How could this happen?! I thought fat college kids and aging hippies had marched and waved signs opposing this!
House Approves Iraq Resolution
By Jim Abrams
Associated Press Writer
Thursday, October 10, 2002; 3:15 PM
WASHINGTON –– The House on Thursday authorized war-making powers for President Bush, giving him the extra muscle he needs is his determination to free America and the world from what he says is the growing threat of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
The 296-133 vote was a solid endorsement of Bush's insistence that he will work with the United Nations if possible, or alone if necessary, to disarm Saddam of his weapons of mass destruction. A majority of Democrats voted against the resolution even though their House leader, Dick Gephardt, was one of its authors.
"Mr. President we are about to give you a great trust," said Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas.
The Senate was prepared to act in chorus, rejecting by a 75-25 vote a bid by opponents to slow down a final vote and picking up the vital support of the Senate's top Democrat, Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.
"It is only when the Iraqi dictator is certain of our willingness to wage war if necessary that peace becomes possible, said Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif.
Bush has stressed he has made no decision about using military force against Iraq. It could take months, once that decision is made, for the military to prepare for an all-out strike.
With Congress behind him, Bush will press his case with the United Nations Security Council that it must approve a tough new resolution holding Iraq to unfettered inspections and disarmament and promising force if Iraq does not comply.
House Democrats urged the president to work closely with the U.N. before making a decision to go it alone against Iraq. "Completely bypassing the U.N. would set a dangerous precedent that would undoubtedly be used by other countries in the future to our and the world's detriment," said Gephardt.
While concerns remained about the dangers of going to war against Iraq without a strong international coalition, Thursday's vote showed stronger support for the president than his father, the George H.W. Bush, received in 1991. The House then voted 250-183 to endorse using American troops to drive Iraq from Kuwait.
Despite efforts by party leaders to defuse Iraq as a political issue four weeks before the election, 126 of the House's 208 Democrats voted against it.
The bipartisan agreement gives the president most of the powers he asked for, allowing him to act without going through the United Nations. But in a concession to Democratic concerns, it encourages him to exhaust all diplomatic means first and requires he report to Congress every 60 days if he does take action.
The House earlier rejected, by 270-155, the main challenge to the White House-backed resolution, a proposal backed by a majority of Democrats that obliged the president to return to Congress for a second vote on the use of American force against Iraq after he decides that cooperative efforts with the United Nations are futile.
Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., said that without a multilateral approach, "this will be the United States versus Iraq and in some quarters the U.S. versus the Arab and the Muslim world."
The Senate, on a key test vote, choked off delaying tactics by a few Democratic opponents and made it all but certain that the Senate would pass the measure.
Only two Republicans voted against bringing debate to a close: Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.
Daschle's support was crucial to the administration's hope for a substantial vote and brought him praise from the White House. He was the last holdout among major Democratic congressional leaders.
"The president appreciates Senator Daschle's decision to vote with the president on this matter," Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said.
Supporters of the resolution fought back efforts in both chambers to weaken the resolution.
Approval of the Iraq resolution in the GOP-led House was expected later Thursday. The Senate, which has been debating the measure for a full week, was expected to approve it late Thursday or early Friday. That could put the resolution on Bush's desk by the weekend.
By a 66-31 vote, the Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. – the most outspoken Senate opponent of the war resolution – that would have ended the authorization for him to use force against Iraq after two years.
Minutes later, the House also turned back, by 355-72, an alternative offered by Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., that would have committed the United States to the U.N. inspections process but not authorized unilateral force. "I plead with you to avoid this rush to war," Lee said.
Bipartisan support for Bush's request for war authority was growing steadily, and chances seemed good he'd have the measure on his desk by week's end to put the nation on combat-ready footing.
"The president hopes this will send a strong message to the world, and to Iraq, that if Iraq does not obey the U.N. resolutions, that the United States is prepared to enforce the peace," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said.
Bush, who has stressed that he has made no decision on launching a military strike against Baghdad, has urged Congress to stand with him as he presses the U.N. Security Council to approve a new resolution demanding that Iraq abide by comprehensive inspections and disarmament or face the consequences.
Progress was slower on the diplomatic front, where three members of the U.N. Security Council – France, Russia and China – continued to hold out against a U.S.-British proposal sanctioning military action if Iraq does not comply with coercive inspections.
A 25-minute telephone call between Bush and French President Jacques Chirac on Wednesday failed to yield a breakthrough over wording of a new Security Council resolution to disarm Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "This is intricate diplomacy and we are continuing our consultations," White House spokesman Sean McCormack said.
In Paris, Chirac spokeswoman Catherine Colonna said the French president was open to strengthening the powers of U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq, but still could not accept making military recourse an automatic response should they be hampered. In Moscow, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov relayed a similar stance.
Retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, former head of U.S. Central Command, said Thursday that the Bush administration seems unnecessarily rushed about taking on Iraq. He said he considers Saddam "deterrable and containable at this point."
"I'm not convinced we need to do this now," Zinni said during a question-and-answer session at a Middle East Institute forum.
Debate in the House went deep into the night both Tuesday and Wednesday, with nearly every member intent on expressing the necessity, and gravity, of granting authority to send Americans into war.
"I know the heartache and pain of the families that are left behind," said a tearful Rep. Randy Cunningham, R-Calif., who was a pilot in the Vietnam War.
But Cunningham and almost every Republican backed the president. "It's time we go straight to the eye and dismantle the elements from which the storm of brutal, repressive tyranny and terrorism radiate," said Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., He said that as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, "I can attest to the evilness of Saddam Hussein." |
