Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
55. You mean
Sun Sep 15, 2013, 02:18 PM
Sep 2013

"Intellectually bankrupt. All he had to do was vote against as his betters did"

..."his betters" who also believed Bush's WMD lie?

Patrick Leahy:

<...>

But the world is increasingly apprehensive as the United States appears to be marching inexorably towards war with Iraq. Today, there are more than 250,000 American men and women in uniform in the Persian Gulf, preparing for the order to enter Iraq, and we hear that a decision to launch an attack must be made within a matter of days because it is too costly to keep so many troops deployed overseas.

In other words, now that we have spent billions of dollars to ship all those soldiers over there, we need to use them "because we cannot back down now," as I have heard some people say. Mr. President, it would be hard to think of a worse reason to rush to war than that.

We should not back down. Saddam Hussein must be disarmed. Doing nothing, and I agree with the President about this, would mean that the United Nations is unwilling to enforce its own resolutions concerning perhaps the most serious threat the world faces today - the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. That would be unacceptable. The UN Security Council ordered Iraq to fully disclose its weapons of mass destruction, and Iraq has not done so.

And I agree with those who say that the only reason Saddam Hussein is even grudgingly cooperating with the UN inspectors and destroying Iraqi missiles is because of the build up of U.S. troops on Iraq's border. I have commended the President for refocusing the world's attention on Saddam Hussein's failure to disarm. I also recognize that the time may come when the use of force to enforce the UN Security Council resolution is the only option.


But are proposals to give the UN inspectors more time unreasonable, when it could solidify support for the use of force if that becomes the only option?

http://votesmart.org/public-statement/8232/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-the-senate-floor-concerning-iraq-the-countdown-to-war


Here is the Durbin Amendment, which only got 30 votes, including Feingold, Kennedy and Leahy.

To amend the authorization for the use of the Armed Forces to cover an imminent threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction rather than the continuing threat posed by Iraq.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00236


The Byrd Amendment got 31 votes, Kennedy voted for, Feingold voted against and Leahy voted for it.

To provide a termination date for the authorization of the use of the Armed Forces of the United States, together with procedures for the extension of such date unless Congress disapproves the extension.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00232
Kerry also made the same claim about Chuck Hagel, who voted for invasion Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #1
It's gargle-wargle CYA by Kerry. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2013 #2
Kerry did oppose the decision, ProSense Sep 2013 #3
There you go... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #4
You have an elastic definition of fact. rug Sep 2013 #6
Not so much... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #15
he was looking at the facts but voted anyway. anyone who allowed this atrocity roguevalley Sep 2013 #30
The facts came out AFTER... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #31
It's convenient to ignore that Bush lied in order to attack Kerry. ProSense Sep 2013 #35
^This... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #36
Why isn't Kerry center stage of a Bush prosecution process? n/t PowerToThePeople Sep 2013 #40
no he isn't evil incarnate. how is it when someone questions a roguevalley Sep 2013 #49
You knew it was bullshit, I knew it was bullshit, plenty of Americans LuvNewcastle Sep 2013 #38
"The IWR was not a vote to attack Iraq"? rug Sep 2013 #5
It wasn't a declaration of war, ProSense Sep 2013 #7
It was a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. rug Sep 2013 #8
incredible, isn't it. KG Sep 2013 #10
Sadly, no. rug Sep 2013 #13
What do you call it if it isn't Aerows Sep 2013 #11
Well, ProSense Sep 2013 #27
Be careful, everyone. Watch your footing Vanje Sep 2013 #29
So, if Bush lied? PowerToThePeople Sep 2013 #34
The U.S. Congress has not formally declared war since 1942. former9thward Sep 2013 #57
If an authorization to use military force Aerows Sep 2013 #9
revisionism? KG Sep 2013 #12
That's the ONLY thing I could call it Aerows Sep 2013 #14
Quick question Aerows Sep 2013 #16
AUMF... YvonneCa Sep 2013 #21
No, that was for Afghanistan, passed September 14, 2011. rug Sep 2013 #23
I am trying to figure out how this is relevant to anything The Straight Story Sep 2013 #17
The relevance, as pointed out in the OP, is that AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #18
Ok...and that means what exactly? The Straight Story Sep 2013 #20
This is the danger of AUMF style resolutions as opposed to straight up War! declarations kenny blankenship Sep 2013 #19
John Kerry wants to have it both ways. bvar22 Sep 2013 #22
Senators Boxer and Durbin voted against the IWR, but voted for the Syria resolution: ProSense Sep 2013 #25
We stand passively mute. Thank you Senator Byrd. Autumn Sep 2013 #26
But Senator Byrd was a racist who voted against the Civil Rights Act... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #32
If you chose to think I stand with a racist Senator Byrd, please do so. Autumn Sep 2013 #37
So a racist who voted against the Civil Rights Act can change... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #39
I don't believe Senator Byrd ever denied voting against the Civil Rights Act. Autumn Sep 2013 #42
Kerry never denied voting for the IWR... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #43
He voted for the IWR, Iraq War Resolution. Autumn Sep 2013 #45
And Robert Byrd doesn't like black people... Dr Hobbitstein Sep 2013 #47
Do as you will. Autumn Sep 2013 #48
Excellent rebuttal, bvar2 Carolina Sep 2013 #28
Those who voted No should be lauded. And special note that the single Republican who Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #53
He may as well have said that he still can have erections.... MrMickeysMom Sep 2013 #24
Yo OP where you go? snooper2 Sep 2013 #33
Sure! Factcheck.org says Kerry is revising history Stupefacto Sep 2013 #44
Congrats on 18 posts! snooper2 Sep 2013 #58
Why are you trying to trash the SOS at this point? treestar Sep 2013 #41
A politician that takes on a new function is free to rewrite his voting history? Celefin Sep 2013 #51
It's worse, he was not asked, he offered up this misinformation in service to himself Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #54
Kerry obviously can do it treestar Sep 2013 #56
Hmmm ...where have I heard this kind of shit before ...Oh yeah ...I was for it before I was... L0oniX Sep 2013 #46
Intellectually bankrupt. All he had to do was vote against as his betters did cali Sep 2013 #50
You mean ProSense Sep 2013 #55
If Kerry relies on his position on the Iraq war LiberalAndProud Sep 2013 #52
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»John Kerry says he ‘oppos...»Reply #55