UPDATES! (Jim Webb Stands Tall) Action: Stop Lieberman/Kyl Amendment
By SusanUnPC on September 25, 2007 at 1:55 PM in Bush/Cheney, Iran
Sept. 26 UPDATE: Toned-Down Measure Passes: “The Kyl-Lieberman amendment, in substantially revised form, passed 76-22. The most egregious saber-rattling language was removed. We’ll have more soon on TPMtv.”
Late Sept. 25 UPDATE: “Due to the still outstanding concerns raised over the amendment, [Majority Leader Harry] Reid announced this evening on the Senate floor that Lieberman-Kyl bill “will not have a vote in the near future.” Reid added that negotiations are ongoing and “maybe the night will be bring more clearness to the issue. But right now I think it’s fair to say there will be no votes tonight.” - From ThinkProgress’s “Durbin: Lieberman-Kyl Amendment Is ‘Dangerous,’ ‘Puts Us On Record’ In Support Of Iran War”
UPDATES: Webb: Lieberman And Kyl’s Hawkish Iran Amendment Is ‘Cheney’s Fondest Pipe Dream’:
[Senator Jim] Webb [D-Va.] cautioned that the “cleverly-worded sense of the Congress” could be “interpreted” to “declare war” on Iran. He continued:
Those who regret their vote five years ago to authorize military action in Iraq should think hard before supporting this approach. Because, in my view, it has the same potential to do harm where many are seeking to do good.
“At best, it’s a deliberate attempt to divert attention from a failed diplomatic policy,” said Webb. “At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.” Watch it:
Webb said that … READ ALL.
The amendment is being revised. (More below the fold.)
FURTHER UPDATE via ThinkProgress:
At a press conference this afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that the hawkish amendment on Iran being offered by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) is now being revised prior to a Senate vote on the matter:
REID: There are efforts being made before we vote on them to modify those two amendments, because people have issues with both of those amendments. So, until we finalize what they really want to do, I think it would be unwise for me to say that I support Kyl-Lieberman, or don’t support it. I think I have to wait until I see what they are finally going to come up with, because some people have some real substantive problems with what’s in that Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
The revisions to the Lieberman-Kyl amendment are most likely driven by concerns raised by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), who warned the amendment amounted to a declaration of war.
==========
ORIGINAL:
ORIGINAL: Leslie gave you the scoop in “Amendment Eases War on Iran.” Now, via an e-mail as well as a post by Josh Marshall, it’s made clear that it is imperative that we each pick up the phone and call our senators (Senate site or toll-free at 800 828-0498, 800 614 2803 or 866 340 9281):
From Josh Marshall this morning:
War with Iran for Fun and Profit
Did you hear about the War on Iran Authorization bill the Senate is going to vote on perhaps as early as today? No, that’s not how it’s getting billed. But that’s what the ‘Kyl-Lieberman’ amendment is. In fact, the supporters of going to war against Iran are using exactly same strategy with this amendment that they did to lay the ground work for the Iraq War.We give you the rundown in today’s episode of TPMtv …
The e-mail forwarded to me originates from Kucinich, not my candidate, but he makes some great points:
CALL YOUR SENATORS RIGHT NOW AND DEMAND THEY VOTE DOWN THE LIEBERMAN-KYL AMENDMENT
In case you thought it was just an aberrant moment of lunacy last week when Lieberman pressed General Petraeus for an attack on Iran, just before the weekend he introduced an amendment to the defense bill to authorize exactly that.
No, we are not kidding. He has drafted language that any impartial observer would interpret as a DECLARATION OF WAR against Iran, and he is pressing for a vote as fast as possible.
[...]
We need every warm body we can muster to call and email their senators RIGHT NOW, before they pull another fast one and sneak this one through in the dead of the night. Call them toll free at 800 828-0498, 800 614 2803 or 866 340 9281, and the submit the action form below to make sure your message gets through.
Just yesterday, Newsweek reported that Cheney had recently made overtures to Israel to get them to launch an attack against Iran, to try to provoke an all out conflagration. It seems every day there is a new story leaked about their aggressive preparations for The Debacle, Part 2. And just as in the lead up to the Iraq invasion, they will keep lying, lying and lie some more about their intentions until they’ve shot off every cruise missile in the military inventory.
We need your voice, and the voices of everyone else you know, … We need to absolutely flood the Capitol with phone calls and email. Please believe your voice counts. Please believe that when enough of us raise our voices together at one time they do have an impact.
Cheney and his minions are absolutely not going to stop pushing for an even bigger disaster unless we stop them by speaking out with a louder voice. So we cannot let up ourselves even for an instant. …
CYNICAL NOTE: I have no clue if our calls will help. But we have to try.
on sale for only $16.95.
also comes with a special spatula.)
(List Price: $27.95 - Your Price: $15.47)
“The story of poker is that of risk-loving America ... a crazy ride in unparalleled detail, driven by wit, wisdom, true love, and sizzling style. As analyst, historian, devotee, and no mean player, James McManus is poker’s most eloquent advocate.”
By Sarah Palin (Release date: November 17. 2009)
This is fucking bullshit!!!!!!!!!
Sept25…….WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress signaled its disapproval of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a vote Tuesday to tighten sanctions against his government and a call to designate his army a terrorist group.
The swift rebuke was a rare display of bipartisan cooperation in a Congress bitterly divided on the Iraq war. It reflected lawmakers’ long-standing nervousness about Tehran’s intentions in the region, particularly toward Israel—a sentiment fueled by the pro-Israeli lobby whose influence reaches across party lines in Congress.
The House passed, by a 397-16 vote, a proposal by Lantos, D-Calif., aimed at blocking foreign investment in Iran, in particular its lucrative energy sector. The bill would specifically bar the president from waiving U.S. sanctions.
In the Senate, Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., proposed a nonbinding resolution urging the State Department to label Iran’s military—the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—a terrorist organization.
It is bullshit. The wisemen of diplomacy that I hear say that we need to ENGAGE Iran not only with diplomacy but also ECONOMICALLY. Iran’s economy is hurting — we can partner with them to improve the lives of their people, and thereby also improve our relationships with Iranian political/theological leaders.
Btw, by framing the Lieberman/Kyle amendment as a vote against a “terrorist organization,” it is difficult to senators to vote nay.
I’m still wondering what became of Jim Webb’s Senate bill to force Bush to get Congressional approval before any military action against Iran. He tried, but his bill got sidelined.
Politically, it appears that all the candidates are viewing any statements about Iran as very precarious. Last night, PBS Newshour featured an in-depth interview with Bill Richardson, who is terrific on diplomacy and all for talking to our enemies. He said he’d have no problem, as president, talking directly to the leaders of Iran, No. Korea, Venezuela, etc.
But then, when asked about Ahmadinajad in NYC, he said it was right to deny A. the visit to Ground Zero because it would upset the families of those who died on 9/11, and that it was unwise of Columbia U. to invite A. to speak. WTF? So it’s political dynamite to say otherwise? Huge sigh.
Wasn’t Iran one of the many nations that lost people in the 9/11 attacks? The only reason A. is suddenly persona non grata is because he’s Bushie’s demonization choice du jour. It’s absolutely ridiculous. Let Ahmadinejad visit the WTC site and pay his respects…what possible harm could he do. Ditto speaking at Columbia. Ahmadinejad and Iran had nothing to with 9/11.
Susan:
but also ECONOMICALLY. Iran’s economy is hurting — we can partner with them to improve the lives of their people, and thereby also improve our relationships with Iranian political/theological leaders.
You know Susan, my theory about the fall of the USSR had more to do with Jeans, Coca cola and rock & roll than anything Ronnie did..
I think the young people of Iran want the same things as our kids do.
Now there is the internet..let’s let nature take its course…We go start a war with iran, all bets are off…
I would not be TOO optimistic in your place. Now the MAJORITY of the young in Russia view USA as a “foe” (after being put under years 24/7 pro-USA prop). it is not that I sudgest USA should bomb Iran - on the contrary, I suppose USA should STOP bomb, invade, bull and ALSO try to undermine others’ culture and values by propaganda of such USA “cultural values” as very unhealthy drink made by company accused of muredering Labour activists in Colambia and robbing Indian farmers of their water.
[...] this or this or read this, then get on the phone and lobby against the Kyl-Lieberman Plan to bomb Iran… (3) that it [...]
Think Progress reports that the Lieberman-Kyl amendment is being revised.
At a press conference this afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that the hawkish amendment on Iran being offered by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) is now being revised prior to a Senate vote on the matter:
REID: There are efforts being made before we vote on them to modify those two amendments, because people have issues with both of those amendments. So, until we finalize what they really want to do, I think it would be unwise for me to say that I support Kyl-Lieberman, or don’t support it. I think I have to wait until I see what they are finally going to come up with, because some people have some real substantive problems with what’s in that Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
Thanks, Robbie. Added that to the story. And it sounds like it’s thanks to Jim Webb, who’s been on this issue a long time.
It’s not a declaration of war. It’s the basis for a declaration of war.
I sincerely doubt the generals would consider some amendment in the Senate to be a declaration of war.
Bushie sure would. It would give him further ammunition. And he’s the Decider Guy, not the generals.
Laura Rozen at War and Piece has more:
A Hill veteran sends along the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran (.pdf), saying it may come up for a vote as early as tomorrow. “In particular, take a look at Section (5) in the Operative portion.” He adds, “This will be a hard amendment for Members to oppose … because a no vote can be spun as ‘You don’t care about Iranian munitions killing American troops.’”
Tuesday Update: “Votes got postponed until tomorrow morning, but Kyl-Lieberman is on tap for tomorrow. Schumer allegedly working on a side by side. Levin will likely vote yes, while … Reid is likely to vote no.”
Oh yes, Mr. Bush, you have fought the war with Iraq with such honor and competence, PLEASE start a war with Iran so you can be the Comanderer Guy again. I really loved the cod piece. Someone please get a net for these guys. Do they really believe this will be a cake walk too?
excuse me for sounding condescending, but where are hillary’s proverbial balls now? My guess is they have decided to visit her ovaries in her stomach…
John, I am not so sure it is lack of balls on Hillary’s part. I suspect it is more that she is genuinely behind the idea of attacking Iran. I have not noticed her ever being terribly shy about joining in the war mongering.
I agree. I just think it proves all her recent rhetoric about Iraq is just so much politically expedient posturing with no actual substance.
I think that is likely. And let us not forget that she has made clear her intention to keep an unspecified number of troops in Iraq for an unspecified time with an unspecified “mission”.
And as far as I know she is the only Democratic candidate to explicitly put nukes on the table.
Oh yes - and then there is her record on Bush’s Iraq adventure, which only became truly and actively negative AFTER it became clear that she needed to be negative on it for her campaign.
You realize, of course, that the key provision that assures * can/will attack Iran, under the AUMF, was left in the amendment. That was the purpose of the amendment, and ALL the senators knew it.
So when’s a good time for the US to attack Iran? There’s really not one. There’s a Middle East conference coming up in November; then there are the holidays; then early in 2008 the primaries start up. The hawks must be hoping that Israel will come through with a strike on Iran. An Iranian response, especially against Israel or against Coalition forces in Iraq, would create the opportunity to hit Iran hard without drawing as much condemnation as a “pre-emptive” offensive would. Bush and Cheney could say something like, “Well, we couldn’t help it about the timing. We were reacting to aggression.”
For a long time there has been in circulation a theory that Republican political leaders favor Hillary Clinton in the Democratic race because of her negatives. Now there’s a theory that Bush actually prefers Clinton among the Democrats because she would be the most likely Democrat to do what he would do in Iraq and the Middle East. I still haven’t decided on a candidate, but, for the primary phase, I’ve ruled one out due to her vote on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
Nice…
MDmnxF oiubrrheadmg, [url=http://hfodoyxinlno.com/]hfodoyxinlno[/url], [link=http://yjgcetwxxsse.com/]yjgcetwxxsse[/link], http://lnosgzujuwfu.com/