I didn’t think it was a very wise idea to take things off the table if you’re trying to get people to modify their behavior and normalize it in a civilized way,” said Rep. Gary Ackerman of New York.
Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) said there is widespread fear in Israel about Iran.
damn it! nothing is being taken off the table by requiring the president to go to congress to get approval to attack iran! by not requiring him is what is obviously taking options off the table! the option of congress having any future say in the matter!

Posted by: annie | Mar 13 2007 15:54 utc | 4

Youtube: Democrats Risk War with Iran to Serve Israel’s Agenda

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 13 2007 16:20 utc | 6

i have heard it said that, unless the aumf for iraq was interpreted to include iran, it is consitutionally illegal for bushco to attack iran, and to deal with this legislatively would be confuse things, possibly even set up a premise that with a veto bush would accord himself the “right” to attack iran without coming to congress for permission. i am not necessarily endorsing this, just sharing it because it thought it was an interesting perspective.
my concern more is that some of the out of iraq caucus members, like my rep jerry nadler who sponsored h.r. 455, have backed down and signed onto the compromise. my feeling is that this is partially due to the fact that the left has not held their feet and the blue dogs to the fire.
one thing that has become clear over the past week is that while the dems do a spineless compromise dance, their is a schism developing in the “netroots” as many feel that the leadership there has gone the way of the compromise dems and has adopted politics before principle. there are those who see intricate strategy in play where it eventually falls upon the republicans to rein in bushco, or think this is better than nothing, or think this is a first step that will inevitably lead to a consitutional crisis. others sound very much like many commentators here – recognizing the demopublicans for what they are. my hope is that this growing contingent picks up impeachment fever fast.

Posted by: conchita | Mar 13 2007 16:42 utc | 8

Words of wisdom from commentator Joe Bageant.

Posted by: Loveandlight | Mar 13 2007 18:04 utc | 10

All this non-action by the Dems just confirms my thoughts that our congress works only for the few. Government by the few, for the few.

Posted by: Ben | Mar 13 2007 18:45 utc | 12

The United States of America cannot leave Iraq, and cannot leave Iran the regional power in the Middle East.
To do so is to take our hand off the oil faucet for planet Earth.
To do that is to consciously embark upon a simpler, gentler life as a Third World nation, waiting in line with 200 other nations for our share of dwindling petroleum and gas, if the new global leaders (China, Russia, India, Europe) don’t mind sharing.
America currently sits atop the world economy because of six decades of growing economic and military dominance of Earth. We are the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the human species. This is It. We are It.
No one in the government, the White House, the Pentagon, the financial elites, the Congress, or the Girl Scouts either is going to simply let go of that.
Whaddaya nuts?
Despite all the bills bouncing off the walls in Congress, nothing will come of them in fact. No impeachment, no end to war, no leaving Iran in charge.
You can be sure we’ll kill a lot of skinny furriners before we’ll be po’ folk like them.
We are living inside a Tom Clancy novel, and the pages keep turning to the inevitable conclusion of America uber alles!

Posted by: Antifa | Mar 13 2007 20:59 utc | 14

“We are the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the human species.”
Mene, mene, tekel, parsin.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Mar 14 2007 0:50 utc | 16

For those who didn’t already know, we live in the United States for Israel.

Posted by: mikefromtexas | Mar 14 2007 3:04 utc | 18

(stupid me) – was referring to #16 (Mene,Mene,Tekel, Parsin)

Posted by: DM | Mar 14 2007 8:12 utc | 20

From the Raimondo article (linked above) ..

Berkley is prepared to send the sons and daughters of her Nevada constituents into battle because, you see, there is “fear in Israel.” What about fear in Nevada of the looming prospect of another war in the Middle East, this time involving a country with three times the population of Iraq and quite a bit more territory? I’ll bet if you grab someone off the streets of Las Vegas and ask them if we ought to gamble on giving Bush the power to launch another war, only the very drunk would say, “Yeah, sure, dude, why the hell not!” On the other hand, if you went up to someone in say, Tel Aviv, you’d get a very different answer. In this context, it is fair to ask: whom, exactly, does Rep. Berkley represent?

Doesn’t need any further comment. If the shit hits the fan, people like Rep. Berkley better duck.

Posted by: DM | Mar 14 2007 10:34 utc | 22

crooks and liars is featuring a year old piece at w/the comment To whom and what are these groups loyal?
when one of the most popular msm blogs starts linking to articles it would have considered to extreme a year ago maybe the tide has shifted.

Posted by: annie | Mar 14 2007 15:55 utc | 24

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s essay ‘The Israel Lobby’ in the London Review of Books had a tremendous impact.
link
That a mainstream (if vaguely or very leftish in GB terms) bookish but solidly ‘Anglo’ paper published this loosened tongues; lead to much other print – public oral debate – internet communications – essays – media discussion – etc.
One can invoke other influences that played a role, such as those within Israel itself; the fiasco of the US ‘backed or organized’ attack on Lebanon in the summer; rising ‘anti-semitism’ in Europe; the failure of the Iraq ‘war’ and hints that it might not be in US interests, etc. etc. It all hangs together, sure, but that article was vital, even if one sees it only as a point in history.
The Israelis are now trying to stem the tide with the old methods. Trying hard.
US Democrats are amongst the most vulnerable targets, so expect a hardening of pro-Israel policies.

Posted by: Noirette | Mar 14 2007 18:22 utc | 26

@L&L#10
I think Bageant may be our generation’s Ben Hecht…

Posted by: DeAnander | Mar 14 2007 23:15 utc | 28

Al-Quds al-Arabi and Al-Hayat both give prominent play to a report in a Russian newspaper that said the US has past the point of no return for an attack on around 20 Iranian nuclear and military locations, scheduled for April 6 and code-named “Sting”.

Posted by: annie | Mar 16 2007 23:55 utc | 30