Webb Introduces Bill on Iran
|VIDEO: Webb on VA & Iran|
James Webb was on \”Hardball\” today talking about the Walter Reed
scandal. He also wanted to focus on the bill he introduced in the Senate that
limits Bush\’s trigger finger when it comes to Iran. Considering Bush\’s incompetence in Iraq, not to mention the general discontent with his leadership, it couldn\’t happen soon enough.
\”This presidency has shot from the hip too many times for us to be able
to trust it to act on its own,\” Webb told reporters Monday. \”It\’s
not the way the Constitution was designed. We need Congress to be involved
in any decision to commence military activities absent an attack from the
other side or a direct threat.\”
\”What I\’m saying today is, clearly, that we should not give up any of
our positions diplomatically, with respect to Iran, but I believe it is not
in the power of the president himself to decide to take unilateral military
action there,\” he added.
If enacted, Webb\’s bill would ensure that \”no funds … may be obligated
or expended for military operations or activities within or above the territory
of Iran, or within the territorial waters of Iran, except pursuant to a specific
authorization of Congress.\”
The bill has a number of exceptions, however. The proposal would allow military
action under the following scenarios without prior congressional authorization:
Ã¢â‚¬” When the action is aimed at repelling an attack launched or about
to be launched from inside Iran;
Ã¢â‚¬” When military forces are in \”hot pursuit\” of enemy forces
fleeing into Iran; and
Ã¢â‚¬” When the military is supporting intelligence gathering.
The bill would require the president to submit a report to Congress within
24 hours justifying any spending that would support any of the exceptions.
Webb told FOX News last week that his concern came about when he compared
the 2002 authorization to go to war in Iraq with the presidential signing
statement accompanying it clarifying prerogatives the administration deemed
permissible under the authorization. … ..
Harry Reid offered some drivel that went like this… \”very, very
confident … in real generality … that I can support\” Webb\’s resolution.
\”In real generality\”? What the hell does that mean? It\’s
doubtful Reid even knows. In case I haven\’t made it clear before, I\’m starting to wonder about our majority leader. He\’s been positively spineless on Iraq. If he can\’t support Webb\’s bill all bets are off with me.