• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Bush Administration and this war

Iriemon said:
Thanks. Of course, that is not a vote for war with Iraq.
Click to expand...

The vote gave the president the authority to invade Iraq if he saw fit.......
 
Navy Pride said:
The vote gave the president the authority to invade Iraq if he saw fit.......
Click to expand...

OK, although it was supposed to be a little more than just if he "saw fit." If Ivan had stated that Kerry voted to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq instead of saying that Kerry voted for the war, there would have been no need to correct him.
 


what did it mean then? by voting to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq isnt voting for war, what is it?

do you think that meant he was giving the military the authority to use strong language on him?
 

You and I both know there was no vote on the war...why do you quibble about such minor points?
 
ProudAmerican said:
what did it mean then? by voting to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq isnt voting for war, what is it?

do you think that meant he was giving the military the authority to use strong language on him?
Click to expand...

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ243.107

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

It was not a referendum vote on war with Iraq. The resolution was passed in Oct 2002, months before the war. It gave Bush authorization to use force, as he determines necessary and appropriate. And the use of force was only after his determination that (1) diplomacy would not work, and (2) use of force is consistent with actions against international terrorist organizations.

This resolution was not an an approval of the war which started in March 2003, but authorizing Bush to make the determination whether use of armed force and war was necessary.

I personally think this kind of "pass the buck" by Congress (Dems included) in its constitutional war making power is wrong; and Congress should be required to make a decision on whether to go to war and not just fob off the decision on the president.
 
Navy Pride said:
You and I both know there was no vote on the war...why do you quibble about such minor points?
Click to expand...

Apparently Ivan doesn't know what you and I know.

And I don't think it's a minor point.
 


That's what I said. This arguement is silly.

what did it mean then? by voting to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq isnt voting for war, what is it?

do you think that meant he was giving the military the authority to use strong language on him?
Click to expand...

:rofl

Apparently Ivan doesn't know what you and I know.

And I don't think it's a minor point.
Click to expand...

Reread the post...
 
Originally Posted by Iriemon
.. If Ivan had stated that Kerry voted to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq instead of saying that Kerry voted for the war, there would have been no need to correct him.
Click to expand...

Ivan The Terrible said:
That's what I said. This arguement is silly.

:rofl

Reread the post...
Click to expand...

Sorry, I missed the post where you said Kerry voted to give Bush authority to use military force in Iraq instead of saying that Kerry voted for the war.

I did see the post where you stated: "Kerry did in fact vote for the war." in #76.

Glad we got this silliness settled up, and we all agree that there was no vote on the war, like NP said.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
lmfao voting for the AUMF is the same thing as voting for the war.
Click to expand...

lmfao no there's a big difference.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
umm no there's not if Kerry was not voting in favor for the war in Iraq then why didn't he vote against the AUMF?
Click to expand...

Cuz he passed the buck to the pres like the rest of them.

Tho' I suppose you could make an argument that in Oct 2002 the US was staring down Hussein about the inspectors, and giving the president this authority gave him credibility and leverage in his threats and negotiations with Hussein.

I also personally think Kerry felt pressured because he voted against the resolution for war in Iraq in 1990, which turned out to be a successful military action.

In any case, the joint resolution was passed in Oct 2002, how could that be voting for a war that didn't start until Mar 2003?
 
Iriemon said:
Cuz he passed the buck to the pres like the rest of them.
Click to expand...

They whom shall not be blamed. :roll:

Tho I suppose you could make an argument that in Oct 2002 the US was staring down Hussein about the inspectors, and giving the president this authority gave him credibility and leverage in his threats and negotiations with Hussein.
Click to expand...

Yada yada yada it was not a resolution to threaten Saddam Hussein it was a resolution to leverage war against him.
In any case, the joint resolution was passed in Oct 2002, how could that be voting for a war that didn't start until Mar 2003?
Click to expand...

Umm because the AUMF is what allowed that war to happen.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
They whom shall not be blamed. :roll:

Yada yada yada it was not a resolution to threaten Saddam Hussein it was a resolution to leverage war against him.

Umm because the AUMF is what allowed that war to happen.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with any of this. But bottom line, a vote giving the president authority to use force is not the same as a vote for war. The former is a pass the buck delegation of decision making authority. The latter is an affirmative decision of either yay or nay for a war. Congress did the former, not the latter. Not that I am applauding Kerry or the rest of Congress for that act.
 

Its really a matter of semantics.........By giving him the authority is about the same as authorizing jim to invade.........
 
Don't disagree with any of this. But bottom line, a vote giving the president authority to use force is not the same as a vote for war.
Click to expand...

one of your lamest attempts at dodging the issue yet.

if Kerry had voted not to give the president authority to use force then it would have been a vote against the war.

its just that simple.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Lucky for you I was just having a separate argument involving the Senate vote on the AUMF:



[/B]
Click to expand...


Im confused.

so a vote by Kerry to AUMF did not mean authorization for war?

again, I suppose it meant the president now had the authority to use stern language on Saddam.

no wait.....a WATER CANNON. thats what Kerry meant.
 
Navy Pride said:
Its really a matter of semantics.........By giving him the authority is about the same as authorizing jim to invade.........
Click to expand...


semantics are how many left leaners try to win debates. its usually all they have.
 
ProudAmerican said:
one of your lamest attempts at dodging the issue yet.

if Kerry had voted not to give the president authority to use force then it would have been a vote against the war.

its just that simple.
Click to expand...

I agree that the difference is a little subtle, and that some folks may have a little trouble grasping the difference between giving authority to use military force if necessary on the one hand, and voting in favor of war on the other.

But I think most people here have the intellegence to understand the concepts.
 
Last edited:


What I understand is that if Kerry had truly been opposed to the war in Iraq he naturally would have voted against the AUMF but he didn't because he wasn't.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
umm no there's not if Kerry was not voting in favor for the war in Iraq then why didn't he vote against the AUMF?
Click to expand...

Kerry has flip flopped so many times on this issue it depends as to what the polls say at the time as to where he stands............
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
What I understand is that if Kerry had truly been opposed to the war in Iraq he naturally would have voted against the AUMF but he didn't because he wasn't.
Click to expand...


Agreed my time shall no longer be wasted on this issue.

Ivan The Terrible has left the debate!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…