Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    WASHINGTON — The US Senate on Tuesday easily defeated a symbolic measure formally declaring an end to the war in Iraq, roughly one month before US forces are due to leave the strife-torn country.

    Republican Senator Rand Paul’s proposal, an amendment to a $662 billion annual military spending bill, failed in a 30-67 vote.
    But here is the part that pissed me off even more:

    But Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat who voted against authorizing the use of military force against Iraq in 2002, warned that Paul’s resolution could tie US commanders’ hands.

    “I just am unwilling to take this risk during the critical transition period,” said Levin. “There are just too many unknown, uncertain consequences.”
    This is the same Democrat who went after Bush for going to war in Iraq in the first place without Congressional approval. Yes, the Democrats bashed their opponents for concentrating more power in the presidency, but when one of their own is in office, they have no problem with it.

    I have a word for this.... Friggen hypocrites.... OK, make that two words.

    Article is here.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    Where is the hypocrisy? I'm confused. Levin was against the war in 2002, fine. I get that, but his reasoning for being against the amendment are quite solid, and show that he realizes that the end of the war effort needs to be done without hampering the situation with a worthless amendment to a defense spending bill.

    I say he's being responsible in this matter.
    Last edited by Renae; 11-30-11 at 11:40 AM.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  3. #3
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    I'm with MrV on this one. I don't see the hypocrisy. I think it's a responsible decision to not complicate the situation any further. They should "formally declare the war over" when the war is literally over and the troops are home. For all we know, something crazy could happen in Iraq tomorrow and we would have to stay longer.

  4. #4
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    I'm with MrV on this one. I don't see the hypocrisy. I think it's a responsible decision to not complicate the situation any further. They should "formally declare the war over" when the war is literally over and the troops are home. For all we know, something crazy could happen in Iraq tomorrow and we would have to stay longer.
    I strongly disagree with you. Levin said, in the runup to the Iraq War, that it should be Congress making the decision to go to war. Levin did agree to cede some powers to Bush, but Bush did end up having to consult with Congress before he went into Iraq, and Levin still voted against Bush. With Libya, however, he is OK with the power in the hands of the president, without going through Congress. In the case of Libya, what Obama did was unconstitutional, because he did not consult Congress. Levin is OK with that. Why wasn't he OK with Bush doing the same thing, and demanding Congressional consultation at that time? That is what makes him a hypocrite.
    Last edited by danarhea; 11-30-11 at 12:28 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  5. #5
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I strongly disagree with you. Levin said, in the runup to the Iraq War, that it should be Congress making the decision to go to war. Levin did agree to cede some powers to Bush, but Bush did end up having to consult with Congress before he went into Iraq, and Levin still voted against Bush. With Libya, however, he is OK with the power in the hands of the president, without going through Congress. In the case of Libya, what Obama did was unconstitutional, because he did not consult Congress. Levin is OK with that. Why wasn't he OK with Bush doing the same thing, and demanding Congressional consultation at that time? That is what makes him a hypocrite.
    Okay, but this is a separate issue from the one in the OP. The subject of your OP is Levin's lack of support for a resolution to formally declare the end of the Iraq War. Here, you're talking about his reaction to Obama's entrance into Libya. I agree that Levin's response to Obama's Libya actions was hypocritical as he didn't appear to have any problem with Obama not going through Congress. However, I still do not see his rejection of Paul's proposal to be evidence of hypocrisy. It's irresponsible to formally declare the end of a war that has not yet ended.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    Levin knows the war isn't going to end and he doesn't want to be a part of a "Mission Accomplished" moment.

    What should have passed is a binding resolution that the Iraq War ends next month which includes no more funding.

  7. #7
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    I don't get this whole thing.

    If Congress didn't declare a war has begun - how can they declare a war is over?

    Per the Constitution - the power given to congress to control activities during conflict are budget (etc) - they don't approve, they don't fund.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  8. #8
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,152

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    This is the same Democrat who went after Bush for going to war in Iraq in the first place without Congressional approval. Yes, the Democrats bashed their opponents for concentrating more power in the presidency, but when one of their own is in office, they have no problem with it.

    I have a word for this.... Friggen hypocrites.... OK, make that two words.

    I don't think it's hypocrisy. He was against the war, voted against authorizing force, but now that we're in there he wants it done right. If anything it's pretty pragmatic.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  9. #9
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: Senate rejects symbolic end to Iraq war

    Quote Originally Posted by theplaydrive View Post
    Okay, but this is a separate issue from the one in the OP. The subject of your OP is Levin's lack of support for a resolution to formally declare the end of the Iraq War. Here, you're talking about his reaction to Obama's entrance into Libya. I agree that Levin's response to Obama's Libya actions was hypocritical as he didn't appear to have any problem with Obama not going through Congress. However, I still do not see his rejection of Paul's proposal to be evidence of hypocrisy. It's irresponsible to formally declare the end of a war that has not yet ended.
    Oops, wrong quote. Here's the proper one.

    The senator tied the measure to Libya, accusing President Barack Obama of circumventing the US Constitution by committing US forces to the conflict there without an explicit authorization from the US Congress.
    Levin did support Obama's going into Libya without congressional approval.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •