Congress can block Iran War by taking nukes out of Bush's hands

[yurbud]

Published on Saturday, January 20, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

How Congress Can Stop the Iran Attack - Or be Complicit in Nuclear War Crimes

by Jorge Hirsch

Notwithstanding Joe Biden's threat of a "constitutional confrontation" if Bush attacks Iran without Congressional authorization, the fact is that such an attack would be perfectly legal: the War Powers Act gives the US President legal authority to wage war against any country for 60 days. It would also be legal for Bush to order nuclear strikes against Iran: under NSC-30 of 1948, "the decision as to the employment of atomic weapons in the event of war is to be made by the Chief Executive". Neither Congressional "resolutions" nor votes to withold funding will have any effect on preventing such events.

However, Congress could pass a law making a nuclear attack on a non-nuclear nation in the absence of Congressional authorization illegal. In so doing, Congress would effectively be preventing Bush from launching any attack against Iran without its authorization, thus reclaiming its broader constitutionally assigned duties. Because Bush will not dare putting 150,000 American lives in Iraq at risk of Iranian retaliation without having the nuclear option on the table. By removing the nuclear option from the Bush toolkit, Congress would be forcefully imposing its will and that of the American people on an administration gone mad.

If Congress chooses not to face the fact that US military action against Iran is likely to lead to the first US use of nuclear weapons since Nagasaki, each one of its members will share responsibility for the nefarious chain of events that is likely to follow, and should be preparing to face his/her very own nuclear Nuremberg trial.

Preparations for the Iran attack

The following recent events have led to widespread suspicions that a US/ Israeli attack on Iran is imminent:

* Additional aircraft carriers deployed to the Persian Gulf.
* US Patriot missiles just deployed to the Persian Gulf.
* F16 fighter planes just deployed to the Incirlik base in Turkey.
* Increased number of US nuclear submarines in Persian Gulf.
* Admiral Fallon named Centcom commander.
* Israeli pilots training for Iran bombing mission.
* Increased rethoric and provocations against Iran.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0120-22.htm

I don't entirely agree with the author that removing nukes from Bush's options would stay his hand, but nuclear weapons have been a critical element of their Iran war plans for a years:

The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option.

As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.

Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing--that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack--but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

http://www.amconmag.com/2005a/2005_08_01/article3.html

[kimmerspixelated]

1. Very interesting, maybe plausible

I still think that the turning point will FALL IN THE HANDS OF THOSE THAT KNOW, -the air force seniors. It's one thing to lose your career, and another to lose sleep for the rest of your rotten life. No one wants to live with that kind of regret, not even military types.

[yurbud]

3. sadly, you're right. The Pentagon and CIA have been ahead of Congress, and besides them...

we are relying on Iran and Ahmenijad to behave more rationally than Bush & Co. And that last one is a pretty slender thread to hang from.

[enid602]

2. Nixon

I read that Nixon's access to nuclear codes was taken away toward the end, but not be congressional resolution; his handlers just changed the codes without his knowledge.

[yurbud]

4. I have a hard time imaging Bush knowing any code, or even a pin number for an ATM

[oldpolicy]

5. Bush cares whether something is illegal or not???

He's going to do whatever he wants.

[yurbud]

6. if it's a law, it gives generals a leg to stand on if they disobey

[classysassy]

7. Take those weapons out

of the childs hands.

[struggle4progress]

8. If the REpublican thugs nuke anyone, I suspect they'll have a revolution on their hands

[yurbud]

9. embedded in that Cheney directive is "in response to terrorist attack"

they might think their buddies the Saudis or the Mossad can pull something over on us. Even Ray McGovern and Paul Craig Roberts have said they might do that to kick off Iran War.