| Today the Senate passed the Kyle-Lieberman Iran amendment, which designates the military of a sovereign nation as a terrorist organization - Iran's Revolutionary Guards. It's a bad idea, and clearly lays the groundwork for military action against Iran.
In one amendment, the Senate has rendered the word "terrorist" meaningless, and has thrown a monkey wrench into international diplomatic relations. It could also give the Bush administration legal justification to do anything it wants with, or in, Iran, without Congressional oversight or approval.
Jim Webb pretty much summed up the amendment:
Those who regret their vote five years ago to authorize military action in Iraq should think hard before supporting this approach. Because, in my view, it has the same potential to do harm where many are seeking to do good.
At best, it's a deliberate attempt to divert attention from a failed diplomatic policy. At worst, it could be read as a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action, without one hearing and without serious debate.
Senator Dodd also spoke out against the amendment:
"I cannot support the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. To do so could give this President a green light to act recklessly and endanger US national security. We learned in the run up to the Iraq war that seemingly nonbinding language passed by this Senate can have profound consequences. We need the president to use robust diplomacy to address concerns with Iran, not the language in this amendment that the president can point to if he decides to draw this country into another disastrous war of choice."
Here's the roll call. Jon Tester voted against the amendment; Max Baucus voted for it.
Odd, isn't it? Just this week, Senator Baucus' op-ed decrying the diplomatic and political situation in Iraq and calling for the withdrawal of US troops from the country appeared in newspapers around the state, and today he voted for an admendment that could embroil us in another - perhaps worse -- clusterf*ck than Iraq. You tell me how any rational person could hold onto those two thoughts at the same time. It's a mystery to me.
Other notable votes include those of Republicans Lugar and Hagel, who crossed party lines to do the right thing; Democratic presidential candidates Dodd and Biden who voted against the amendment, and Clinton who voted for it. |
