[Peace-discuss] Murtha's Promise

[Robert Naiman]

Kucinich: Bush Plans to Use Unproven Allegations to Bypass Congress
and Attack Iran

Robert Naiman, Huffington Post, 02.28.2007
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/kucinich-bush-plans-to-u_b_42280.html
[go there to find the links to the articles cited]

President Bush is claiming that Iran is supplying weapons being used
to kill US troops in Iraq, in order to prepare for a military strike
against Iran, Rep. Dennis Kucinich writes in The Nation. This
justification - an attack on U.S. troops - is the one that the
President can use to bypass Congress and begin a military conflict.

Section 2(c) of the 1973 War Powers Resolution states that the
President can introduce armed forces into a conflict created by an
attack upon the armed forces.

As Kucinich notes, the Administration has been playing a step forward,
step back game with allegations that the Iranian government is behind
attacks on U.S. troops.

One day, it announces with great fanfare that it has incontrovertible
proof that the top levels of the Iranian government are behind attacks
on U.S. troops. The next day, it quietly concedes that it has no such
proof and doesn't know for sure. The first day is covered prominently
on the TV networks watched by the multitudes, with special graphics
and breathless commentary. The next day is carefully dissected in
measured prose in the back pages of print media read by a minority of
the population.

The predictable result: what the Joe Lieberman Senate campaign
approvingly referred to as "low information voters" become convinced
that the Administration has the evidence it has claimed, even though
this evidence has failed to withstand scrutiny.

Consider this poll data reported yesterday by the Washington Post:

    the poll found that a majority of Americans now distrust the Bush
administration on its handling of intelligence. Thirty-five percent
said they can trust the administration to report potential threats
from other countries honestly and accurately, and 63 percent said they
cannot.

Good news. The public is skeptical.

    The administration has been challenged on the quality of the
intelligence underpinning its assertions that Iran is helping
insurgents in Iraq. Forty-seven percent of those surveyed said they
believed that the administration has solid evidence to support those
claims, and 44 percent disagreed.

Bad news. The public has been tricked.

Here's good news again: Secretary of State Rice has just announced
that the Bush Administration will follow a key recommendation of the
Iraq Study Group and support talks with Iran and Syria about Iraq.

Bad news: the pressure the Bush Administration is feeling from
Congress right now is atypical. Top Administration officials are on
the Hill defending the Administration's request for so-called
"emergency" war funds, and getting pointed questions from Members of
Congress (like Senator Byrd) about press reports of U.S. plans to
attack Iran. Rep. Murtha has pledged to include language in the
supplemental barring an attack on Iran. The Administration wants the
discussion about Iran to go away so Congress can approve the money
without Murtha's promised language. If the supplemental is passed,
particularly if it is passed without Murtha's promised language,
Congress' leverage will be dramatically decreased. That's why - from
the point of view of the Administration, but not its critics - passage
of the supplemental constitutes an "emergency."

Good news: The overwhelming majority of Americans do not want the U.S
to attack Iran. They want the U.S. to negotiate with Iran.

Bad news: the overwhelming majority of Members of Congress have not
clearly spoken out, even in defense of their own Constitutional power
to decide when the United States will go to war. Only 67 Members of
the House and 2 Senators have co-sponsored resolutions against
attacking Iran without Congressional authorization.

Good news: you can do something about it.

Get involved:

www.justforeignpolicy.org