Lieberman to Push for Iran War Resolution?

[Purveyor]

http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/John+McCain+Holds+Press+Conference+Iran+UCsOTqkbkgel.jpg

Senator Joe Lieberman on Tuesday signaled that the incoming Congress may consider endorsing war with Iran.

Speaking before the Foreign Policy Initiative, a neoconservative think tank formed by many of the chief architects of the Iraq war, Lieberman was questioned by accomplished war advocate Bill Kristol about how the new Congress will factor into Iran policy.

Lieberman said that Congress would focus on pressing the Administration on sanctions, but also suggested Congress may decide to formally endorse military options against Iran. According to Lieberman, Congress’ role should include “that we express what I believe is actually there in the Congress and I think it's there in the American people. Nobody wants to use military force against Iran, but there is a base, a broad bipartisan base of support if the Commander in Chief comes to a point where he thinks that’s necessary.”

MR. KRISTOL: And so Congress could --

SENATOR LIEBERMAN: Could express that in some way, but I think that's not tomorrow, but it may be down the road depending on -- I mean, when you think about it, by January it will have been six months since the sanctions began to be applied to Iran, and it's fair to say that there's been no voluntary limitation of their nuclear weapons program.

While Lieberman was careful to say that such a Congressional action endorsing war would be in “support” of the President if he decides force is necessary, the pro-war crowd is clearly trying to turn up the pressure on Obama and is unlikely to be satisfied with compromise. Republicans have already demonstrated a willingness to undermine the President on foreign policy, with incoming Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s suggestion to Benjamin Netanyahu that Republicans would be a “check” on Obama as just the latest example. Earlier this year, House Republicans introduced a resolution endorsing Israeli strikes against Iran, undercutting the authority of the President and his civilian and military leadership to prevent such an attack by sending a signal that Congress would stand with Israel instead of the President.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Here's the problem.

According to the Constitution, Congress can declare war.

Just the opposite of * declaring the equivalent of war on Afghanistan and Iraq without actually calling them "wars".

[Blue Owl]

2. Fuck you, Joe

Let me say it again:

FUCK YOU, JOE.

[Demoiselle]

4. ...and the horse you rode in on.

[AnArmyVeteran]

6. And in case there's any doubt...

FUCK YOU JOELIE!!!

[whoneedstickets]

3. AIPAC pulls the strings... joe jumps

redux

[AnArmyVeteran]

5. JoeLie represents Israel, JoeLie represents corrupt corporations, JoeLie represents the republicans.

But JoeLie does not represent the American people.

JoeLie is a regular guest on the Sean Hannity hate show where he espouses nothing but right wing attacks against people in this country who are trying to make the US a better place. Can you imagine if JoeLie had been elected as vice president and something happened to President Gore? He would have declared war on Iran and other countries the next day. If JoeLie wants to be an Israeli senator I wish he'd move to Israel. He couldn't care less about the United States or the American people.

[asjr]

7. Portrait of the Three Stooges.

[JohnnyBoots]

8. He is basically a Lobbyist for Israel and the Millitary Industrial Complex...nt

[karynnj]

9. Fortunately, Congress cn not declare war or take us to war

Only the CIC can.

[MiniMe]

11. Actually, the congress is the only one who an declare war

[karynnj]

12. I misspoke that they can"t declare war, but it is the President who

has to order the troops to attack - and I don't think he has to if he doesn't want to.

[MiniMe]

13. Agree with that

[bluedigger]

17. I doubt that that has ever happened.

It would be pretty strange, maybe even impeachable. For one thing, once you declare war on someone, whether acted on or not, the other party has every right under international law to defend themselves. It would be like challenging someone to a fistfight and saying, "You first!" :shrug:

[Hippo_Tron]

27. Congress has never declared war without the President asking first

[MiniMe]

10. Hey budget hawks, we can't afford another war

They can't extend enemployment, but they want to spend a brazillion dollars on another war.

[Chulanowa]

20. We can ALWAYS afford war!

A good war distracts Americans from all the stuff we can't afford!

Bottom line? Joe wants to kill American soldiers for Israel.

[oberliner]

29. Joe wants to kill American soldiers for Israel?

You really believe this?

[blm]

14. They ALWAYS use a willing Dem hawk to hide behind...and call it bipartisan.

.

[Rob H.]

15. "...accomplished war advocate Bill Kristol..."

WTF? Man, does the right-wing media love to puff up its own. They go out of their way not to mention it, so I will: Bill Kristol was wrong about EVERYTHING wrt to the Iraq War. Anyone with any sense would listen to what he's pushing for and then do exactly the opposite.

[Yavin4]

16. Draft The Fucking Assholes in CT First

They're the stupid people that voted this asshole back into the senate.

[Jennicut]

19. Draft the idiots in my state that voted for him. But I voted for Lamont.

old Joe is toast in 2012 here. No one seems to like him and his poll #'s are crap. My parents did vote for him but they have crazy thoughts on politics and love Rush and Beck.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

18. War resolution?

Why????? :shrug:

:wtf:

Just.......

:wtf:

If we ever, I mean truly, ever had to use military force against Iran, I would hope that it would (or should) be only for reasons that are pretty clear and unimpeachable and, frankly, I trust President Obama not to use military force ever against another country for anything other than clear and unambiguous reasons. I couldn't say the same about Bushcheney but even they didn't have the stomach for attacking Iran while they had the power to do it and, even if they had wanted to, the resources were certainly not available for them to do so. Also, we can't just bomb another country because their country's puppet President is a bellicose jerk who doesn't have the means, let alone the actual power, to order the use of nuclear weapons (that they don't apparently even have) against another country.

[Chulanowa]

23. Why?

Because right now Iran is Israel's major economic and political competitor in the middle east, and the only country that could effectively fight back if war broke out between them. Israel's leaders and lobbyists have, for the past five years, been demanding that we start killing lots of Iranians for them, and Joe Lieberman has been at the front of that pack.

Lieberman, and the thugs behind him, want to see American soldiers die, for the political gain of a foreign government.

[sally cat]

21. It would be impossible to wage war on Afghanistan, Pakistan AND Iran at the same time.

[Dawson Leery]

22. We did everything we could for Lamont in 06'.

In the end, Obama will have the power to decide where the military will be utilized.

[AndrewP]

24. Why is this jackoff allowed to caucus with Democrats?

Yeah, I know. It's a matter of "politics".

I still think it sucks. He's a full fledged Republican. Bottom line.

[craigmatic]

25. Sounds like Lieberman doesn't take his orders from the dems or the US.

[lfairban]

26. Dust off the old peace signs . . .

. . . replace the "q" with an "n".

'Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war

Here we go again!

[awoke_in_2003]

28. If this happens...

expect total collapse of this country.

[SKKY]

30. I just love how these people who have never served a day in uniform...

...throw the military around like it's an infinite resource. Joe, YOUR MILITARY IS TIRED. AND IT CAN'T SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM. Now, memorize that, and go repeat it to John Bolton.

[harun]

31. AIPAC's agents keep throwing this poop against the wall, hoping it will stick.