THE IRAQ WAR: The War Powers Act
Bush's request to Congress asked for sweeping authority to use "all means (Bush) determines to be appropriate, including
force, to enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions, "defend the national security interests of the United States
against a threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region". In a break with past resolutions
authorizing military force, the draft does not cite any imminent and tangible threat or specific act of aggression against the
United States as a justification for military action now. Rather, its rationale is hypothetical and highly uncertain risks that it
says must be pre- empted".
RH: In retrospect, it seems ironical that Bush wanted to fight the war to enforce United Security Council resolutions.
Ronald Hilton - 5/9/03
With regard to the Iraq war. Tom Grey answers the question "Why no "War Powers Act"? The answer is simple: had
Democrats complained more, it would have been a BIG campaign issue in November, and, at the time, the Democrats
thought they would lose even more. And I think they were right. The anti-leftist voters would probably have given the
Republicans more Senate seats had the Democrats fought the September resolution. But at least the debate would have
started sooner (http://www.dawn.com/2002/09/22/int16.htm).
| Webmaster |