How do you feel about Hillary's warning to Bush on Iran?

Question

Clinton Warns Bush On Attacking Iran
WASHINGTON, Feb. 14, 2007(AP) Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton warned President Bush on Wednesday not to take any military action against Iran without getting congressional approval first.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/14/politics/main2479399.shtml
"If the administration believes that any, any use of force against Iran is necessary, the president must come to Congress to seek that authority," Clinton said in a Senate speech.

Clinton, a member of the Armed Services Committee, voted in 2002 to give Mr. Bush the authority to use military force in Iraq — a vote that has prompted some Democrats to demand that she repudiate.

Since then, the New York senator has become an outspoken critic of Mr. Bush's handling of the war. She said the new Democratic Congress must not let him make similar mistakes in the increasingly tense relationship with Iran.

"It would be a mistake of historical proportion if the administration thought that the 2002 resolution authorizing force against Iraq was a blank check for the use of force against Iran without further congressional authorization," Clinton said.

She also insisted the resolution authorizing force against those responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks did not allow for U.S. action now against Iran

Answer 1

She is correct based on the Constitution. Any military action has to be agreed upon by the Congress. As in 1969, Nixon "illegally" bombed another country, Cambodia, because that was where the supply line of arms came from enroute to the Viet Cong in South Vietnam. Congress called it an illegal act so there is a precedent that Bush needs to abide by or face impeachment. Expansion of any war will require Congressional support.

Answer 2

Hillary wouldn't be making that challenge to Bush without that being part of Democratic Party Strategy. After Congress being a spineless rubber stamp for Bush and his Plundering Herd for the last six years, the new majority is serving notice on the President that they will no longer go along no matter what he does as "The Great Decider." Investigations have begun, and the gauntlet has been thrown down. Hillary was chosen, or given permission, to be the spokesman for the party consensus. And the message was pointed to specifically refer to attacking Iran, as Bush and especially Cheney have made clear that is what they intend to do. These men are out of control and they intend to do whatever they plan, and Bush even said about the Congress, "They can try to stop me, but ..." So the lines are drawn, and it remains to be seen how much backbone the Democrats possess as I believe Bush/Cheney will be calling their bluff very soon. They could have made it clear they will impeach if Iran is attacked, or not. We will have to wait and see. But, I don't think they would have offered the challenge if they did not intend to back it up. Otherwise, those words will come back to haunt them. I find it somehow delicious that those words to Bush and Cheney are coming from a woman. It's almost as if they have been bad boys and their mother has just come in to scold them. God knows someone has to.

Answer 3

She is correct to warn him [Based upon the current evidence]. however, if an Iranian force is caught inside of Iraq, then she is incorrect, and military strikes against bases supplying that force are part of the initial resolution.

Answer 4

That relies upon on no matter if i replaced into sane or no longer. If i replaced right into a sane and rational man or woman, then it might want to be glaring to me that Iran had no objective of nuking everybody. Does all those who's sane particularly imagine that the Iranians are so innovations bogglingly suicidal that they want the U. S. to nuke their entire usa into oblivion? although, if i replaced into an evil and insane megalomaniac who replaced into managed by technique of my even more desirable evil twisted pyschopath of a vice chairman, and my *** replaced into owned by technique of the state of Israel, then i might want to probably bomb the Christ out of them and throw the global right into a global melancholy (at proper), or possibly even commence WW3. Then all my artwork because 2000 might want to be finished, and that i might want to have taken a non violent (particularly) and rich global, and plunged it into hell. and also you recognize the proper ingredient about it? maximum individuals are so apathetic, stupid, bigotted, and cowardly that they does no longer even realised i might want to performed it. that they'd blame it on the trrrrrrrists. Osuma bin Ludinon and that Al Kayda Franken guy. Goddamn awful muslims. Towel heads. awaken you idiots, in the previous that's too overdue. If it isn't already.

Answer 5

I think she's right. The Congress needs to re-assert its rights to influence military action. Presidential power in this area has been growing out of control for decades and Bush is absolutely abusing his "rights."

Answer 6

I think it will be a problem if Iran is attacked by Bush...but the way things are ,in the white house these days,and the current state of domestic politics,BUSH MUST BUSHHAD THOSE EVIL IRANIAN BASTARDS...its that simple,our troops are getting killed from munitions from Iran...true lots of other county's munitions in the field of battle ,but the real problem now is IRAN,,,,missiles and roadside bombs..AND THE NUCLEAR MATERIALS,,clean sweep time,the warning from Hillary just means ,,,ITS ALMOST BUSHHAD TIME,,,,hail bush....freedom,,,,as support for our troops anyway,,,

Answer 7

I agree with her as Bush is saying he is not going to attack! But you know Bush! He tends to lie!

People are sick of Bush and the 4 year war he has us bogged down in with body bags coming home daily.

A stand-up president who is so pro-US military, that in his new budget, He cuts the VA Hospitals a 2nd time, the 1st by 100 Billion in 2006. But his TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH still made it into his budget! We can tell where his priority's lie so why is he so damn concerned about IED's when he is cutting the places that are going to take care of the wounded, and has been since he has been in office.

Tax cuts for the wealthy, while he runs up the deficit, and program cuts for those that take care of our wounded! Typical Republican! And I don't know how one can even begin to fathom what he is thinking! It is NUTS!

And Kolatcom, please get your facts straight! No US President has EVER been impeached, and that includes Clinton! So please get that straight and quit fibbing!

We do know that Bush was the FIRST CRIMINAL ever elected for a cocaine bust in Texas!

Answer 8

We have a President that is having his strings pulled by someone behind the scenes and he needs to be brought under control. It would not surprise me at all if one of the puppeteers was Dick Cheney.

Answer 9

Have you noticed, before Hillary speaks, she raises her hand to check which way the wind is blowing? She will say anything to get elected. She's for, then against, then against, then for anything that will help her win the nomination. Kinda like all Dems, huh?

Answer 10

Um she is a candidate for President and anything she says from now on should be considered posturing and nothing more.

Sort of like when your parents go out and leave your brother in charge, he now starts spewing out orders like a general. Empty words my freind all very empty words.