Democratic Underground - The UN could have passed another resolution any time they

Reply #124: The UN could have passed another resolution any time they [View All]

Guaranteed

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Feb-19-04 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #123

124. The UN could have passed another resolution any time they

wanted to. They weren't counting on Congress to do anything for them.

The lesson to be learned is that those within have a lot more power than those without. And the inspectors were a temporary compromise, born of the Bush administration's seeming determination to start the war, from the UN that stalled the US only long enough so that they could build up troops in the area.

You'll remember that at the time we Democrats had control of the Senate...Slapping down that resolution and speaking out STRONGLY against the war would have made a HELLUVA statement against Bush. It might have destroyed the whole plan. As things went, we lost control of the Senate AND went to war anyway (since Bush didn't even need anything more that 1441 from the UN). Way to go. And I'm not psychic, but I knew what was going to happen. So did Congress. Everyone saw how bloodthirsty Bush was.

The Democrats could have made a real difference, but they were too cowardly to make a stand. They could have at least affected public opinion with legitimate opposition.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

-Would you have voted for or against the IWR?	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 12:46 PM	#0
- I would have voted against the IWR	lastliberalintexas	Feb-19-04 12:49 PM	#1
- This is difficult	BayCityProgressive	Feb-19-04 12:58 PM	#2
- if it weren't	BayCityProgressive	Feb-19-04 12:59 PM	#3
- Right...but in this specific situation it was George W. Bush	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 12:59 PM	#4
- that's the point	acaudill	Feb-19-04 01:20 PM	#16
- and he even said	politick	Feb-19-04 03:06 PM	#54
- "Nation building"	lastliberalintexas	Feb-19-04 01:04 PM	#7
- Would you have backed the first Gulf War if you knew that:	FloridaPat	Feb-19-04 01:05 PM	#8
- Might I add a fourth to this	no name no slogan	Feb-19-04 02:30 PM	#46
- We invaded a sovereign nation...and set a dangerous precedent...	Gin	Feb-19-04 01:00 PM	#5
- the resolution wasn't a vote to invade or not invade	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 01:06 PM	#9
- Who woulda thought Bush would have used it to invade Iraq?	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 01:14 PM	#11
- Well of course it was a surprise to me	lastliberalintexas	Feb-19-04 01:18 PM	#13
- But he DIDN'T use it, nor did he need it, to invade Iraq	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 01:26 PM	#18
- But if he did not need it or use it	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 01:34 PM	#25
- If Bush didn't need the resolution to invade, why did we need it	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 01:35 PM	#27
- Because the executive is only one branch of government	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 01:49 PM	#30
- You just said Bush didn't need Congress's approval.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 02:12 PM	#38
- Bush commands the US military and one seat at the UN security council	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 03:24 PM	#59
- Okay...now you're just making stuff up.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 04:13 PM	#62
- Bull ! "Why We Need a Second UN Resolution" - Joe Biden	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 04:17 PM	#63
- OH...you mean the Biden/Lugar resolution.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 04:52 PM	#66
- No. that's not what I mean. The congressional resolution passed was	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 05:01 PM	#71
- Yes...supposedly because it gave Bush the power to invade.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:05 PM	#76
- Why don't you just admit you didn't pay enough attention to the issue	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 06:10 PM	#102
- HERE IT IS: H.J. res 114:	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 06:33 PM	#107
- "going to the un" is not the same thing as getting a second UN resolution	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 06:57 PM	#111
- Of course it was a rubber stamp. LOOK AT THE TITLE.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 07:06 PM	#112
- Actually, Bush* could have only stayed in for 90 days	goobergunch	Feb-19-04 07:08 PM	#114
- By the way, that was written March 10, 2003	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 04:59 PM	#69
- An effort to stop a rush to war that the so-called IWR didn't endorse	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 05:04 PM	#75
- So what did that article have to do with a resolution	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:06 PM	#77
- It had to with your accusation that I "made up" the fact that without	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 06:21 PM	#105
- It's your pro-Kerry spin.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 06:43 PM	#109
- No, actually none of that is true, and you never stop putting words in my	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 07:07 PM	#113
- It wasn't necessary because Congress didn't MAKE it necessary	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 07:14 PM	#116
- I never said congress forced Bush to go to the UN	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 07:29 PM	#123
- The UN could have passed another resolution any time they	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 07:41 PM	#124
- Bush needed it to stop talk on any other subject right before	FloridaPat	Feb-19-04 02:19 PM	#40
- Public Relations?	GreenArrow	Feb-19-04 02:38 PM	#47
- No it wasn't unless you read the resolution	vision	Feb-19-04 02:29 PM	#44
- determination and power he already had and posessed	DaisyUCSB	Feb-19-04 03:12 PM	#56
- Oh, I see.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 04:11 PM	#61
- Voted no in this poll	sirjwtheblack	Feb-19-04 01:02 PM	#6
- You know,	lovedems	Feb-19-04 01:20 PM	#15
- Cleland voted FOR the IWR	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 01:33 PM	#24
- But he voted against the PA. That is why they were able to exploit his	lovedems	Feb-19-04 01:42 PM	#29
- Only Feingold voted against the Patriot Act.	greatauntoftriplets	Feb-19-04 01:52 PM	#32
- Crap, I must have short term memory loss!	lovedems	Feb-19-04 02:03 PM	#33
- They ran the ads against him because of	goobergunch	Feb-19-04 02:26 PM	#42
- How exactly does that relate to all of the comparisons to OBL and	lovedems	Feb-19-04 03:03 PM	#53
- exactly... but they apparently were effective despite the direct link	salin	Feb-19-04 05:56 PM	#101
- Then why I don't I see any posts bashing him? He is not running for	lovedems	Feb-19-04 02:06 PM	#35
- Alright then.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 02:16 PM	#39
- Answer this question for me...	lovedems	Feb-19-04 02:27 PM	#43
- Honestly,	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 02:42 PM	#48
- I remember democrats being creamed for voicing any objection.	lovedems	Feb-19-04 03:00 PM	#51
- That's Wishful Thinking	arwalden	Feb-19-04 05:21 PM	#85
- That's not wishful thinking. That's what the Bush administration did.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:36 PM	#92
- I Choose To Look At Things More Realistically	arwalden	Feb-19-04 08:03 PM	#126
- So did Carnahan	vision	Feb-19-04 02:30 PM	#45
- The truth is that neither of them WERE	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 02:44 PM	#49
- So..the decision to vote yes if one is running for office...is to save	Gin	Feb-19-04 07:21 PM	#119
- I wonder...	cavebat2000	Feb-19-04 01:11 PM	#10
- Abrogation	OhioDem	Feb-19-04 01:17 PM	#12
- Interesting, 88% voted against	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 01:19 PM	#14
- Why don't you consider future wars?	lovedems	Feb-19-04 01:24 PM	#17
- What makes you think there would not be more of the same	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 01:26 PM	#19
- Because Kerry and Edwards first of all didn't have a VP who was interested	lovedems	Feb-19-04 01:52 PM	#31
- did you know Kerry wanted to use unilateral military force in Haiti?	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 04:18 PM	#64
- We need to show our leadership that we're not going to tolerate	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 01:38 PM	#28
- I marched. e-mailed, etc.	edzontar	Feb-19-04 01:28 PM	#20
