Edwards: Bush has exceeded war authority

[JohnLocke]

Edwards: Bush has exceeded war authority
By Tony Leys--Des Moines Register
Friday, July 13, 2007
----
Garner, Ia. — In most circumstances, President Bush would be correct in claiming the right to run the Iraq war without Congress trying to alter his course, presidential candidate John Edwards said today.

“Normally there’s a lot of deference given to the president of the United States to conduct war, there’s no doubt about that,” the former North Carolina senator said in an interview. “But I think this is a relatively unique situation.”

Edwards, a Democrat, continued his harsh criticism of the way Bush has handled the war.

“I think the president is in complete denial about what’s happening in Iraq, and he’s made mistake after mistake, and he’s got to be f0orced to change course,” he said. “I think the Congress has the power to do it, and they should use their power.”
(...
Edwards said he and other members of Congress authorized Bush to confront Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2002. “But he wasn’t authorized to monitor and police a civil war, which is what’s happening now.”

Earlier this year, Bush vetoed a war-spending bill that included a timetable for withdrawal. After that happened, Congress voted in May to pass a bill without a timetable, which Edwards characterized as caving in to the president. He said today that he could not predict what would happen next.

“I’m hopeful that Congress will stand its ground on a timetable. That remains to be seen.”

He had heard speculation that Bush would have to start scaling back the war in a few months anyway, because the current troop levels there can’t be sustained. He said Congress should not wait for that to happen.”

Edwards made the comments midway through a three-day, 10-town campaign tour of northern Iowa. He has stops scheduled later today in Iowa Falls and Webster City. Saturday, he will be in Maquoketa, Anamosa, Peosta and Cedar Rapids.
----
Read the rest here.

[Bobbieo]

1. I agree with everything Edwards has said BUT

who is going to stop Bush?! No one that I can see and the war goes on!!
It is so depressing!!!!!

[mzmolly]

2. That's a very interesting point. What does the iraq war rez say again?

he wasn’t authorized to monitor and police a civil war

GO JOHN! :yourock:

[riverdale]

3. Edwards = full of it

When he co-sponsored the IWR, he was a key player in congress' abdicating its role in advising and consenting to the president's war plans. The comgress pre-approved Bushie to basically do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted regarding Iraq because that would give them a bump in the elections. Sad.
President is a leadership position. And when we look at Edwards' track record, when we most needed leadership out of him, he did the exact wrong thing.

[rodeodance]

4. Lets hope Reed continues to force the votes these next two weeks

[calteacherguy]

5. Edwards is correct: Bush is in denial, but so is Edwards.

(07-15) 15:23 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --
The White House is holding firm on its Iraq strategy in the face of yet another effort to curb the mission, proposed this time by moderate Republicans the Bush administration can ill afford to lose.

President Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said Sunday the administration's "very orderly process" for reviewing its Iraq plans should be allowed to play out despite a hurry-up initiative from two respected GOP senators.

Hadley's reply was "No" when asked whether Bush could live with the proposal by Sens. John Warner of Virginia and Richard Lugar of Indiana. They want to give the president until mid-October to submit a plan to restrict the use of U.S. troops in Iraq to fighting terrorists and securing borders and U.S. interests.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/07/15/national/w071519D50.DTL

Edwards is stating what the Congress "should do," implying that Democrats aren't taking a big enough stand. Clearly, that is not the problem.