LisaM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:36 PM
Original message |
| What if the IWR had failed? |
|
Do you think Congress then would have declared war? I have been going over and over this, trying to deconstruct Kerry's position on the vote.
And, if Congress, headed by the likes of DeLay and Frist, had declared war, would it have been worse? Then * might have been even more arrogant, insisting that the "American People" wanted this war.
The way it played out, * and Rummy, the PNAC, et al are far more culpable than if the Congress had authorized/declared war.
Any thoughts?
|
greatauntoftriplets
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. Bush would have invaded anyway. |
|
No question. The IWR was window dressing to appease the masses.
|
K-W
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 4. Not to appease the masses, to appease congress. EOM |
Ducks In A Row
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
he would have use the war powers act, whether it was legal or not.
|
sangh0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:42 PM
Response to Original message |
|
There was not going to be a Declaration of War regardless of how Congress voted on IWR. The reason why IWR was put to a vote was in order to avoid having a Declaration of War. Furthermore, if Congress wouldn't pass IWR, it certainly wasn't going to pass a Declaration of War.
But, to answer your question, I believe that Bush* would have invaded Iraq if IWR had failed to pass.
|
LisaM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 3. I think they might have invaded in our name |
|
particularly after the debacle of the 2002 elections. And I think the outcome of that would have had a lot of negative implications on the country. As it stands now, * is responsible.
I didn't agree at all with Kerry's vote, but I don't know that it ultimately made a difference other than putting the onus on the administration and PNAC to succeed.
|
sangh0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 5. That's along the lines of what I've been thinking |
|
IMO, IWR didn't make a difference as to whether or not we invaded. IMO, Bush* clearly had his mind made up on that score. I think IWR was about giving Bush* some cover in the name of bipartisanship in exchange for limited concessions in the text of the IWR.
|
K-W
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
| 7. That and giving congress a chance to be involved. |
|
For both Bush's and thier benefit.
|
MadHound
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:53 PM
Response to Original message |
| 6. Well, I don't think we would have invaded, at least not right away |
|
If Bush didn't have Congressional authorization, he could have gone in under the emergency war provisios. But he would have taken one hell of a political hit for invading a nation pre-emptively and without the approval of Congress. Impeachment would have been a definite possibility, especially after no WMDs turned up.
I truly think that Congress had the power to stop Bush and the Iraq war, instead they handed his illegal, immoral war to him on a silver platter.
|
President Jesus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Aug-11-04 01:57 PM
Response to Original message |
| 9. IWR was symbolic, hence the use of "resolution" instead of "act" |
|
And once and for all, there is ony ONE person who made the ultimate decision to invade and occupy Iraq: GWB.
Not Rummy, not Condi, not Dick, not Kerry, not Edwards, etc...
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Feb 27th 2026, 08:50 PM
Response to Original message |