Lieberman-Kyl amendment text revisions

[goodgd_yall]

I am seeing a lot of people who are posting the text of this amendment, posting the older version of it. Here is a link that compares the previous version to the one that the senate approved today. Thanks to uppityperson for this link.

http://irannuclearwatch.blogspot.com/2007/09/revised-lieberman-kyl-amendment.html

Click on "Click here" to see the entire amendment.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Blatant, open hostility.

Dark day for Congress.

[Hydra]

2. Thanks

not that the revision is much better, but we should get our facts straight :evilgrin:

[Cameron27]

3. Thanks

K&R

[uppityperson]

4. Thank you. Been searching around, hard to figure it out and I'm still not sure.

If anyone has a direct link, without having to figure out how the heck to negotiate through the congress thingy website (I know you have to go through all the steps directly each time, but bah), or copy paste the whole thing from there, would appreciate it.

[goodgd_yall]

7. It's early; by tomorrow we should definitely have a link to the complete wording

The senate.gov site seems to only go up to yesterday.

[goodgd_yall]

10. I found a link to the complete text---it is inside the link I gave in the OP

Click on "Click here" and it takes you to the amendment text.

[southern_belle]

5. Thanks

[BelgianMadCow]

6. Here is the annotated text, pdf from thinkprogress

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/kyl-lieberman.pdf

[jumpoffdaplanet]

8. It's not really better wording

The meaning of "should" in the line:

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


The meaning of "should" indicates a recommendation and does not impose an obligation.

Meaning going past the borders of Iraq is just fine and dandy.

Sorry, but a yes vote really does give bush permission to attack Iran whenever he wants.

I'm surprised Congress critters are pretending it means anything else.

[goodgd_yall]

9. Interpretation ambiguity for sure.

"Stop inside Iraq" could be interpreted as not going outside Iraq OR going outside Iraq into Iran in order to stop the influence of Iran inside Iraq.

[calteacherguy]

11. I read it as pertaining to inside Iraq only. I have no problem with that. nt

[Bigmack]

12. My wife and I were away for 4 days....

and we come back to this!

I've read all the threads about Lie-berman Kyle, and I still can't believe it.

WTFF is going on with the Dems in the Senate?

Is there some deep dark secret threat against the US that makes them constantly bend over to the warlovers? Lack of testicular activity isn't an explanation... it's got to be more complicated than that.

Where the fuck will this country get the bodies and money to fight any more wars?

My wife is still yelling in the living room.