- an interesting poll would be how many who marched protested	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 01:31 PM	#23
- Not me. In the GE, since I'm in PA, I will vote Dem no matter who	edzontar	Feb-19-04 02:05 PM	#34
- Correct, voting is a right	Snivi Yllom	Feb-19-04 03:01 PM	#52
- No fucking way. (n/t)	goobergunch	Feb-19-04 01:30 PM	#21
- Anyone who has not read "The Price of Loyalty" should.	greatauntoftriplets	Feb-19-04 01:31 PM	#22
- Despite my bitching, probably yea.	poskonig	Feb-19-04 01:34 PM	#26
- I would have voted for it	aldian159	Feb-19-04 02:09 PM	#36
- watching Fox much?	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 05:04 PM	#74
- You sort of have to look at the question from the potential	XanthaS	Feb-19-04 02:11 PM	#37
- Hindsight bias.	anti-NAFTA	Feb-19-04 02:22 PM	#41
- I was rabidly against this war	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 02:58 PM	#50
- So was I.	anti-NAFTA	Feb-19-04 05:48 PM	#95
- I knew * was lying from day one.	pmn	Feb-19-04 03:08 PM	#55
- Iwould not give bush permission to use my father in an oil war any one who	corporatewhore	Feb-19-04 03:15 PM	#57
- I adore your graphic!!!! This sums it up.	edzontar	Feb-19-04 05:03 PM	#73
- Not sure	kiahzero	Feb-19-04 03:21 PM	#58
- I voted for it	darboy	Feb-19-04 03:56 PM	#60
- Against	buddhamama	Feb-19-04 04:24 PM	#65
- 17% would have?	Sean Reynolds	Feb-19-04 04:54 PM	#67
- PLEASE CLARIFY: If I Were A Senator? If The Vote Was A Public Referendum?	arwalden	Feb-19-04 04:58 PM	#68
- If you were a senator.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:01 PM	#70
- As A Politically Savvy Senator, Seeing The Trap Had Been Set I Would Have	arwalden	Feb-19-04 05:07 PM	#79
- It wasn't meaningless because leadership affects public support	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:10 PM	#81
- Yes, It Was Simply An Exercise And A Trap.	arwalden	Feb-19-04 05:18 PM	#84
- Then why did this "political professional" vote against GWI	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 05:36 PM	#91
- Oh Good Grief!	arwalden	Feb-19-04 06:35 PM	#108
- Good grief right back atcha!	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 07:17 PM	#117
- I Don't Believe You Have Anything To Worry About	arwalden	Feb-19-04 07:27 PM	#122
- I was against the war.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:41 PM	#94
- Only Two Candidates Stand A Chance At Becoming President	arwalden	Feb-19-04 06:22 PM	#106
- I don't have to vote for either of them. That's the beauty of democracy.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 06:51 PM	#110
- But You ARE Helping Bush. You ARE, You ARE!	arwalden	Feb-19-04 07:20 PM	#118
- Deleted message	Name removed	Feb-19-04 05:01 PM	#72
- That wasn't the question	XanthaS	Feb-19-04 05:07 PM	#78
- Let me put your question in "bold" and read it again	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 05:23 PM	#86
- When The Question Is Framed As "If I Were Senator"...Then My Answer Is YES	arwalden	Feb-19-04 05:12 PM	#83
- Deleted message	Name removed	Feb-19-04 05:28 PM	#87
- Yes I'm Insulted... But I'll Answer Your Questions Anyway	arwalden	Feb-19-04 06:14 PM	#103
- The prose is very smooth	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 07:22 PM	#120
- Name Calling Is Not A Way To Encourage Me To Answer Your Questions	arwalden	Feb-19-04 07:42 PM	#125
- I'm not pro-invasion.	poskonig	Feb-19-04 07:25 PM	#121
- Back then I remember being for the resolution...	LoZoccolo	Feb-19-04 05:10 PM	#80
- Heck, even Al Franken was pro-invasion!	XanthaS	Feb-19-04 05:11 PM	#82
- The majority of Germans supported Hitler	Jacobin	Feb-19-04 05:30 PM	#88
- The point is, many good people were misled	XanthaS	Feb-19-04 05:54 PM	#99
- I would have voted no	wabeewoman	Feb-19-04 05:33 PM	#89
- Against	mvd	Feb-19-04 05:34 PM	#90
- A definite NO! n/t	bigwillq	Feb-19-04 05:39 PM	#93
- I Voted No	Leilani	Feb-19-04 05:48 PM	#96
- Now THAT'S courage.	BullGooseLoony	Feb-19-04 05:50 PM	#97
- I would have voted a resounding NO!!!!	lams712	Feb-19-04 05:50 PM	#98
- Abstain	Slice	Feb-19-04 05:54 PM	#100
- At the time Yea... Now, not a chance in hell I'd vote for it.	Hippo_Tron	Feb-19-04 06:17 PM	#104
- Oops I thought it said AGAINST the war not 'for or against'--	holyrollerdem	Feb-19-04 07:11 PM	#115

Reply #124: The UN could have passed another resolution any time they [View All]