-Caveat Lector-

From

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe- byrd9oct09,0,5925018.story?
coll=la%2Dnews%2Dcomment%2Dopinions

COMMENTARY

The War Debate

By ROBERT C. BYRD

October 9 2002

As I have witnessed the tides that ebb and flow on the world stage over these 50 
years, all
the more have I come to believe that the Constitution is the principal mast to which we
should rope ourselves in order to put wax in our ears to the siren calls that will 
lead us
astray from what the Constitution says.

The Constitution very clearly says, in a nonambiguous sentence, the Congress shall have
power to declare war. I am very pained to see a Congress, most of the leaders of which
say we should pass this resolution--pass it now, pass it here, get it behind us before 
the
election. Get it behind us.

Where are we looking? We are looking at Iraq. Yet there is nothing new in the 
evidence. I
have asked the director of the CIA on two different occasions: What is different? Do 
not tell
me anything about policy; we will make the policy. But tell me what there is by way of
intelligence where you are the expert. What is there that is new today, that you know 
today
that you did not know three months ago or six months ago? What is it that is so new, so
compelling that all of a sudden, after we heard all this business to the effect there 
is no
plan on the president's desk?

I asked that question of the secretary of State: What is it that is new? I have asked 
that
question of the secretary of Defense. What does he say? The thing that is new is Sept. 
11.
That is not so new; that is over 365 days old. So what is there that is new that 
requires us
to make this fateful, far-reaching decision before the election?

There is nothing new. They have known it for three months, six months. A lot of it they
have known for years. This is a fateful decision, and the decision ought to be made 
here,
and this Congress ought not turn this fateful determination, this decision, over to any
president, any one man, because, as James Madison said, the trust and the temptation 
are
too great for any one man.

Here we are today; we have rubber spines, rubber legs, and we do not have backbones.
This branch of government, under the Constitution, is the branch consisting of the
immediately elected representatives of the people, and under the Constitution it is to
declare war.

The framers were very wise when they determined that these two matters--the decision to
go to war and the making of war--should be in two different places. The decision, the
determination to declare war, should flow from this branch, the people's branch, and 
the
matter of making war should be in the hands of a unified commander, the commander in
chief.

What are we doing? In my view, if we accept this resolution as it is written, we are 
saying
both of these vital functions would be placed in the hands of one man.

I respect the president of the United States. We should work with him, and we should
support him when we can. But remember what Madison said: The trust and the temptation
are too great for any one man.

We elected representatives of the people are not supposed to follow any president,
whether he is a Democrat or Republican, meekly and without question. I do not believe
there is a Republican in this body who knows me well who would believe for a moment, if
we had a Democratic president today, I would not be saying exactly what I am saying 
right
now.

There is no king in the American scheme of things. There is no place for kings in our
constitutional system. But there is a place for men. When I say "men," of course, I am
speaking of men and women.

We are voting on this new Bush doctrine of preventive strikes--preemptive strikes. 
There is
nothing in this Constitution about preemptive strikes. Yet in this rag here, this 
resolution, we
are about to vote to put the imprimatur of the Congress on that doctrine. That is what 
the
Bush administration wants us to do. They want Congress to put its stamp of approval on
that Bush doctrine of preemptive strikes.

That is a mistake. Are we going to present the face of America as the face of a bully 
that is
ready to go out at high noon with both guns blazing or are we going to maintain the 
face of
America as a country which believes in justice, the rule of law, freedom and liberty 
and the
rights of all people to work out their ultimate destiny?

What are the ramifications around the globe? What is the image of the United States 
then
going to be? A nation that is a rogue nation, that is determined to wipe out other 
nations
with a preemptive strike? And what will happen if we deliver a preemptive strike? Will 
other
nations be encouraged to do the same?

I think the president is in a much better position, ultimately, if we let the United 
Nations
speak first and not go to the United Nations and say: Now, we would love to hear what 
you
have to say, but regardless of what you have to say, we have made up our minds, and if
you don't do it, we are going to do it.

We are committing the blood and the treasure of the American people to do what the
United Nations won't do. I say, do what the president has done thus far. Put it in the 
lap of
the United Nations and expect them to give us an answer. Then come back to the people's
representatives and let them make a determination as to whether or not at that point we
should strike.

[However], if we are going to make it a blank check, let's make it a blank check right
upfront, without all of these flowery fig leaves of "whereas" clauses, and simply say 
that the
president has this power. Give it to him and we will put up a sign on the top of this 
Capitol:
"Out of business." "Gone home." "Gone fishing."

We are giving to the president of the United States a blank check, and Congress cannot 
do
that. Congress should not do that. Where is the termination? Where is the deadline? 
Where
is the sunset language that says after this happens this resolution shall no longer 
exist?
There is nothing. This goes on to the next president of the United States.

Why shouldn't the leadership of this Congress say that the concerns are so great, the
potential is so weighty, that we, the people's representatives, ought to go back and 
talk to
the American people about this? Let's hear from them before we make this final 
decision.
Why should we be forced to make this decision now?

*

About This Article

These are excerpts from the remarks Friday by Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) and Sen.
John W. Warner (R-Va.), debating a measure that would give President Bush broad
authority to launch an attack on Iraq.
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives. 
For
information about reprinting this article, go to www.lats.com/rights.





Copyright 2002 Los Angeles Times
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A<>E<>R
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; I don't believe everything I read or send
(but that doesn't stop me from considering it; obviously SOMEBODY thinks it's 
important)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without 
charge or
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of 
information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth
shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to