General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Chuck Hagel to McCain: Surge This [View all]bigtree
(85,996 posts)Last edited Thu Jan 31, 2013, 03:45 PM - Edit history (1)
. . . to that point where some were misled by his lies. There isn't anything productive at all, outside of some political bludgeon, in shoving whatever opposition these folks (Hagel, Kerry) offer now (or offered after Bush invaded) behind that one criticism. It's a curious strategy that seeks to mute that opposition by pointing to that vote. To me, it only serves to distract and detract from whatever opposition is offered.
As much as I understand and appreciate the initial opposition to that resolution, I don't think it would have restrained Bush at all from deploying troops to Iraq. He only sought it as an afterthought and anyone who believes he was going to be bound by it need only look at how he completely ignored Congress' intent that he return to the UN security council; withdrew inspectors; and invaded.
Bush knew well that a frequently used loophole in the War Powers Act would allow him to deploy as many troops to Iraq as he wanted; only needing to inform Congress and seek their funding a number of days later. At that point, everyone can see well that Congress would have been loath to pull funding and hamper the troops in the field. That's the rub of Congress' refusal to hold the President to a more restrictive reading of the Act. That resolution was no more approving of the invasion than the money that was later appropriated. That's where the occupation was ultimately approved and perpetuated. The IWR was no more consequential than a political document, imo.
So, focusing on those votes serves little more than a political narrative. More important (especially today, right now) is the post-Iraq philosophy that these principals are indicating they will use to guide them in office. To the extent that they are dwelling on that vote, it's clear that it's used as a lesson-learned, rather than some sort of affirmation. You can certainly form your doubts on their future conduct, but it's a mistake, I think, to let that obscure whatever correct and appropriate policy and position these principles offer today.