Tuesday, June 12, 2007
We all know that by passing a funding bill for Iraq without a timetable, Democrats gave Bush what he wanted. Lost in the hubbub of that debate was another unwise, timid act.
This one was arguably worse.
The Webb Amendment requiring Congressional approval for an attack on Iran was supposed to be attached to the Iraq supplemental. But Dems killed the amendment, making war with Iran more likely.
To be sure, the Webb Amendment was controversial. AIPAC-allied Congresspeople killed a similar measure in the House, and of the Democratic contenders for president, only John Edwards and Joe Biden have declared their support for the Webb's bill, which would make an unauthorized attack on Iran illegal.
If Google is a reliable guide, reporting on the demise of the Webb Amendment was shamefully thin, but I found this blog post.
...Webb's amendment, which according to the Senate's web site, has a status of "read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations" is essentially a dead letter. It was determined to be "not germane" to the bill to which it was intended to be attached, namely the Iraq supplemental.
Not germane, huh? An amendment regarding war with Iran isn't germane to a bill regarding war with Iraq? Oh-kay. Well, I suggest they find a bill to which the Webb Amenment is germane, and attach it.
With Joe Lieberman calling for an attack on Iran, and Bush increasingly unhinged and unpopular, war is a real possibility. Harry Reid says he disagrees with Lieberman. Great, but without the Webb Amendment, Bush will be able to start another war, an even more disastrous one, with impunity.
The Congressional effort to prevent a war with Iran can be and should be revived. Senators and presidential hopefuls need to defy AIPAC and declare their support for Webb's bill.
UPDATE: Several commenters have made an excellent point that I wanted to highlight: the Bomb-Iran faction has switched tactics. Just a few weeks ago, they were saying that we need to bomb Iran to stop it from building a nuclear weapon, but since that prospect is years away, they need a more immediate "threat" with which to scare people. Now Joe Lieberman and friends are saying that we need to bomb Iran to prevent it from killing American inside Iraq. Shifting rationales: sound familiar. As commenter Alias Mister Smith put it:
And did anybody else notice the ever-shifting rationale for bombing Iran?view comments
The U.S. needs to attack Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons....I mean, er, to prevent Iran from aiding Iraqi attacks on American soldiers...I mean, uh, because the Iranians are planning on beating sweet little old ladies to death with bags full of cute puppies while making Girl Scouts watch.