Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Getcher Sunday Papers

July 15, 2007 11:46 AM

Two respected Republican senators -- former Senate Armed Services Committee chairman John Warner, R-Virginia, and former Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Dick Lugar, R-Ind. -- have broken from the president with Iraq legislation that would require the president to plan (though not implement) a new strategy for Iraq, and suggest to him that he submit a new war authorization..

The two senators were exclusive guests of George Stephanopoulos this morning.

But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has indicated that the amendment is, at least for him, a non-starter (LINK).

Meanwhile, and I apologize for this taking so long, but HERE IS THE VIDEO of the entire two-minute-plus exchange I had with Reid about whether the U.S. -- and those senators, like Reid, who voted to authorize use of force against Iraq in October 2002 -- have a moral obligation to ensure the security of the Iraqi people as much as possible.

-- jt

July 15, 2007 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (5)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

If Sen. Reid doesn't watch himself more carefully, he's going to get the reputation of a cold, calculating, manipulative politician that would make even Willie Stark blush. Also, if he keeps up his high-and-mighty attitude as "The One Who Controls What the Senate Will Do," he's also going to be confronted with charges from anyone and everyone about being an obstructionist in not letting legislation be discussed and voted on. And I thought Bill Frist was inept!

Posted by: chuck | Jul 16, 2007 1:52:14 PM

Jake - Good questioning, but I would not call those two repubs as respected.

As far as Reid, well he uses the talking points fro the left, and your questions to him did not follow his script.

The congress authorized the use of Force in Iraq, by them turning their backs now not only do they have the responsibility for the Iraqi people but they have the Duty to support our troops and make sure none have died in Vein.

What they are attempting is UN-Constitutional, they only can do one thing under the Constitution anything else that they say or do is only propaganda for the enemy.

Posted by: spock | Jul 16, 2007 10:25:14 AM

On 18 December 1972, the North Vietnamese walked out of the Paris talks. and Nixon ordered 100 to 150 B52 sorties per night to carpet bomb Hanoi and Haiphong. By 29 December, they returned to the table and gave Kissenger everything he wanted. This outcome, by any standard, constituted a military victory.

The democrat controlled Congress, however, could not allow Nixon to receive credit for winning, so they cut security assistance from $1.4B to $700M, ensuring they would be unable to withstand another invasion. As insurance, they added the Case-Church amendment to the defense appropriation bill prohibiting the U.S. armed forces from operating in, over or in the waters of North and South Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia.

The North Vietnamese could not believe we would sit by and allow them to take the South, so in January 1975 they attacked Phuoc Long Province. We did not respond.

To that point, the war had taken about 1,250,000 lives including 58,202 Americans. Unfortunately, the killing was just beginning.

Peace brought Vietnam 850,000 dead in reeducation camps and another 150,000 dead boat people attempting to flee the North's repression.

In Cambodia, Pol Pot brought the Khmer Rouge to power and killed 2,000,000 of the country's 6,000,000 people through execution, torture and starvation. Jane Fonda thought this man was a peace-loving, quiet, polite scholar.

After American politicians cut and ran from South East Asia, there was epic slaughter. 3,000,000 people died after we had left.

Is the Middle East a more peaceful place than South East Asia? I see no evidence of it.

Posted by: arch | Jul 16, 2007 10:21:25 AM

Jake- I appreciate your attempt on this one to get a simple straight answer from Sen Reid. Keep up your constant questioning for straight answers from both sides of the political aisle. You are on record with Sen Reid's response that basically he feels no moral compunction about the Iraqi people if we pull out of Iraq. Hmmmmm - strange position for a Mormon Bishop to have - but I feel this whole issue is full of Alice in Wonderland qualities.

Hang in there
Hang tough

Posted by: Diane Peske | Jul 15, 2007 10:19:42 PM

Geez Jake, you've got your answer. Harry Reid and the 'bring the troops home now coalition' aren't concerned about Iraqis. But thanks for helping make it clear.

Posted by: Menlo Bob | Jul 15, 2007 1:33:17 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS