[Peace-discuss] Senate debate begins - hurray for Byrd

[Dlind49 at aol.com]

I find the debate on whether or not to authorize an attack on Iraq 
interesting because the fundamental question as to: By what authority under 
what international law can Congress even vote on this issue?   Somehow the 
legality of the vote just escapes them. Pure arrogance!  The U.S. Congress 
has never and does not now possess any authority to establish international 
law and authorize the U.S. military to attack Iraq. Iraq is a sovereign 
nation. Iraq has not attacked nor conducted any belligerent act at this time. 
The possible threat, that is questionable, is not the same.  This case is the 
same as if Willy Sutton, the infamous bank robber, and his colleagues of bank 
robbers just voted to make robbing banks legal.  So Congress votes to 
authorize an attack -- then what?   Who is next? Germany voted to and then 
launched WWII? We then went to war over that action.  I do not see any 
difference at all.

I think that because the arrogant authorization is eminent that focusing on 
the defective WMD protective equipment, inadequate medical care capability, 
probable environmental effects, and actual effects on combatants and 
noncombatants should be the focus of efforts to prevent war.

dr. rokke
major, usar