|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Skip Intro (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:00 PM Original message |
An honest question - was a vote for the IWR a vote for war, or something else? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Justitia (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:03 PM Response to Original message |
1. Well, what is the actual title of IWR? There's your answer. -eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LSparkle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:04 PM Response to Original message |
2. Well, the "W" stands for war so I think they had to know it was a possibility |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
laugle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:53 PM Response to Reply #2 |
43. The answer to your last question is 911,911,911! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberalmuse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:05 PM Response to Original message |
3. It was a vote to give Bush a blank check. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NI4NI (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:28 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. About the UN Resolutions |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JANdad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:10 PM Response to Original message |
4. You tell me... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:15 PM Response to Original message |
5. It's absolutely incorrect and the media uses it all the time. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hedgehog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:33 PM Response to Original message |
7. All I know is that I thought at the time that it was a vote for war. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stillcool (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:36 PM Response to Original message |
8. Personally...I find it very hard... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:43 PM Response to Reply #8 |
10. That's irrelevant! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:51 PM Response to Reply #10 |
13. There were NO conditions in the AUMF. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:54 PM Response to Reply #13 |
14. Yes there were, here are two right there in your post: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:05 PM Response to Reply #14 |
20. Sorry, but those are not legally binding conditions |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:11 PM Response to Reply #20 |
23. Yes they are. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:24 PM Response to Reply #23 |
30. Of course the resolution was legally binding. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:37 PM Response to Reply #30 |
35. I think you need to check your facts straight, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:51 PM Response to Reply #35 |
42. So far you have defended your incorrect assertions |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:54 PM Response to Reply #42 |
44. grossly misinformed blogger? huh? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stillcool (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:57 PM Response to Reply #10 |
15. exactly. and I find it hard to believe... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:42 PM Response to Original message |
9. It was a vote for war. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:47 PM Response to Reply #9 |
12. No it wasn't! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:22 PM Response to Reply #12 |
28. READ THE TEXT. Not the SPIN, the actual text |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:42 PM Response to Reply #28 |
38. Yes, read it and stop spinning" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:57 PM Response to Reply #38 |
45. Are you unaware that Bush delivered his determination |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:01 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. Are you reading any of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:19 PM Response to Reply #46 |
48. Links to incorrect spin mean nothing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:26 PM Response to Reply #48 |
49. What's incorrect spin: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:29 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. That the resolution contains any restrictions. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:18 PM Response to Reply #38 |
47. Wrong, read it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:30 PM Response to Reply #47 |
52. A determination is not an opinion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:41 PM Response to Reply #52 |
54. Wrong. Read... The .... TEXT! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:54 PM Response to Reply #54 |
57. That doesn't define a determination as |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:59 PM Response to Reply #57 |
60. No, he didn't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 11:05 PM Response to Reply #60 |
63. I did, did you: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:14 AM Response to Reply #63 |
66. So? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:17 AM Response to Reply #66 |
68. You said he didn't offer any, and then asked me if I read it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:18 AM Response to Reply #68 |
70. I said he didn't HAVE TO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:21 AM Response to Reply #70 |
72. He did, he did! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:23 AM Response to Reply #72 |
74. Nope. Find it in the text! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:32 PM Response to Reply #28 |
53. Restriction: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:48 PM Response to Reply #53 |
55. Yes it does... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:56 PM Response to Reply #55 |
58. No it isn't, this was one of the most restricting such |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 11:04 PM Response to Reply #58 |
62. Stop spinning and Read the TEXT. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 11:07 PM Response to Reply #62 |
64. No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:16 AM Response to Reply #64 |
67. Not stated in the text! Yeah, you still have to READ THE TEXT! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 11:13 PM Response to Reply #62 |
65. Also, if this was simply his opinion, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:17 AM Response to Reply #65 |
69. You are kidding, right?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:20 AM Response to Reply #69 |
71. The hearing would be about all the evidence including |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:22 AM Response to Reply #71 |
73. The resolution WAS a declaration of WAR on its face! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:29 AM Response to Reply #73 |
75. Leahy, seven day before the illegal invasion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:31 AM Response to Reply #75 |
76. READ... THE... TEXT... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:36 AM Response to Reply #76 |
78. This text: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:40 AM Response to Reply #78 |
81. The threat is stated IN THE TEXT THAT YOU WON'T READ! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:45 AM Response to Reply #81 |
83. That is stating the history of the tensions and circumstances that led to the resolution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:53 AM Response to Reply #83 |
