[Peace-discuss] Common Dreams: House Moots Afghan Exit, Iran War, Military Budget, and "Signature" Drone Strikes

Wed May 16 20:56:51 UTC 2012

Very nice work, Bob.

Thank you.

On 05/17/12 3:18, Robert Naiman wrote:
>
> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/05/16-8
>
> /Published on Wednesday, May 16, 2012 by /Common Dreams 
> <http://www.commondreams.org/>
>
>
>     House Moots Afghan Exit, Iran War, Military Budget, and
>     "Signature" Drone Strikes
>
> by Robert Naiman <http://www.commondreams.org/robert-naiman>
>
> On Wednesday and Thursday, the House is expected to take up 
> consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act. Amendments 
> will be offered to expedite military withdrawal from Afghanistan, to 
> oppose war with Iran, to cut the military budget, and to stop 
> "signature" drone strikes that target people without knowing who will 
> be killed.
>
> According to the way the House operates, the authorization bill is the 
> most open opportunity to challenge current policy. When the House 
> considers the appropriations bill, amendments can be offered to cut 
> money for specific programs. But it is difficult to otherwise alter 
> policy when the appropriation is considered, according to the rules of 
> the House. On the authorization bill, there is much more scope to try 
> to direct policy.
>
> Every American who cares about war and peace ought to be calling 
> Congress. The Friends Committee on National Legislation has 
> established a toll-free number that connects you to the Capitol 
> Switchboard: *1-877-429-0678 <tel:1-877-429-0678>*. Then you can ask 
> to be transferred to your Representative's office. [If you can't call, 
> you can write here <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/ndaa2013>.]
>
> Every American who cares about war and peace ought to be calling 
> Congress. The Friends Committee on National Legislation has 
> established a toll-free number that connects you to the Capitol 
> Switchboard: *1-877-429-0678 <tel:1-877-429-0678>*. Then you can ask 
> to be transferred to your Representative's office. [If you can't call, 
> you can write here <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/ndaa2013>.]
>
> What should you tell your Representative's office? Whatever else you 
> do, you should tell them that you are a constituent and give them your 
> address to document that fact.
>
> Then you have some choices to make about what to emphasize. Many 
> amendments have been offered 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/Legislation/legislationDetails.aspx?NewsID=828>. 
> At this writing, we don't know which amendments will be allowed on the 
> floor by the Rules Committee. Once the Rules Committee has decided 
> which amendments it will allow, there might not be much time before 
> voting begins. So it's better to call when you can and emphasize broad 
> themes.
>
> For example, you could say: "I urge you to support amendments that 
> would expedite U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, oppose war 
> with Iran, cut the military budget, and bar the military from 
> conducting drone strikes against people whose identities are not known."
>
> It is virtually certain that the Rules Committee will allow at least 
> one amendment which would expedite U.S. military withdrawal from 
> Afghanistan. Such amendments have been offered byReps. Jim McGovern 
> and Walter Jones 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/MCGOVE_056_xml51512085807587.pdf>, 
> Rep. Adam Smith 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/Afghanistan515121110441044.pdf>, and 
> Rep. Barbara Lee 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/LEE_123_xml514122036463646.pdf>.
>
> Representative John Conyers is offering an amendment 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/CONYER_101_xml51512090353353.pdf> that 
> would push back against the drive for war with Iran. The amendment, 
> offered jointly with Reps. Keith Ellison, Ron Paul and Walter Jones, 
> would make explicit that nothing in the bill authorizes the use of 
> force against Iran. That might sound modest, and indeed it is. But in 
> fact the gang baying for war with Iran is so fanatic that you can't 
> say anything against war that if you say, "let's pass a resolution 
> that we won't have a war with Iran on Saturday at 3:37 pm.," they 
> break out in hives. So it's a brilliant move by Conyers to try to 
> force the House to vote on this.
>
> Rep. Conyers is also offering amendments that would cut the military 
> budget by terminating the F-35B 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/CONYER_104_xml51512090958958.pdf> , 
> by moving ahead with retirement of 18 Global Hawk drones 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/CONYER_102_xml51512090748748.pdf> as 
> proposed by the Administration, and by delaying the new long-range 
> nuclear-capable bomber 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/MARKEY_117515120814161416.pdf>.
>
> Representative Dennis Kucinich, supported by Rep. Conyers, is offering 
> an amendment 
> <http://www.rules.house.gov/amendments/KUCINI_055_xml514121743264326.pdf> that 
> would prohibit the military from carrying out drone strikes against 
> unidentified targets. Senior U.S. officials have expressed concern 
> that such "signature strikes" greatly increase the risk of civilian 
> casualties. Indeed, just in the last week, between eight and twelve 
> civilians were killed in U.S. drone strikes in Yemen, according to 
> /CNN 
> <http://edition.cnn.com/2012/05/15/world/meast/yemen-violence/>/ and 
> The Bureau of Investigative Journalism 
> <http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/05/15/suspected-drone-strikes-kill-12-civilians-in-yemen/>. 
> The Kucinich-Conyers amendment shows that Members of Congress are 
> concerned about civilian casualties from drone strikes and the 
> expansion of drone strikes that is currently underway in Yemen.
>
> Judging from past years, most of the amendments that have been offered 
> are not going to pass, and that's not surprising. If everyone already 
> agreed on the underlying policy, in most cases, it would already be in 
> the bill. But Afghanistan might be an exception to this trend, because 
> the Republican leadership is out of touch with the majority of 
> Republican opinion on military withdrawal from Afghanistan; in a free 
> vote on the floor, the Republican leadership may lose. Already, a year 
> ago, an amendment offered by Reps. McGovern and Jones urging expedited 
> withdrawal from Afghanistan got more than 200 votes on the floor.
>
> But amendments that don't pass are also useful. They force Members of 
> the House to stand up and be counted on particular issues, and raise 
> the profile of concern about those issues. If they draw sufficient 
> support, they send a signal to the Administration of significant 
> Congressional concern. If eighty Members of Congress voted for the 
> Kucinich-Conyers amendment to limit drone strikes, it would be 
> historic, because Congress has never tried to limit drone strikes 
> before. The Administration would notice, and that might lead them to 
> be more cautious in expanding a policy that is already controversial 
> inside the Administration. And if that saved the lives of eight or 
> twelve civilians in Yemen who wouldn't be killed in a U.S. drone 
> strike, wouldn't that be worth doing?
>
>
> -- 
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org>
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>    

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20120517/c68b4eae/attachment.html>