Senate Bill Passed

-->
Bush Administration

The Senate just passed the “emergency” supplement bill, 51-47. Details to follow.

Update: The Associated Press reports,

Forty-eight Democrats and independent Bernard Sanders of Vermont were joined by two Republicans, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Gordon Smith of Oregon, in voting for the measure. Opposed were 46 Republicans and Connecticut independent Joseph Lieberman.

Sens. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., and Tim Johnson, D-S.D., did not vote.

Share Button
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Madison Guy  •  Mar 29, 2007 @11:17 am

    Passage of the bill is cool. But what about “withdrawing” from the next war before it starts?

    And a little barking poodle shall lead them? U.S. Navy war games in Persian Gulf. Captured British sailors. Blair nipping at Iran’s heels. Is this the long-awaited incident that escalates into war? Shouldn’t we be paying more attention?

  2. merciless  •  Mar 29, 2007 @11:44 am

    Madison Guy, I’m pretty scared about this too. My fear was assuaged a bit yesterday, when SecDef Gates said publicly that a war with Iran was not likely.

    It sounded to me (and heck, I’m just an editor out in the hinterlands, what do I know?) that Gates is not on board with Cheney and his nuke-lust. I’m sure that more sober heads have calculated the costs involved and decided that it wouldn’t be profitable. From what I’ve read, the pentagon folks are also completely against this.

    On the other hand, it’ll take just one nasty “accident” to get it started, and we have an awful lot of hardware out there. We’re going to have to depend on Congress (shudder) and people like Jim Webb, who’s floating a bill right now that requires the president to get permission from Congress before going to war against Iran.

  3. Madison Guy  •  Mar 29, 2007 @1:30 pm

    Merciless, one moment I see the glass half full (Gates, Webb), the next minute it seems half empty (what were the Brits doing anywhere near the Iranians if they didn’t want to provoke something?) There’s so much military might floating around in the Persian Gulf that there’s real danger of stumbling into war even if nobody intends it. People do miscalculate, after all.

    A commenter at my post had heard that the Iranians grabbed the Brits as insurance against what they thought was a planned April 6 bombing attack. Just the sort of thing that can easily backfire.

    Bush’s current serenity in the face of near universal opposition is what most worries me. It seems like the cocky self-righteousness of someone who has his mind up to do something and knows nobody can stop him. And that the “something” will make our current debates seem so beside the point.

  4. merciless  •  Mar 29, 2007 @2:42 pm

    I hear you about the mood swings, Madison Guy. Some days it would just be better to stay in bed and pull the covers up tight.

    I also agree that an accident, real or implemented, could get out of hand in a second, with disastrous results.

    But I don’t think Bush is serene in the face of all this; he’s looked pretty riled up the last several times I’ve seen him in public. If it’s serenity at all, it’s the kind that comes from long discussions about the contamination of his precious bodily fluids, while he plays idly with the .45 on his desk. But seriously folks, I think he’s just being the pissy toddler he’s always been, and my only cause for hope is that he can’t go to war alone. He’ll need lots more support, without and within, than he has now. Let’s hope that’s enough to keep him caged.

  5. ray  •  Mar 29, 2007 @4:10 pm

    I know this won’t pertain exactly to your story, but I would like to point you to a link:

    http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=629&language_id=1

    They mention there is plan in the works to withdraw. I know the article is two weeks old, but I don’t recall seeing or hearing of this before. Maybe I just missed it or maybe it was buried in the paper. *shrugs*

    Leaves me to wonder if Bush will cut and run or will he drag this surge out just to avoid that.

    Again, I apologize for posting this here, but I don’t think my emails make it to you.

  6. Pat  •  Mar 29, 2007 @4:30 pm

    Upon whom does being “single incident away” from all out war really reflect on? Should perpetually being in this tenuous state really stand in place of negotiation? Negotiation just means talking, not capitulation.



    About this blog

    About Maha
    Comment Policy

    Vintage Mahablog
    Email Me
















    eXTReMe Tracker













      Technorati Profile