Monday, June 06, 2005
More on "Iraqi Liberation Act" of 1998
Some excellent posts discovered at DU:
ALERT! Arm yourself to counteract Pug "spin" on the DSM, posted by LunaC
Sourcewatch: Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
These relate to the bill, H.R. 4655, discussed in my post below, Potential (R) response to Kerry on DSM, and why it's bunk.
These articles add the valuable context of statements by various Senators prior to passage of the bill in the Senate by unanimous consent. For example,
From the DU article, which includes excerpts from Sourcewatch:
Clearly, the Senators making these statements did not consider the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 to in any way authorize the U.S. military to invade Iraq.
ALERT! Arm yourself to counteract Pug "spin" on the DSM, posted by LunaC
Sourcewatch: Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
These relate to the bill, H.R. 4655, discussed in my post below, Potential (R) response to Kerry on DSM, and why it's bunk.
These articles add the valuable context of statements by various Senators prior to passage of the bill in the Senate by unanimous consent. For example,
From the DU article, which includes excerpts from Sourcewatch:
Don't be fooled by the selective tunnel-vision rhetoric.......
This bill is to support the IRAQI OPPOSITION. It never came close to opening the
door for direct U.S. military intervention.
And here's another handy tidbit to know.....Clinton may have signed the bill but he
never funded it! Why? Because a huge [portion] would heve gone to Chalabi's Iraqi
National Congress
Here's a few quotes to arm yourself with......
Jesse Helms, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, commented:
"This bill will begin the long-overdue process of ousting Saddam. It will not
send in U.S. troops or commit American forces in any way. Rather, it harkens back
to the successes of the Reagan doctrine, enlisting the very people who are
suffering most under Saddam's yoke to fight the battle against him."
According to Senator Bob Kerrey,
"Second, this bill is not a device to involve the U.S. military in operations in
or near Iraq. The Iraqi revolution is for Iraqis, not Americans, to make. The
bill provides the Administration a portent new tool to help Iraqis toward this
goal, and at the same time advance America's interest in a peaceful and secure
Middle East.
Speaking on behalf of the bill in the Senate, Trent Lott said:
:
<snip>
:
"This is an important step. Observers should not misunderstand the Senate's action. Even though this legislation will pass without controversy on an unanimous voice vote, it is a major step forward in the final conclusion of the Persian Gulf war. In 1991, we and our allies shed blood to liberate Kuwait. Today, we are empowering Iraqis to liberate their own country."
This bill is to support the IRAQI OPPOSITION. It never came close to opening the
door for direct U.S. military intervention.
And here's another handy tidbit to know.....Clinton may have signed the bill but he
never funded it! Why? Because a huge [portion] would heve gone to Chalabi's Iraqi
National Congress
Here's a few quotes to arm yourself with......
Jesse Helms, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, commented:
"This bill will begin the long-overdue process of ousting Saddam. It will not
send in U.S. troops or commit American forces in any way. Rather, it harkens back
to the successes of the Reagan doctrine, enlisting the very people who are
suffering most under Saddam's yoke to fight the battle against him."
According to Senator Bob Kerrey,
"Second, this bill is not a device to involve the U.S. military in operations in
or near Iraq. The Iraqi revolution is for Iraqis, not Americans, to make. The
bill provides the Administration a portent new tool to help Iraqis toward this
goal, and at the same time advance America's interest in a peaceful and secure
Middle East.
Speaking on behalf of the bill in the Senate, Trent Lott said:
:
<snip>
:
"This is an important step. Observers should not misunderstand the Senate's action. Even though this legislation will pass without controversy on an unanimous voice vote, it is a major step forward in the final conclusion of the Persian Gulf war. In 1991, we and our allies shed blood to liberate Kuwait. Today, we are empowering Iraqis to liberate their own country."
Clearly, the Senators making these statements did not consider the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 to in any way authorize the U.S. military to invade Iraq.
The Bush Administration's
public statements on Iraq
