Lieberman Pushes New Iran Resolution

[kpete]

Lieberman Pushes New Iran Resolution
by: Matt Stoller
Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 14:54:38 PM EDT

Wow.

Senators Lieberman and Kyl are offering an amendment today calling on the US to combat, contain and roll back Iran’s aggression in Iraq. It also designates the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization.

As General Petraeus and his troops continue to defeat al-Qaeda in Iraq - and they are - the biggest threat to Iraq's stability and independence is Iranian intervention: both direct and through the militias and death squads that Tehran arms, funds and directs.

It's a meaningless sense of the Senate resolution, but then again, that's mostly what the Senate does these days. It's worth revisiting Dave Meyer's July 17th piece on why Lieberman's first Iran resolution passed. It looks like the same play.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZWExZjlkYjU2NzYwYjAzZGY4YTNiMTkwYzMzNDFlOTk=

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1503

[cali]

1. NO. NO. NO>

OK, Harry, you let this get to the floor, and you really are worse than useless. You'll be complicit. Don't do it.

[Mythsaje]

2. Lieberman can take a long walk off a short pier

in a concrete overcoat for all I care.

He's a super-creep.

[Individualist]

10. The darling of the DLC loves war

[Whisp]

3. Fibberman. nt

[no_hypocrisy]

4. Hard to believe that less than 115,000 votes in Connecticut would be

the instigation of World War III.

[Me.]

5. Will Some Democrat PLEASE Put A Hold On That Bill!

Harry Reid's number

Phone: [phone]

The guy in Reid's office laughed when I said Lieberman isn't a democrat, he's a traitor

[leftchick]

6. it is highly unlikely this will turn out differently than the July vote

lessons from then....

<snip>

Someone in the Democratic caucus needs to stand up and say "stop" when things like the "bipartisan" Lieberman amendment hit the floor. The leadership did not see fit to do it. Nor did any of the Democratic Presidential candidates. Carl Levin endorsed the amendment, signing onto it without any input, after receiving the minimalest of assurances that it wouldn't authorize the use of force.

Had Democrats taken the time to consult with national security experts, they would have learned what they should have already known: that many of the assertions laid out in the amendment were far from settled. The amendment included a collection of cherry-picked quotes from suspect sources, yet was based entirely on the credibility of those sources. Democrats also would have had time to examine the strategic impact of the vote, which will undoubtedly be used to undermine efforts to get out of Iraq. And we would have had time to make our voices heard.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=195

[scarletwoman]

7. "A Tiny Revolution" is on this, too. Where's everybody else?

ATR is always my first stop after I check into DU. I saw this and immediately jumped back to DU to do a search, in order to find out if anyone was discussing this here.

Hah!

Thanks kpete, at least YOU started a thread on this -- with ONE recommendation, even! (I've already done the 2nd rec)

Here's the whole ATR post, btw:

September 21, 2007
Threatening Lieberman-Kyl Amendment On Iran

Amazingly, no one anywhere in the US media seems to have noticed that yesterday Jon Kyl (Arizona) and Joe Lieberman filed an extremely threatening amendment on Iran to the FY 2008 Defense Authorization bill. I guess all their time was taken up with the earth-shakingly important issue of newspaper ads.

It's a "Sense of the Senate" resolution, which means it has no legal force, but as the Congressional Research Service will tell you, "foreign governments pay close attention to as evidence of shifts in U.S. foreign policy priorities." If you want you can read it yourself (.doc), but here are the most important paragraphs:

(3) that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its foreign facilitators such as Lebanese Hezbollah, and its indigenous Iraqi proxies;

(4) to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies.

If something like this passes both the House and Senate, I think Bush could legitimately argue that between it, the War Powers Act and the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations to Use Military Force, he has all the authority he needs to attack Iran.

(link posted above)

I want to know when the Senate votes on this, and what the roll call turns out to be...

sw

[Solly Mack]

8. Lieberman is meaningless

[Swamp Rat]

9. Even the penguins have marginalised him.

[Disturbed]

11. Can CT recall this Asshole?

I am sure that most of those that voted for him, except the Rethugs, regret their vote.

[JerseygirlCT]

12. How's about Joe heads over first, and when we get around to it

we'll meet him there? (Yeah, that's it).

[scarletwoman]

13. Needs a kick...

[Roland99]

14. I have two words for you Sen. LIEberman: FUCK YOU!!

[scarletwoman]

15. It really bothers me that something like this gets so little attention.

I dunno. Maybe it's just me...

[cali]

16. not just you

but I think people don't know what to say, beyond fuck you joe, and don't do it, harry.