Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired), states that the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is “a fallback position that’s darn near bulletproof” if Bush decides to unilaterally attack Iran since it “gives a president up to 90 days to commit forces to combat without permission from Congress.”
Huber concludes:
The only chance of checking whatever aggressive ambitions Bush may have on Iran would be a passive coup by the senior members of the administration’s civilian and military security team through a group resignation, and hoping for that is, well, hopeless. After the latest round of musical deck chairs is complete, everybody still on board will have signed on to the program in blood (somebody else’s, of course).
But a passive military coup is not the only check. Francis Boyle states that another 20,000 troops would require additional authorisation from Congress under the terms of the War Powers Resolution.
Would Bush attack Iran without “the surge” in position?
“Surge” Without Congressional Approval Is Impeachable Offense
Section 4(a)(3) makes it quite clear that the War Powers Resolution is triggered … ‘In the absence of a declaration of war [which we do not have for Iraq], in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced … (3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation….’
Congress can deny Bush the surge.
Anything less is tactic approval for this bloody insanity from the Democratic majority.
Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
Uzi Mahnaimi, New York and Sarah Baxter, Washington
The Sunday Times, 7 January 2006
Israeli military commanders believe conventional strikes may no longer be enough to annihilate increasingly well-defended enrichment facilities. Several have been built beneath at least 70ft of concrete and rock. However, the nuclear-tipped bunker-busters would be used only if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene, senior sources said.
Israeli and American officials have met several times to consider military action. Military analysts said the disclosure of the plans could be intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt enrichment, cajole America into action or soften up world opinion in advance of an Israeli attack.
“Soften up world opinion” for a nuclear attack executed by a country that denies it possesses nuclear arms? “Cajole” America into action? Such playful words for unleashing destruction on a scale of immeasurable proportions. Monstrous, immoral, and illegal are much more suitable descriptives.