Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (46287)	9/22/2002 10:04:29 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

A View From 'The Heartlands'... Here's what the Editorial Board of Iowa's largest newspaper is saying about the Iraq situation... Editorial: No blank check for war Congress shouldn't delegate its war-making power to the president. By The Des Moines Register Editorial Board 09/20/2002 desmoinesregister.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- President Bush is asking Congress for a resolution that would give him "maximum flexibility" to proceed against Iraq. In effect, he wants Congress to delegate to him the power to make war. That it should not do. The Constitution places the power to declare war with Congress, not the president. Bush wants permission to attack Iraq at any time of his choosing, with or without the United Nations' support and apparently without further consultations with Congress. He said passage of a resolution "is a chance for Congress to indicate support" and show world leaders as well as Americans that he wouldn't be acting unilaterally in striking Iraq. It would be appropriate for Congress to pass a resolution indicating support for the president's demands that the United Nations hold Iraq to its promises to permit inspections and to disarm. But there should be an understanding that no American will be sent into combat without further congressional approval. When it becomes clear that Iraq is not abiding by its promise to permit comprehensive and unconditional inspections, that's the point at which Bush should return to Congress, ask for a declaration of war and make the case that it is warranted. The president is moving so quickly toward positioning the United States to engage in a war, it's easy to forget that he's never demonstrated an imminent danger to the United States that justifies a pre-emptive attack on Iraq. It's the duty of Congress to act as a check on the power of a president. Giving Bush carte blanche just to appear unified to the world would be irresponsible. The American people depend on their elected officials to demand clear and convincing assurances that military action can't be avoided. That simply hasn't been done. Instead, the country is left with a lot of "maybes." Maybe there's a link between Iraq and Sept. 11, but there's no evidence. Maybe Saddam Hussein possesses weapons and has the means of delivering them, but there's no proof. Maybe the United States would be successful in ousting Saddam, but there is no assurance his successors would be any better in the long run. Maybe Saddam can be toppled without setting off chaos throughout the Middle East. Maybe the United States can occupy Iraq and succeed in building a democracy in a multiethnic region that has no experience with democracy in its 6,000-year history. A lot of maybes. Congress should insist on evidence that Saddam Hussein is a clear and present danger before granting authority to proceed with war.

To: JohnM who wrote (46287)	9/23/2002 1:52:42 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

dissatisfaction with the outcomes of the first Gulf War. Cohen is very circumspect about making statements in Judgement of what happened, or what he thinks other people think. He says you can judge what the people involved with Gulf one think about how is ended, if they invade Iraq. He said that Rumsfeld was on the phone to Franks three or four times a day during Afghanistan, bypassing the JCOS. When he said this, I realized that the present JCOS is Air Force, and not really a "Player." Also reinforces my opinion that Rumsfeld and Cheney don't think Franks is the sharpest knife in the drawer. We need to keep in mind that Cheney was Sec Def during Gulf one. He did mention how good a Bureaucratic Infighter Powell is, and that 41 handed Powell whatever he wanted during Gulf one. Said that "Storming Norman" went into the armistice talks with the Iraqis with his own notes and set the terms without anyone else being involved. Very bad way to run it, in his opinion. Hates the term "Neocon." Says the quality of our Generals is top notch. He teaches them of course, at the War Colleges. A few at the bottom should not be there, but the top people are superb, IHO. Says that the caliber of our Military has just gotten better and better since Gulf one. Says that a common quality of the four leaders he talks about in his book was there ability to be ruthless. Says that 42 should keep talking Texan, because that is what he is. Wants him to get out and meet the troops down to Division level that will be sent into Iraq if we go. As I said, a really worthwhile interview. Lamb tried to trap him into some admissions, but he dodged them. Very, Very, smart guy. Spent his first 13 years at Harvard. NE Jewish BG. undergrad, grad, PHD and teaching at Harvard. ROTC, 6 years service, so he is no "ChickenHawk."