Saturday, September 29, 2007

THE IRAN WAR(tm) brought to you by these sponsors:

"— The Senate approved a resolution on Wednesday urging the Bush administration to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization,"
-from the NY TIMES.

for those of you without a bullshit to english dictionary, this allows the executive branch (i.e. president) to take military actions against Iran per the Patriot Act/Military Comissions act War on Terror legislation instead of the proper due-process of law that is required to declare war with the consent of congress when dealing with conflicts with other sovereign nations. You are being conditioned and prepared for ANOTHER WAR. Iran. So for the 80% of people who are now dissapointed with themselves for complicitly allowing the Iraq war under our patriotic watch, which was a totally unfounded, aggressive conflict with a nation who didn't violate our territory with an attack of any kind, instead of responding to your cries by removing troops from Iraq, despite a Democrat majority in congress, you are now being primed for A NEW WAR with Iran, who has strengthened their ties with numerous other nations, such as China, Russia, most South American countries, etc.

While this war posturing is definately the fault of the neoconservative socialists, such as GEORGE BUSH, DARTH CHENEY, PAUL WOLFOWITZ, BILL KRISTOL, lets not forget our other complicit politicians who will soon have innocent Iranian blood on their hands if we do not stop them:

the new war leglislation which will enable Bush and his warhawks to blast Iran at will is the "Kyl-Lieberman Iran Amendment". This piece of legislation essentially allows the US to use military force to combat any actions anywhere in the middle east by any organization such as the Iranian military, hamas, hezbollah, Lybia's national military, etc. although most of you haven't researched the complexity of middle eastern politics well enough to understand the significance, some of those are elected political parties who lead nations, and that sketchy legislation would allow us to attack nations who are essentially doing nothing wrong.

In the political arena, most of the people who oppose this legislation oppose it because it essentially, in modern politics, amounts to a covert DECLARATION OF WAR WITH IRAN.

Joe Biden, who DID vote against this in the senate, put it in these terms.

"I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences. We need the president to use robust diplomacy to address concerns with Iran, not the language in this amendment that the president can point to if he decides to draw this country into another disastrous war of choice."

he added

“We shouldn’t repeat our mistakes and enable this President again.”



so to let you know exactly who you can blame for our war on Iran, when it happens, lets show you some of the "heroes" that voted YES on this bullshit. (let it be also known to those of you who think OBAMA is a hope for change, this pivotal piece of legislation which amounts to a declaration of war on iran, didn't seem important enough to OBAMA to be worth SHOWING UP FOR. so he didn't bother to show up and vote on that date.) and i highlighted one special crook to show their complicit acceptance of another war, similar to their votes on YES on IRAQ AND THE PATRIOT ACT.


YEAs ---76
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)

5 comments:

Jason said...

"for those of you without a bullshit to English dictionary, this allows the executive branch (i.e. president) to take military actions against Iran per the Patriot Act/Military Commissions act War on Terror legislation instead of the proper due-process of law that is required to declare war with the consent of congress when dealing with conflicts with other sovereign nations."

I have included links to the two bills you've mentioned. I couldn't find anything that allowed the President to bypass anyone if the organization attacked has been 'declared' terrorist.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:4:./temp/~c107ThLpul::

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:3:./temp/~c109UHe81f::

However, the article you linked does suggest "The Senate resolution, which is not binding, also calls on the administration to impose economic sanctions on Iran.

Even if the White House took that step, policy experts said, it was unclear that it would be anything more than a symbolic gesture without the cooperation of nations that, unlike the United States, still had substantial business dealings with Iran."

And also says "In negotiations, two crucial paragraphs were deleted from the measure in an attempt to reassure critics who had said the proposal seemed to urge the Bush administration to deal with Iran on a war footing."

So, it doesn't seem that this is the beginning of another war, as you suggest.

Here's the entire Kyl-Liberman Iran Amendment. It's actually "To express the sense of the senate regarding Iran." It should also be noted that the final series of paragraphs on this version have since been altered to exclude page 8's paragraphs 3 and 4; Thus actually removing any language that could in any case be considered an approval of war against the government or Iran.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/Iran%20amendment.pdf

"In the political arena, most of the people who oppose this legislation oppose it because it essentially, in modern politics, amounts to a covert DECLARATION OF WAR WITH IRAN."

None of these bills actually do that from my reading. I've included them all so if I missed something you can correct me.

Anonymous said...

it is in combination with the "war on terror".

the president already has the authority to do something like a missle strike, congress or no congress, so long as the military budget is there, which it already is. the fact that we have a common law practice of attacking anyone considered a terrorist, and have defined iran's military as officially a terrorist organization, this authorizes us effectively to attack.

this was the leading argument in attacking iraq, as our common law precedent was to defend the democratic congress in iraq, despite the fact that they were not a popularly elected sovereign government.

this does not authorize a direct attack, but the direct attack is already authorized, it simply allows us to put them in the attackable category.

and if we're allowed to go and arrest their entire military without a trial, put them in gitmo and torture them, that allows us to use a military strike as a "police action".

essentially, lets say you go march in and try to arrest the general of the Iranian military, when they resist this act of war militarily, you use air strikes to get compliance.

while this is not technically an act of war in the legal documents behind it, it is to everyone looking on, and this resolution makes that approach to war totally legal(and thats just one example).

a similar resolution is what lead us to the "war" in iraq.

Reverend Jeff said...

If we do actually end up going to war with Iran, I'm probably leaving the country.

Jason Hamilton said...

If our government sends any troops or makes any attack on Iran, then I am promising reprocussions from this citizen..and I bet i can round up a few dozen others to show how we don't appreciate being endangered by our own goddamned government.

damn it corker. said...

damn it corker.