Reply #15: Cute but not on the point [View All]

[bigtree]

The authority to commit forces is not inherent in the IWR. That authority is contained in the War Powers Act which decades of presidents have used to commit forces for 60 days without congressional approval. Congress would be loath to remove forces after they are committed.

The only imput that Congress had to the president's rush to war was a 'no' vote, which was principled opposition but would not restrain the president, and to attempt to place restrictions on the president's behavior before he invaded through a resolution. Sen. Kerry and other Democrats chose the latter. They didn't feel that the president would be restrained with a 'no' vote.

Bush's position before, during and after invasion was that 1441 gave him authority to do any thing he wanted to in that region. He wanted cover, but the IWR doesn't give him cover for his unilateral, preemptive invasion. Nowhere in the bill does it mandate what he did.

Bush disregarded the restraint implied in the resolution and pushed past Congress, the American people, and the world community in his predisposed zeal to invade and occupy Iraq.