87. LMAO!! Dizzy from the spin. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:55 AM Response to Reply #87 |
89. No they are taken as fact, the part I highlighted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:57 AM Response to Reply #89 |
90. Is that bucket getting heavy? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:00 AM Response to Reply #90 |
92. That's not what Leahy said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:08 AM Response to Reply #92 |
96. But it was, and we both know it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 08:44 PM Response to Original message |
11. It was a vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:06 PM Response to Reply #11 |
21. Only if Bush violated the promises made and made a mockery of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jimdish25 (128 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:00 PM Response to Original message |
16. It Was Because The Democrats Bailed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:01 PM Response to Original message |
17. And then there's Wiki |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:02 PM Response to Original message |
18. President Bush himself said that it was not a vote to go to war |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:04 PM Response to Original message |
19. the resolution empowered Bush to go to war |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:08 PM Response to Reply #19 |
22. No it didn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:14 PM Response to Reply #22 |
25. Congress had no real subsequent power to stop the president |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:24 PM Response to Reply #25 |
29. Congress can't stop a president from going to war, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:32 PM Response to Reply #29 |
34. wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:38 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. What? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 05:08 AM Response to Reply #36 |
105. there are certain emergency circumstances |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JANdad (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:14 PM Response to Reply #19 |
24. Please read the following: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:17 PM Response to Reply #24 |
26. that just says that he has to show his determination to congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:28 PM Response to Reply #26 |
31. You are the one misunderstanding the process. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:30 PM Response to Reply #31 |
33. where in the IWR was evidence required??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 11:01 PM Response to Reply #33 |
61. See my previous posts. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 05:09 AM Response to Reply #61 |
106. it would be nice if your previous post said where evidence was required |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:36 AM Response to Reply #33 |
77. None was required |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:39 AM Response to Reply #77 |
79. That is simply your misinterpretation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:41 AM Response to Reply #79 |
82. Spin... Read... the... text. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:48 AM Response to Reply #82 |
85. That is a article by |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:54 AM Response to Reply #85 |
88. The facts are stated in the text you refuse to quote! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:58 AM Response to Reply #88 |
91. In the real world, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:07 AM Response to Reply #91 |
95. Yes, many times. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SOS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:44 PM Response to Reply #24 |
39. Bush complied in full |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
illinoisprogressive (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:18 PM Response to Original message |
27. it gave Bush pretty much unlimited power and to do what he wanted to do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zulchzulu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:29 PM Response to Original message |
32. Boiled down, it was a vote to authorize the war for Bush and everyone knew it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:49 PM Response to Reply #32 |
40. It was always a mistake to trust Bush. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenArrow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:39 PM Response to Original message |
37. going along to get along, for the most part |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
laugle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 09:50 PM Response to Original message |
41. You are correct.....but nobody knew how demented Bush was then! nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
killbotfactory (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:59 PM Response to Reply #41 |
59. They should have. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
venable (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:30 PM Response to Original message |
51. It was a vote for a process |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slipslidingaway (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Aug-07-07 10:51 PM Response to Original message |
56. A look back to statements made by Edwards |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Egnever (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:39 AM Response to Original message |
80. In a lot of cases something else |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FrenchieCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:48 AM Response to Original message |
84. What? Are we still debating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 12:53 AM Response to Reply #84 |
86. This isn't a discussion about |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:03 AM Response to Original message |
93. Under a reasonable President it would be for something else, under Bush it was a vote for war |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:05 AM Response to Reply #93 |
94. Bush would have violated any of them, and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:18 AM Response to Reply #94 |
97. Maybe, but they would have legitimate grounds to say that he violated them |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:25 AM Response to Reply #97 |
98. Yes they do. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:28 AM Response to Reply #98 |
99. Guess they didn't read what they voted for. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:30 AM Response to Reply #98 |
100. Ted Kennedy was hammering them on their evidence and getting somewhere... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 01:42 AM Response to Reply #100 |
101. He still had to come back to Congress, and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 02:44 AM Response to Reply #101 |
102. But the key is that no second vote was required, meaning he could just lie in the report |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milo_Bloom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 02:57 AM Response to Reply #101 |
103. Wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
calteacherguy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Aug-08-07 02:59 AM Response to Original message |
104. W is for war. They should have understood that (get the double entendre?) nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun May 05th 2024, 08:27 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC