’t hide behind “gosh, W lied to us and now what can we do” for example. This says, ok that was done – now is time to end it. Pure and simple. No “gosh, but the troops won’t have MREs” … it removes all the cover that so many D’s are using to avoid ending the occupation.
I think Bill Richardson would certainly consider a live blog. . .will spotlight this to his staff.
I’ve been chatting with Richardson’s staff and I hope we’ll have news of a visit sometime soon. I’d sure like to learn more about his other positions – and thank him for this and for his amazingly strong stand on global warming (backed up by action as Governor). Oh, he’s also sane about medical marijuana too …
perris @ 3
LS said it last thread. We take to the streets.
Siun @ 78
I would love to see this happen. How many votes does he have? What, realistically are his chances of getting this through?
perris @ 61
Here is the whole chapter from a different translation.
Noen – I don’t know what support in Congress he has … hopefully, we can all create some!
noen @ 49
Hmmm. You are asking a layman a complicated question that the “layman” raised.
We have a constitution. We have laws. We preemtively attacked a sovereign nation based on faulty and suspect evidence, that proved to be untrue. We have had serious questions regarding the vote count of two presidential elections. The people in power created documents in the 1990’s (PNAC) expressing their agenda. Most of that agenda has come to pass. Our public media has supported the agenda of the administration based sometimes on pressure from those “in power” (Libby trial evidence). Our Justice Department and many other departments have been infiltrated by political operatives that seek to shape the characterization of the laws of our land. Our taxpayers have been duped by lobbyists who misused the funds to support partisan efforts. Our taxpaying dollars have been used to pad personal lifestyles of congressmen, such as convicted felon Cunningham. Our government has not acted during national emergencies such as Katrina or Rita. We watched in horror as a city died in front of our eyes! Our jobs have been outsourced, and our citizens displaced. We can’t fly on an airplane if we speak our minds, because we’ve been eavesdropped on and deemed as dangerous without probabable cause. We have lost Habeas Corpus. Okay, there is tons more, but I stop there. Pragmatic has not worked so far. This is serious. I trust that the Democratic leadership is more aware of these things than I am. They have access to information we will never see.
The thing that most alarms me, is a pre-emptive strike on Iran right now. Our civil rights are equally important, and our exit from the debacle in Iraq is equally important. We stand at a crossroads right now. We need some really strong leaders, and we need them NOW.
wigwam @ 83
thanx, will read L8tr 2nite
It’s starting to get kind of urgent. The bridge campaign is intensifying. Another one was blown today and that one’s important so important that it was permanently under heavy US guard. Then there was this that was a time on target barrage not a lucky shot.
Siun @ 80
The problem I have with richardson is two-fold
1) His exageration/lying on his resume for years about having been drafted by the KC Royals.
2) His ludicrous performance at the debates including naming Whizzer White as his fave Supreme Court Justice ucz he was a jock and his support for Abu solely becuz he was Hispanic
Neither of those items lend themselves to my having confidence in the man, no matter how much I may have hoped for better given his resume.
I like Richardson- appears to be competent- an undervalued commodity. Doesn’t appear to have much of a chance- but it IS early.
Siun @ 23
I sent him a little money too. This kind of work deserves to be rewarded.
I’m still with Gore.
I’m sorry to be late here but I am just blown away with the citation from TeddySanfran at 73. Here’s the link. A real mensch.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article…..6455062969
boing flying forward one-and-a-half somersaults, pike position, no splash
g’evening siun. excellent post and discussion tonight.
You guys won’t believe what happened w/ the SOpranos.
Right at the end, Tony…
Kidding, I dont even have HBO.
markfromireland @ 87
Yup. It is not by accident. They are following an obvious strategy. Not good.
AUMG for Iraq
It’s worth reading. It’s kinda quaint.
Siun @ 71
The discussion on Chadha was in The National Security Constitution by Harold Koh, Dean of Yale Law School published in 1990. The case itself can be downloaded at FindLaw:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/…..;page=919.
On Wiki here is the blurb for the holding:
“Congress may not promulgate a statute granting to itself a legislative veto over actions of the executive branch consistent with the bicameralism principle and Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution.”
It has nothing to dow ith a bill proceeding to the president for him to veto; the legislative veto worked, until 1983, as a way of preventing executive action by a congressional majority.
This was one of a number of decisions in the 80s whereby the Berger court weakened the legislative branch in favor of the executive.
tee vee is dead to me now. ‘cept C-Span. And C-Span 2… and 3.
And I’ll never tell.
I signed the petition. Great idea, wonder if it will get any traction amongst this bunch of wusses. I sure hope so, as it seems pretty straight-forward. Unfortunately, that will probably be its undoing. Boy, what a eeyore I am. :)
Teddy SanFran @ 42
I find that calling and politely asking for the staffer responsible for particular issues is a better way to get answers. If you don’t call too often, you can set up a personal relationship with people and get reasonable answers.
LS @ 85
I certainly share your concerns. I’m really worried that Lieberman’s recent call for bombing Iran is really just preparing America for what is to come. I am suspicious that Lieberman was given that message by the administration and that the bombing campaign will start soon. Or maybe I am just being paranoid, I can’t tell any more.
Senator Clinton is not going to like any Democrats to step out of line.
joel hanes @33, I agree totally. It’s time to find out if the constitution is still operative.
Hey, Teddy, great letters to Boxer/Fienstein. I’m right behind you, as usual!
Siun @ 78
Doesn’t Clinton have a proposal similar to this, with an October timeline, so that the authorization ends at exactly five years? If so, she should explain why we’re waiting and not moving forward right now, as Richardson proposes.
This incidentally is how AP are running the Richardson story:
Richardson: I’d leave no troops in Iraq
I’m a believer in the Constitution but I’m beginning to realize it’s time for an overhaul of the document. First off I don’t believe our Founding Fathers believed that it should last forever, even with amendments. Second, I doubt they ever imagined a bunch like the Bush Crime Family coming along. An administration that was corrupt and evil that they had no desire to follow any rule of law.
I wonder what this country would be like if it was formed today. Would we be as we’d all like the country to be or what the neoCONS see the country as? If we were to re-do the Constitution who would do it, who would the American people trust to do it. Well those Americans and the MSM who aren’t caught up in the Paris Hilton debacle.
I hope I haven’t strayed off the path too much here. It’s just something that’s been eating away at me after seeing how the British got rid of Bush’s lapdog Tony Blair and how sweet that was.
Remember to keep smiling, it makes them wonder what you’re up to!
James – thank you! I’ll take a close look at those.
About the only thing I care about is getting rid of the Republicans. Too bad. So sad. And if my party keeps doing what it’s doing now (Iraq, DLC, Lieberman, etc.) after 2008, I’ll work on getting rid of them.
Didn’t Whizzer White write the dissent in Roe?
Yes he did, castigating the majority for their holding that:
Bad choice, Bill Richardson.
Demos. Talk is cheap.
My message:
Please end this illegitimate war with a country who did not, nor have the ability to, threaten the U.S.A. This administration’s justification to invade Iraq was on the information provided by a known alcoholic who had no international credibility AND a 40 year Iraqi refugee who was convicted of bank fraud!
Therefore, our honorable military personnel were not engaged in protecting the U.S.A. and are currently not improving the safety of the American Citizens nor the international community as a whole!
Bring them home, and let’s reinstate honesty, integrity, and accountability to our Nation!
Your consideration is greatly appreciated.
Okay. Another major bridge blown up surrounding Baghdad today. Saddam was a student of Stalin.
http://www.militaryhistoryonli…..rossa.aspx
The DLC has decided for a long time who the Democratic candidate will be. And I so resent it.
There are only 3 bridges. Two have been hit badly. One to go.
rwcole @ 89
I’ve been open to a Richardson possibilty for some time now, Yeah, it’s early
OT – The Sopranos… ARRG%$&*#$@!!!!!!
LOL
And as I pointed out above that bridge is so important it was under permanent heavy and I do mean heavy US guard.
No Bg there are 13 major bridges in Baghdad
When I hear about these bridges (and there will be more, probably) I wonder if we’re still seeing the resistance/insurgency outlined by Saddam’s regime in case of invasion.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 113
And who might that be, Hilary?
In much less than a year from now, we might want to coalesce around one candidate for the next president.
I had not realized … until some discussions with our friend MfI … how really significant the bridge attacks are.
While Congress quibbles, the US troops are being methodically cut off from supply lines and exit routes … so how does leaving them there show support?
noen @ 101
That is how I feel exactly. I feel he is softening us up, or..he is pushing McCain. Hard to tell.
The bridges are absolutely critical to the supply line. HCM Trail. Which of course we never shut down.
Of course you are teddy thats the army that bremer disbanded doing what soldiers do. Isolate, concentrate, annihilate.
Here’s the roll call on Abu’s confirmation:
http://www.senate.gov/legislat…..vote=00003
I really dislike having to say this. I will support the Democratic candidate for President in 2008.
But I believe there are far better Democratic candidates than the two front-runners.
bg @ 114
Better than building Walls, Whatcha think…!!!
Do not underestimate the Iraqi soldiers.
Saddam studied Stalin and Lenin – remember the Saddam statue….
These people want us out. They are not stupid. Beware of the war strategy of the Battle of Stalingrad. Just sayin’
I thought this was a pretty good article on bridges in the Iraq.
http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/2359
TeddySanFran @ 41
My congresscritter has a public email, and complains about being inundated with emails. Of course, most of them are forwards, so your intelligent, individually crafted emails may not get noticed. I like to cultivate a relationship with their Chief of Staff, and send them something maybe once a week, so they won’t have to filter my emails to some automatic processor.
Both my senators are worse. They both use a webmail system now, which is less user-friendly. Can’t just forward stuff to them, which is probably why they use it.
Then you better get used to using the phone.
There’s a nice idea.
Bob in HI
Pursang @ 128
Really good.
Democrats. You all really need to listen to last November’s vote. And to your base. I’m not kidding. Beneath the surface, there is disquiet.
Wasn’t this deauthorization plan originally flown in the Clinton camp?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 102
She can block this but if we can expose her as the force blocking this then if anything REALLY goes bad in Iraq it will hurt her. The Centerist Democrats like Hilary who care about their “political viability” are going to have to stop thinking about looking weak on the war. Nope they need to start thinking about their “political viability” if something bad happens in Iraq. How long can this stalemate go on? I heard on Time’s blog Jon McCain is NOW reading about Dien Bien Phu something is in the air and its not good.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 131
Just a tiny bit beneath the surface. Same as my anger.
Here’s one ‘wonky type’ (Professor Michael Glennon) discussing the War Powers Resolution and the powers of Congress in pre-invasion Senate Judiciary Committee testimony in 2002:
Professor Glennon was describing the effects of the 2001 AUMF, of course, because the 2002 (Iraq invasion) AUMF had not yet been passed. His point about a veto, however, should remain the same with regard to both AUMFs.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/te…..wit_id=434
I’d like to know more detail about why Richardson thinks a presidential signature is not required on this resolution to deauthorize. That assertion standing on its own is not convincing.
Others I know of who are talking about offering a form of deauthorization of the 2002 AUMF are Senators Byrd and Clinton, Rep. Ellen Tauscher (surprisingly), and I believe a “bipartisan” group of corporate-controlled Members of Congress who are trying to use it as cover for pretending to scale back our involvement in Iraq without actually doing so. Speaker Pelosi has already stated that she will bring Tauscher’s proposal (or something similar) to the floor for a vote.
In the endless elevation of the Executive Branch to supremacy over the Legislative Branch in our society, this AUMF deauthorization is an extremely important counteracting force to help restore the Founders’ intended balance between the branches of government, and the central power of We, the People in our federal legislature.
Tragically, despicably, and ominously, however, now that we have been robbed of hope by Congressional Democrats as to any future acts of integrity from their leadership, while I wholeheartedly support the deauthorization approach, I can predict nothing about its future prospects in Congress under the current A*P*C-cowed crowd of incumbents, who are desperately eager to abandon and cede their Constitutional powers (and sworn duties) to a lawless Executive Branch before the country can fully realize what they’ve done.
markfromireland @ 46
Yes!
Jebbus Fracking Christ, yes!
Civil society kicked the WTO’s ass in ‘99.
And Civil society kicked the IMF/WB’s ass in 2000.
And eight years later, the WTO / WB / IMF are still effectively paralyzed by internal dissent arising from external pressure.
We The People – and the largely cowardly crew of Dems who purport to represent us – we can win this fight.
If we ever fucking start it.
CTuttle @ 126
Ummmmm….not good. If the U.S. Military does not take some action to amend the problem…not good. One more bridge….shit will hit the fan.
Loo Hoo .. HRC has talked about some form of deauthorization – in fact she mentioned it at the same time she told the NYT that she would not have voted for the McGovern amendment. And she wants to retain a rather large number of US troops in Iraq after “leaving” .. figures mentioned as her plan run up to 70,000!
Democrats. What results have you given us in six months? And I don’t give a rats behind any longer about having patience. Do something. I want out of Iraq and I don’t care what it takes. Do you hear me?
For the second time that figure of 3 bridges is BS Baghdad has 13 major bridges and I should know I cross them often enough when I’m there.
markfromireland, just how strategic was the bridge that was hit today? based on your knowledge.
markfromireland @ 140
So, are you telling us that it is not a big deal? Is there nothing to worry about? Is everything going to be alright baby???? Tell us that.
LS @ 137
I wholeheartedly concur, however, it would isolate Sunnis from Shi’a more effectively than our feeble walls! I sincerely hope the Iraqi Congress would ask us to leave!!! They seem to have more intestinal fortitude than our own congress!!! :-)
Pow wow – wow! thank you! Great information, as always! Let’s hope we can get Richardson to set up a visit so we can learn more!
pow wow – you are golden..)
markfromireland @ 140
Fiction: The George Washington Bridge was blown up today, making commuter traffic difficult for New Yorkers, since the Triboro Bridge and the Brooklyn Bridge have already ceased to exist.
Excuse me!!! If I lived in Baghdad, I would be somewhat alarmed, don’t downplay this!!!
I’m all for that, Siun. And thanks for this post and the air war link.
I hope Keith will have Turley on tomorrow night to discuss deauthorization.
Hola, Suzanne! Much appreciate all you do.
LS – is the evening getting a bit dull for you? Perhaps correcting your error in fact would have been a better course than trying to provoke with such comments. I suspect you will get a well deserved reply …
Glad I could help ya out, LooHoo.
Perris@3 and noen@10 – where is Christy when we need her, to say “Cut out the Eeyore shit!” and get to work!
de-authorize the war?
de-authorize the wars?
o hell yeah! If fact a litmus test, among others, for the candidate I’ll vote for.
Hi-
Didn’t Dennis Kucenich want to de-authorize the war?
As the GOP 2008 presidential candidates continue on a steep descent into the crazy/loopy world view only the GOP could think is a good place to go the DEMS are going to have to be the real world alternative choice in 2008. Again.
As many here at fdl are aware of how or where the DEMS tend to snatch defeat/losing from the hands of victory I wont digress further about THAT either…
Bill Richardson has displayed some genuine better thinking about leaving Iraq unconditionally. That makes him a very rare current contender in the running for prez contest these days.
I hope Al Gore will run and be elected. That remains my highest hope and devotional thought for this cycle of Who Wants To Be the President? in American electoral sweepstakes.
Sen. Clinton is just not hitting the marks on being outfront or being able to find the target bulls-eyes. She has had lots and lots of prime time,face time,name time and money time. It just is not reaching 3..2..1…ignition/blast-off for me with her.
Edwards should become Al Gore’s VP. That seems about right.
The American ‘ presence ‘ in Iraq has lots of historical American ME baggage and I doubt the DC DEMS are going to buck all that.
Bill Richardson does deserve credit for stating that he would do just that…buck decades of pre-dispositioned American ME policy.
American militarism is fully wound into that policy and taking on the American militarists is a serious political fight. One should count the Pentagon/American arms makers and dealers as being the viable,mythical American third national political party. That is what they are. Take them on and you are in for some heavy lifting and fighting . This is not unknown in DEM and GOP DC circles.
The trick in WashDC is to move the lines farther to the left and more to a anti-American militarism/corporatism way of being America. It ain’t easy and that is why finding backbones in the DC DEMS ranks these days to take on the militarists is like finding a missing eye contact lens on a wet tile floor.
Richardson scores points with this idea. It would be nice to see an epidemic of copycatitis break out in the DEMS ranks over it.
That would be nice. That also is very unlikely.
Al Gore….please run. Please.
Milan River @ 153
I thought so
I’m old enough to have a pretty good memory of the flights out of VietNam…and those visions are coming back.
OT: The conundrum that has never left my mind is whether it was more tragic that the US Supremes illegally gave us 41 or that we the people elected him twice…sort of.
Milan River @ 153
the kucinich plan
LS coming from someone who last night suggested a strategy thast would involve your country finding another six hundred thousand combat troops plus tail and who sedulously avioded my repeated question of where the eff you were going to find them my I sugggest that you stop m**st*rb*t*ng your ego by displaying your pathetically inadequate grasp of the terrain of which we’re talking and your even worse grasp of logistics.
Suzanne that bridge is vital both logistically and tactically. Logistically it makes convoys easier to attack (and before anyone says “air supply” bwaaaa hahahaahahahha)
That’s why I said this:
in an earlier comment. Logistically it means that the siege of Baghdad is tightening.
Tactically it means that local commanders are going to find it more difficult to send reinforcements to units of theirs that get into trouble. It’s the logistics aspect that’s more important.
Shootthatarrow … interesting comment and very good points on the historic context.
Siun @ 149
??? Please explain your comment more fully??? Which error in fact are you referring to, so that I can correct it.????
masaccio @ 100
Yes, this is a good strategy. But those staffers are in the Washington office, aren’t they?
Bob in HI
TSF is upstairs with Late Nite
Thanks tw3k- you are a quick draw.
MarkfromIreland 158,
“LS coming from someone who last night suggested a strategy thast would involve your country finding another six hundred thousand combat troops plus tail and who sedulously avioded my repeated question of where the eff you were going to find them my I sugggest that you stop m**st*rb*t*ng your ego by displaying your pathetically inadequate grasp of the terrain of which we’re talking and your even worse grasp of logistics.”
What are you talking about??? I am as antiwar as anyone on this site. I’m completely confused by your charges. Is there a misunderstanding??? What is going on here?
B. Hatten June 10th, 2007 at 8:02 pm – flights out are not an option this time. They’re going to have to fight their way south if it comes to that and that’s going to be more than ordinarily difficult both because of the terrain and because there are several chokepoints.
Eureka Springs @ 145
Siun @ 144
Ditto, however, that’s for revoking AUMF, Congress can skirt any veto, by the power of the purse, and simply with the power of the purse!!! It really is as simple as not authorizing anymore funds!!! Honestly! The Executive has no real Authority in procuring Funds, pure and simple!!!
This is a great topic. What is with all the repetition above? Let’s have ideas. How does the Constitution state that a war is ended? What is so difficult about Richardson’s idea to just declare the war over? Is this concept confusing or just looked at through cowardly eyes?
LS – you continued with the 3 bridges and then got downright snippy when MfI was pointing out that there are more than 3 bridges … your comments 142 and 146 sure rubbed me the wrong way and I’m not even someone who actually crosses those bridges. MfI is.
markfromireland @ 72
Siun, I’d sent faxes to both of my Senators (Levin and Stabenow) asking them to de-authorize the AUMF; in fact, I think I’ve sent several different variants on this theme to Levin as ranking minority on Armed Services and as Chair of same. I think it comes down to the number of votes; they’re still afraid of bad press if they don’t get to the magic number of votes.
I like the tack that markfromireland suggests and had already sent a fax to this effect, asking for defunding of contracted services with all necessary services to be provided by U.S. military in-house in Iraq for security reasons — very hard for Repugs to get around this point — and to limit the overall expense so that the actual size of the effort contracts with the departure of contractors. Why not try putting through both at the same time, rather like the spaghetti approach: throw it all at the wall and see what sticks. It’s the least we can do for the lives at risk.
TeddySanFran @ 117
And this is what makes it SO different from South Korea, Bush’s currently favorite model.
Bob in HI
Rayne – I like it!
jayackroyd @ 96 — quaint, indeed.
makes me weep.
when real life is so sinister, who needs the Sopranos?
Siun, thanks. great discussion and links. good to be Lakeside.
Mark from Ireland,
It seems to me that the entire strategic goal of the insurgency should be to cut the American supply lines and thus make the continued occupation simply not feasible. I wrote a piece about this back in February, and I haven’t seen anything yet to invalidate my conclusions-but, like many, I have no experience on the ground in-theater, and thus am theorizing from a distance. As someone who’s been there, would you mind taking a look at it, and tell me what you think?
Green Zone Tet
Nico! what a treat lady!
big smile from here …
Don’t give me that garbage LS you were spouting complete and total garbage last night and when I as a professional soldier very familiar with Iraq pointed it out to you sedulously didn’t reply.
Moreover you spouted your ludicrous trash not only when I was around but also in the presence of a desperately worried parent and of someone who works with soldiers every day so don’t even think of trying to pull that injured innocence tone.
And for the record as a professional soldier I’m not antiwar there are times when war is needed ask the family’s of any of the innocent victims of your country’s aggressive racist and brutal war against the Iraki people.
Pompous inadequate pathetic little twit it’s because of w*ank*rs like you that these poor two poor b*st*rds were captured and died screaming.
Now go get some cheetohs ….
Give me a few muntes ronD i need to read it :-)
Siun @ 168
Thank you Siun for responding. I guess I got wound up because I am concerned that the routes out of Baghdad are getting blown up systematically. I’m not making that up. I feel that to downplay that is like downplaying if major bridges out of a city, say NY for example, were destroyed, it is a major, major concern. I’m sorry if that is not what someone wanted to hear, but, it is the news, and I’m worried. If you told me that only 3 out of say 10 bridges in NY were blown up and that was okay, I’d be really worried…hello. Why is that the wrong thing to say?
Listen to the language carefully … when Ms. Clinton came out in favor of a similar plan, she didn’t say she was in favor of deauthorizing the war, she said she was in favor of “sunsetting” the existing resolution, so that the Senate would have time to debate and pass a NEW resolution, which presumably would continue the Iraq war, just with different language. I’d love it if this were a serious attempt to end the war, but I’m afraid I think this is just a little bit of bureaucratic clean-up to make sure the troops can stay there for years to come. I fully expect 80% of Senate Democrats to vote to continue the war, just as they voted to continue the funding last month.
LS @ 34
ditto
Much as I like Richardson I think he’s off a little here, over-reacting a bit.
Thanks, Siun.
I think Cheney also tipped his hand about the other tack we should be taking right now, and that is begin an all-out negative news assault on Cheney as prep for impeachment. Fouad Ajami’s WSJ op-ed about Libby as “fallen soldier” was an exercise in remote authorship by Cheney; he views himself as the ultimate general in a war fought by his aides-de-camp.
In which case I say Bring. It. On.
We go after the Dark Lord, pointing out his repeated involvement in offenses against the public — his direct involvement in NSA spying, his direct involvement in a security breach betraying one of our deepest cover agents, his direct involvement in the selling of a war that has been completely illegal and utterly f*cked up in its prosecution.
Not one progressive blog should go a day without an anti-Cheney post about his unsuitability for office; it should be about as easy as hitting your best elderly quail hunting buddy in the face since Cheney’s JAR hovers above the single digits.
And then we ask the Repugs in Congress why they are siding with Cheney and protecting his ugly, sorry ass, especially when Cheney hurts Brand Repug so damned badly.
Bet you dollars to donuts that if Cheney was impeached, the rest of the chips would all fall into place and we’d be out of Iraq.
see
budget, black, the
scandal, Iran-Contra, the
state of emergency, rules for declaring
posse comitatus, lack of
Besides, Bush is already spending money that Congress never appropriated in Iraq, and then coming to them with the invoice, after the fact.
What makes you think that the flow of orders and memos and dollars will stop just because Congress stamps its tiny foot? Bush will ignore them, and he controls the entire executive branch.
You know, the one with all the guns and bombs and planes and policemen and ATF and FBI and the Army and Secret Service and stuff. The branch of the Government that _writes_ _checks_. The branch that prints money.
I tell you, it’s like some of you haven’t been paying attention at all the last six years. From a time even before they assumed power, Bush & hench have simply _taken_ what they wanted in the most in-your-face way possible, and dared the rest of the government to call them on it.
markfromireland @ 175
What are you referring to??? What did I say that has you so angry? I am completely at a loss as to what you are referring to. If I said something that made you think the kind of things you are inferring, I am so sorry, but I don’t know what you are talking about!
Suzanne, methinks some IP addresses may need to be checked. Capice?
HuffPo is quoting a Wash Post article about cutting troops and settling in for a very long stay with references/sources for a kind of consensus on this plan. I wonder if the Richardson move would make anything go any faster.
rayne, YGM
No ron I don’t accept the analogy with “tet”. They don’t need to mount a “tet” and nobody who knows what they’re talking about ever said the Iraki army had bad officers. They’re damned good. All they need to do is mount a series of what we call “complex” attacks by which we mean multipart coordinated attacks against key outposts.
Coupled with extensive use of TOT area denial and heavy artillery (you’re wrong there the artillery was the first thing that vanished and none of it from the armouries has ever turned up.) and your troops in Baghdad will be down to doing something that they’re very bad at. House to house fighting. It’s not that they’re not willing or physically courageous but they’re not trained for it. The republican guard are.
We’re still at the shatter attack phase but you are right to identify what’s coming its the final phase of a failed invasion – repeated battles for control of the capital. Good piece.
B. Hatten @ 183
Yep, that looks like the Republican plan for winning the Presidency in 2008 … draw down the troops some, say we’re on the “road to victory” but we have to “stay the course” and we definitely can’t hand over such a dangerous situation to the crazy Democrats. I don’t see how Clinton could win against that strategy, since she has been unable to come up with any convincing position on the war. Obama or Edwards might have a better chance.
Mark don’t call LS or anyone else here a Pathetic Twit or Wanker we try to address ideas here sometimes we are wrong and sometimes we argue about…ideas. Personal insults are where we draw the line many of us left the Huffington Post for exactly that reason. If you want respect for being a “military proffesional ” which your constant Appeals to Authority suggest. Then try not insulting people personally yesterday we argued I admitted I was wrong I honestly thought you were rude but you stayed away from personal insults. Why are you going after LS like this today?
bg @ 114
Dien bien phu ?
things come undone @ 133
Geez, I just wrote Dien bien phu. This is not good.
MarkH @ 189
I saw that. Why’d you write that?
LS talked crap last things come undone I called him or her on it last night and now they’re trying to deny it.
That’s the behaviour of both a wanker and a twit and I have no reservations whatsoever in calling them that. Indeed I’m amazed at my moderation.
And don’t give me that garbage about appeals to authority – unlike him/her or you I have had to turn up to family home’s and tell them why their father is dead I make no bones about the fact that I believe a military defeat of your forces in Irak is the only thing that will force you to leave but I equally make no bones about the fact that the family’s of the increasing numbers of your soldiers killed are going through hell.
Jane Hamsher @ 2
Jane, I thought that this statement, from our policy team, would help you and
FDL’s readers, understand where the Governor is coming from. A reader at MyDD,
asked how the Governor’s call for de-authorization resolution would be implemented.
