Why do people say that Congress voted for the Iraq war when they voted to leave it up to Bush for leverage?

Question

Although I despide congress for giving Bush the sole authority to make that decision.

- despise - (above)

The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107–243), it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133, and the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16, 2002.

I disagree that congress read Bush's mind and knew he would not try to get inspectors back in. Like 3 year odls, they trusted Bush and allowed him to start a war. They are guilty of foresaking their duty, NOT voting for war.

Answer 1

I don't know. They did give permission for Bush to go if he chose but they didn't vote on when and if an invasion would occur.

Answer 2

Well, they did give him the authorization to use force. Of course, Congress did so after being lied to by the administration. Of all the lies, however, the deadliest were the lies told by Colin Powell. We trusted Colin Powell with the lives of our children and the honor of our nation, and he, loyal Republican that he is, proceeded to waste them.

Worst of all, Congress lacks the moral fibre to respond by impeaching the lot of them. The fear of President Cheney is an excuse: if Congress was really about honor and honesty, it would have impeached them all, years ago. But, ultimately, Congress is populated by career politicians, and therein lies the problem. Nobody should be allowed to be a politician for life. Everybody should be required to be of SOME use to America at some point.

Answer 3

Congress showed its lack of critical thinking skills.

Note: Only Congress has the constitutional authority to declare war. In this case, they gave all that responsibility to the president and therefore this war was never officially declared. Thats why you often hear people refer to this as an illegal war, it is.

Answer 4

I don't know what "people" you are referring to but they are most likely affiliated with the Congress or they are helping in defending the Congress since the Iraq war is in such negative light.

Over 2/3rds of Congress voted to go to war with Iraq.

Answer 5

Voting to leave it up to Bush is voting for the war. If they were against the war, they should have not voted to give a pro-war man that power.

Your argument is insane. Would I be responsible for peoples' deaths if I set Jeffrey Dahmner free and "left it up to him?"

Come on.

Answer 6

The only US Military force that the President can send off to battle without congressinal approval is the Marines. I know there are soldiers, sailors, national guard, and airmen over there as well as Marines.

The only ONLY way that those other branches could go over there to fight in an official war is if CONGRESS votes them in.

Read your Constitution. It's in there.

Answer 7

You seem to be mistaken about your information, the US military has been conducting missions in and around Iraq since the Gulf War.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/swa-ops.htm

Edit:
Just because I know this information goes hand-in-hand with the voices that are against this war. Weapons of Mass Destruction have been used in Iraq, but before I give you proof, lets look at the definition of WMD:

The term “weapon of mass destruction” means any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of—
(A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors;
(B) a disease organism; or
(C) radiation or radioactivity.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00002302----000-.html

Now, here's the proof that WMD's have been found in Iraq.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50746

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/42111/error

Answer 8

Congress didn't, the constitution gives the President sole authority over the military.

Answer 9

and to add to your initial question...those of us who haven't forgotten the "news" environment at that time, recall a lot of screaming by conservative pundits. they said the president needed every option at his disposal. denial of the "potential" for use of force would weaken the president in his efforts to "resolve" the crisis peacefully.

as we now know...peaceful resolution was never in the cards. so...what have we learned for the future?

Answer 10

they didnt have to read his mind he was very clear. you knew, i knew, so did they. they worded as they did in hopes of preserving some plausible deniability if it went poorly and to get credit if it went well. it seems to have worked on you, but so few others that even those who regret it, refer to it as the vote to authorize the war.