LOL - tough break for the peaceniks

**pugsly** · August 26th, 2002, 06:32 PM

As our Commander In Chief, Bush has the power to start a war anytime he wants, and the law supports him. If the "I feel Saddam's pain" libbies don't like it they can go cry to Klintoon, but he can't do jack! [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

Bush Aides Say Iraq Decision Is His

Mon Aug 26,10:29 AM ET

By RON FOURNIER, AP White House Correspondent

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) - White House lawyers have told President Bush (
news - web sites) he would not need congressional approval to attack Saddam
Hussein ( news - web sites)'s Iraq, although advisers say political
considerations could prompt the president to seek a nod from lawmakers
anyway.

Two senior administration officials, speaking on
condition of anonymity, said White House counsel Al
Gonzales advised Bush earlier this month that the
Constitution gives the president authority to wage war
without explicit authority from Congress.

"Any decision the president may make on a
hypothetical congressional vote will be guided by
more than one factor," said White House spokesman
Ari Fleischer ( news - web sites), who declined to
confirm that Bush had received an opinion from
Gonzales on the matter.

"The president will consider a variety of legal, policy
and historical issues if a vote were to become a
relevant matter. He intends to consult with Congress
because Congress has an important role to play."

Despite the go-ahead from his legal advisers,
administration officials said the president has not
ruled out seeking lawmakers' approval if he decides
to attack Iraq.

The officials noted that Bush's father was told in
advance of the 1991 war that he did not need
congressional authority to act, but nonetheless sought Congress' blessing for
his action.

One of the officials said Gonzales also concluded the current president has
authority to act against Saddam under the congressional resolution that
authorized his father's actions in the 1991 Gulf War ( news - web sites).
Saddam has not complied with the terms that ended that war, the official said.

Furthermore, the official said Bush was told he also could act against Iraq on
the strength of the Sept. 14 congressional resolution approving military action
against terrorism.

Both of the officials said Bush had not decided whether to use military force
against Saddam.

Still, the existence of a legal opinion ? along with earlier reports that the
Pentagon ( news - web sites) is drafting attack plans ? reflect the seriousness
of preparations within the highest reaches of government to pave way for war
against Iraq if Bush so chooses.

The legal advice became public Sunday as Republicans sounded a mixed
message for Bush about whether, when and how to use military action to
remove Saddam from power.

The Bush administration's policy is that Saddam is trying to develop weapons of
mass destruction and is refusing to allow international inspectors to find and
destroy them, as Iraq agreed to do after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Rep. Tom DeLay ( news, bio, voting record) of Texas said Sunday the decision
to act is the commander in chief's, but he expects Bush to consult with
Congress first.

"The president says he's going to consult with the Congress, and he has. The
president has taken the advice of many of us in Congress; he wants input from
Congress," DeLay said. "He has said he's going to come to Congress when he
decides what needs to be done and when it needs to be done, and I expect him
to do that."

While saying Bush properly "is trying to keep the (anti-Iraq) coalition together,"
DeLay rejected a suggestion by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III
that Bush first get a resolution of support from the U.N. Security Council.

The president answers only to the American people through Congress, DeLay
said.

Baker, secretary of state to President Bush's father, wrote in Sunday's New
York Times that a Security Council resolution was necessary as political cover
for any U.S. military action.

"The only realistic way to effect regime change in Iraq is through the application
of military force," Baker wrote.

But he added: "Although the United States could certainly succeed, we should
try our best not to have to go it alone, and the president should reject the advice
of those who counsel doing so. The costs in all areas will be much greater, as
will the political risks."

Lawrence Eagleburger, who succeeded Baker in 1992, the final year of former
President Bush's administration, is among several old-line Republicans
advocating caution.

"I think there are any number of complex questions that simply haven't been
examined," Eagleburger said on "CNN Late Edition." "And if it's wimpish to say
that ... until we know at least with some confidence that we must act now, then
I say we need to be very careful about going forward.

"I'm simply saying I think this is much more complex than (DeLay) and his
chest-thumpers think it is."

**larsguy** · August 26th, 2002, 07:34 PM

Let the "copy n pastes" begin.

Having been prone to do this on the Greenspun board, I resolve not to do it here. "Pugsly", if you are so inclined, go for it. My sense is that it's not what people are here for.

As Dennis Miller says, "of course, I could be wrong".

**lol** · August 26th, 2002, 08:16 PM

I'm just here to see how long the board will go without any new posts.

**pugsly** · August 26th, 2002, 10:56 PM

Well jeeez Lars, I'm sorry I wasn't notified that we weren't allowed to discuss current news. [img]redface.gif[/img]

I feel I must tell you though, I doubt that your little word game is going to be enough to hold the interest of all the participants indefinitely. Even though the majority of people are brainwashed zombies [img]confused.gif[/img] , we are not all COMPLETELY braindead.

Might I suggest a new policy? How about: If you don't like a thread, don't read it, and don't respond to it! Think that would work? [img]biggrin.gif[/img]

**lol** · August 27th, 2002, 12:11 AM

You're only allowed to discuss current news if you blame everything on the "repugs."

**pugsly** · August 27th, 2002, 12:23 AM

"Let the "copy n pastes" begin. Having been prone to do this on the Greenspun board, I resolve not to do it here."

Lars,

Maybe I was born yesterday, but this sure looks like a "cut and paste" story to me.

"My sense is that it's not what people are here for."

Your "sense"?? Hmmm, I wasn't aware that you were psychic. Can you "sense" the winning lottery numbers for this week and give me a call? Thanx!