The following is our response:
I’d also like to point out this AP
story from today, discussing how Governor Richardson, is the only candidate
calling for a total troop withdrawal from Iraq.
SMarkH @ 188
Sorry don’t know how to link its a battle the French fought when the lost the first Indochina war the Viet Minh surounded a French base cut off its access to ground supplies then when the French started suppling the base by air the Viet Minh brought in their antiaircraft guns and artilery shooting planes from the sky and french troops on the base. This battle is the nightmare scenerio of what could happen in the Green Zone if we let the Iraq’s blow up all the bridges. Time’s blog Swampland reported that a book on the battle plus other books was on John McCain’s reading list. I freaked in the comments about that because why would anyone read a book about a defeat unless they and the Pentagon were worried and were already war gamming the possibilty. Today’s news seems to confirm that history may be repeating.
Joaquin – Thank you so much for stopping by and for providing more info.
I hope you’ll pass along the comments here to the Governor as well as our interest in having him visit some time soon!
Joaquin – thanks for taking the time to provide more detailed background.
I sympathize with the approach of cancelling the AUMF, and I applaud Governor Richardson for proposing it. As I said above, though, it seems to me awfully easy for the Senate to take away with one hand what it gives with the other, simply by passing a new AUMF to replace the old one.
Given the current disposition of the Democrats in the Senate, there are somewhere between 80 and 90 votes for continuing the war. I’m afraid a new AUMF would pass easily.
very late to the party but, Siun, i think Richardson has framed this in the right way and you have highlighted it for us brilliantly. i’m very much for pushing this hard. one of the outcomes will be to see just how committed people like joe sestak actually are.
gussmith @ 167
Was the AUMF authorization to fight ‘terrorism’ or to attack Iraq?
If it’s the former, then revoking it would be a huge gain for Bush and Republicans in the coming elections. They would attack Democrats unmercifully.
If it’s the latter, then there is still the question of whether the primary motive was to fight terrorism in Iraq.
Finally, if it’s just about toppling Saddam to protect us from his terrible anger, then I see little reason to not cancel it.
However, does anyone really believe that would end things? Would it really prevent him from using a false-flag operation to generate a war with Iran?
What would the likely false-flag operation be? You can almost imagine it without even being prompted by the media or Unka Karl.
In all this it’s important to remember that whatever his response we’re still not going to be able to remove him with Impeachment. Take that as a given. Don’t question it. Assume it.
Our fight is electoral, oversight and in the courts. We’re winning on all those counts, but we could flub the election if we let them yank our chain.
Win the election by showing the American people their corruption/criminality, their unconstitutional behavior, their ineptitude, their craziness. Remember, Bush41 nicknamed them the Crazies for a reason.
Battle of Dien Bien Phu
Thanks Fahrender!
Mark H – read jayackroyd’s comment at #96 for the text of the AUMF.
If LS is wrong prove it which you did, personal insults NO!markfromireland @ 175
LS is as antiwar as anyone here accusing people like him/her of being responsible for those two solders dying well I assume its the grief talking. “Now get me some cheetos ” Misogynistic Comedian Andrew Dice Clay would have been proud of that one although “he would have said get me a beer.” Grief, Anger what ever demons you got do not take it out on us everyone here tried to stop this war.
markfromireland @ 198
Thanks Mark
LS @ 190
dunno, it just popped into my head.
Everything Bush has done seems to be related to the military experiences of his youth. There has been talk of Vietnam and recently of the long presence in Korea and with Iraq talk of Stalin and then that just sparked a memory of Dien bien phu. Were there any victories in all those events? Nope. All failures like Dubya. As we’ve said, this does not look good.
BTW, a day or two ago I was thinking how Rove was likely to end the war next summer, so they could bring troops home to parades and claim it was just like ending WWII. That appears to be out the window.
MarkH @ 203
Sigh. Anything can happen my friend. Tonight, I’m kind of speechless.
Siun @ 200
It appears they could use this language about his willingness to attack the United States as relating to 9/11 or other terrorist attacks.
I wouldn’t put it past Rove to say that cancelling the AUMF was a ’surrender’. It isn’t hard to imagine, is it?
LS made an utterly ludicrous suggestion which would get vast numbers of your troops massacred. When I pointed out last night that for that utterly ludicrous suggestion to have even a remote chance of success that you would need an extra 600,000 combat troops they very carefully didnt reply.
Tonight LS is trying to deny that and affecting injured innocence and moreover tonight they made a completely ludicrous factual error which even ½ second glance at a map would have shown to be a ludicrous error.
I’m not even slightly impressed by somebody who not to put too fine a point prostitutes the misery and the evil of war because they’re too effing wrapped up in themselves to admit that made ludicrous mistakes of the sort that get people killed.
And spare me that garbage about how you tried your best to stop the war because there’s a simple ugly fact of the matter. Your best wasn’t good enough and continues to be not good enough and lots and lots of people are dead .
Come back and bitch about me when you’ve succeeded. There’s nothing effing polite about killing people.
noen @ 29
Richardson is a Governor, not even in Congress. He is only bloviating. Easy to do when you have no power to enact a Bill.
Joaquin G. @ 192 – Now I get it… Of course! THANK YOU for that excellent, clearcut summary.
In other words, Governor Richardson is proposing to use the CONSTITUTIONAL WAR POWERS that Congress DID NOT INVOKE (because Congress did not “declare war” on terrorism or Iraq) when it passed the 2001 and 2001 AUMFs in the form of legislation based on the War Powers Resolution… [Constitutional war powers which were last used by Congress to declare war on Japan and Germany after Pearl Harbor?]
Which would mean bypassing the flawed 1973 War Powers Resolution, which has enabled our “military force” to be used around the world since WWII without a Congresssional declaration of war – a very dangerous precedent that has weakened the Legislative Branch’s powers, rather than reinforcing them as originally intended.
This seems so obvious – why didn’t we think of it years ago…
I’m on board! Full speed ahead.
Senator Byrd’s 10/11/07 AUMF anniversary date-certain for an end to our occupation is starting to look more and more inviting – if only Congress could get its principles together before August and do what Richardson suggests. What a world that would be…
markfromireland @ 206
Dear MarkfromIreland,
With all due respect, I realize that attempting to speak with you directly may not be the wisest thing to do, but in all seriousness, please allow me to inquire as to what it was that I suggested that has caused your anger toward me? Perhaps, if I knew what you were referring to precisely, I could respond accordingly. I would graciously appreciate your response.
Go read your comments on the thread last night LS.
markfromireland @ 210
Mark, I am happy to do so. Where? To what are you referring? Tell me where to read, and I will go there, I’m not sure what you are referring to. If I can locate the problem, I assure you I will address it. If I was in error, I assure you I will apologize. Please tell me what you are referring to.
[Corrected the date typo and added a P.S.; ignore version one.]
Joaquin G. @ 192 – Now I get it… Of course! THANK YOU for that excellent, clearcut summary.
In other words, Governor Richardson is proposing to use the CONSTITUTIONAL WAR POWERS that Congress DID NOT INVOKE (because Congress did not “declare war” on terrorism or Iraq) when it passed the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs in the form of legislation based on the War Powers Resolution… [Constitutional war powers which were last used by Congress to declare war on Japan and Germany after Pearl Harbor?]
Which would mean bypassing the flawed 1973 War Powers Resolution, which has enabled our “military force” to be used around the world since WWII without a Congressional declaration of war – a very dangerous precedent that has weakened the Legislative Branch’s powers, rather than reinforcing them as originally intended.
This seems so obvious – why didn’t we think of it years ago…
I’m on board! Full speed ahead.
Senator Byrd’s 10/11/07 AUMF anniversary date-certain for an end to our occupation is starting to look more and more inviting – if only Congress could get its principles together before August and do what Richardson suggests. What a world that would be…
P.S. This is a classic example of the citizenry (because less familiar and less versed in the ways of Congress) being kept in the dark by our politicians (until Richardson’s proposal) and media about achievable, realistic ways and means for Congress to end the Executive Branch’s ability to wage war against the will of the American people, even without “60 votes” in the Senate or holding more than a bare majority in both houses of Congress (and without the need to refuse to propose a spending bill in the House). What’s Howard Dean playing at, for example, by pretending that it will take a Democratic President in two years before the Legislative Branch can exert its Constitutional powers again? This Richardson proposal calls that Democratic leadership bluff, and how.
From your 110 on:
grinning … pow wow .. you said it!
Pow Wow 212, Richardson is kewl..
beth meacham @ 51
It could possibly be argued that Congress is not empowered to execute justice (except impeachment), including effecting an arrest; but We the People have original jurisdiction to arrest anyone, or even to depose them. In fact, we have the moral obligation if we believe they are tyranical. Read the Declaration of Independence.
More historical background to help answer the question: Where have all our Congressional powers gone?
http://www.warandlaw.homestead…..ernco.html
Gary Hart, in 2006:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..21896.html
It’s time for We, the People to take back our power, our Congress, and our Armed Forces from those who seized them, and from those who spurn the awesome responsibility they represent and corruptly trade on that power, in imperial Washington.
If you really want to end the invasion of Iraq here is a legislative proposal and a legislative strategy to accomplish that goal:
Gravel bill and strategy
There are at least two candidates who have proposed ending the invasion.