Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who said this?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:01 PM
Original message
Who said this?
Link and answer will be provided later. No googling, or searching DU posts.

Hint. This is a speech given to a house of Congress on March 4, 2002.

===========================================================

Before We Bomb Baghdad.....

With our military actions waning in Afghanistan, the administration appears to be gearing up for a second phase in the Middle East. Although the Al-Queda threat has not yet been fully neutralized, political and popular support for a full-scale war against Iraq is growing. The President explicitly named Iraq as a target in his State of the Union address, and British Prime Minister Blair recently stated his backing for such an invasion.

Yet I remain convinced we should be very cautious before we send troops and bombs into Iraq. It's simple to point out that Saddam Hussein is a ruthless dictator, but it's not so easy to demonstrate that he poses a threat to us. We should also remember that the congressional resolution passed immediately after September 11th, which I supported, authorized military force only against those directly responsible for the attacks- and there is no evidence whatsoever that Iraq played a role in those attacks. This leaves me with two serious concerns: first, the near-certainty that this coming war will be undeclared, and hence unconstitutional; and second, that such a war does not serve our best interests.

First and foremost, we must follow the Constitution and require that the President secure a congressional declaration of war before he proceeds against Iraq. Undeclared wars represent one of the greatest threats to our constitutional separation of powers over the last 50 years, beginning with our "police action" in Korea. This most sacred legislative function- the power to send our young people into harm's way- must be exercised by Congress alone, the body most directly connected to the electorate.

The undeclared wars waged by various Presidents during the last century represent a very serious usurpation of the legislative function, adding greatly to the rise of the "imperial Presidency" that we witnessed so clearly during the Clinton years. I'm always amazed that Congress is quite willing to simply give away one of its greatest powers, especially when it spends so much time otherwise trying to expand its powers by passing extra-constitutional legislation. The reason for this, I'm afraid, is Congress learned in Vietnam that wars sometimes go very badly, and few want to be on record as having voted for a war if they can avoid it. So despite all the talk in Congress of "supporting the President," nobody wants to really support him by doing the obvious and passing a declaration of war.

Constitutional questions aside, we have to ask ourselves quite simply whether it serves any national interest to invade Iraq. So often we lose sight of the true purpose of our military, which is to defend our borders against attack. Remember, Iraq has not initiated aggression against us. We, on the other hand, have bombed them, taunted them by flying military jets in their airspace, and starved them with economic sanctions- all for more than a decade. We haven't done these things out of humanitarian concern for Kuwait, we've done them because we want to protect our oil interests. Yet these actions have harmed the people of Iraq, not the Hussein regime. If anything, our policies serve to generate support for Hussein, who uses American aggression as a convenient scapegoat to deflect attention from his own oppression. Sadly, we've made him a martyr in Iraq and much of the wider Muslim world, alienating many otherwise pro-Western Iraqi moderates in the process. I question the wisdom, and the necessity, of once again traveling 6000 miles to pick a fight with a third-world Muslim nation that is simply not threatening us.

Congress should not allow any administration to take our nation to war without the consent of the people. I fear that we are about to embark on an undeclared, unconstitutional war in Iraq that is exceedingly unwise and fraught with unforeseen consequences. This war will have nothing to do with US national security or Iraqi aggression. It will, however, make us all less secure by antagonizing millions of Muslims who understand the necessity of our actions against Al-Queda, but who will object to an invasion of Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sanders of Vermont?
Tell me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kennedy? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'll take a stab... Ralph Nader? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GCP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. Senator Byrd?
Please tell us!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Closest so far, geographically
Keep going south and west.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wookie294 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. Ron Paul ?
Just a guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Bingo!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wookie294 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yeehaw !!!
I win! I win!

I have so many people I want to thank for my glorious victory!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catma Donating Member (83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. Sounds like Ron Paul
even if it's not I just like him a lot. Not crazy for the whole libertarian economic idea but still he's a great guy. Glad he's from Texas. Proves we aren't all crazy :p
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
8. THIS makes me think it's not anyone from Congress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>we've done them because we want to protect our oil interests. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I don't think they would ever admit that, do you?

I think it's someone outside of the House and Senate. JMCPO ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
11. we have a winner, folks, see posts 5 & 9.
Good guesses, one and all.

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catma Donating Member (83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. damn, a second to late. :( n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. You get the runner-up kewpie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catma Donating Member (83 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. w00t!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. Senator Robert Byrd Wets Virginia....
...maybe, but he did give this speech a month before the invasion of Iraq:

<snip>
t r u t h o u t | Statement
by US Senator Robert Byrd
Senate Floor Speech

We Stand Passively Mute

Wednesday 12 February 2003

"To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.

Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.

We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.

And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world.

<more>
<link> http://truthout.org/docs_02/021403A.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. This came out of a post I'm building in GDP - definitive statements on
Edited on Mon Jun-06-05 06:23 PM by paineinthearse
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-06-05 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. You bet, glad I could contribute.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

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.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC