Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: How Barbara Lee's anti-war push succeeded on Iran

  1. #1

    How Barbara Lee's anti-war push succeeded on Iran

    Longtime anti-war dissident Barbara Lee’s name wasn’t on the resolution the House overwhelmingly approved on Thursday to halt hostilities with Iran. That distinction went to Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a freshman Democrat who served multiple tours in Iraq as a top-level CIA analyst.

    But it was the 73-year-old congresswoman who had helped push the Democratic caucus over decades to unite and hold President Donald Trump’s presidential military powers in check, according to interviews with nearly a dozen of her colleagues.

    “The historical and current credit needs to be given to her,” Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said. “Even if it was a Democratic president, even if it was Obama, it was her courage and her consistency to say, ‘This is a role for Congress.’”

    “More times than not, history has proven her right,” he added.

    It was Lee who, in 2001, stood alone in a bruised and angry America to oppose post-Sept. 11 warfare. A generation later, the California Democrat is helping to lead a party-wide crackdown on the expansion of Trump’s presidential war powers.

    The 22-year House veteran is renowned across the Capitol for her resolute approach to holding to account all occupants of the White House: Clinton's bombing in Yugoslavia, Bush’s surge in Iraq, Obama’s airstrikes in Syria and, most recently, Trump’s drone targeting of an Iranian leader.

    And for that dogged persistence — even in the face of death threats that once required her to have a 24-hour security detail — Lee was celebrated by her caucus this week.

    She earned a round of applause at a leadership meeting, praise from Speaker Nancy Pelosi at her press conference and personal accolades on the floor. It all happily coincided with her recent wedding to a Los Angeles-based pastor on New Year’s Eve, which Democrats toasted with a reception off the House floor just moments after approving the war powers resolution.

    Earlier in the week, it wasn’t clear the vote would happen at all. An Iranian retaliatory strike against U.S. bases in Iraq made some Democrats reluctant to move forward with the resolution. But progressives kept the pressure on, arguing to Pelosi and others in the caucus that it was even more important to send Trump a message as the situation appeared to spiral.

    The threat eventually de-escalated, and talks moved back to Trump's powers to strike Iran in the first place — which he claimed under a 2002 war authorization that Lee has clawed at for years. Lee fielded questions throughout the week from fellow Democrats, particularly freshmen, on the issue.

    In the end, only eight moderate Democrats voted against the resolution.

    Beyond Thursday’s Iran vote, top Democrats have also set in motion two other key measures to control the executive branch’s war-making authorities, nearly limitless in the 19-year global war on terror. Lee is taking the lead on the push to repeal the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq though that may prove a more difficult step.

    The new push by Democrats, spurred by Trump’s sudden killing of Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani without congressional consultation, marks the strongest challenge to a White House’s war authorities since 2006 when the House debated cutting off funding for the Iraq War.

    The repeal of the 2002 AUMF — which has justified Pentagon strikes in countries like Yemen, Somalia and now Iran — could now see its first-ever standalone floor vote.

    And unlike the divisive, often ugly, debate back then, Lee now stands in lockstep with the vast majority of the Democratic caucus, including veterans of that war serving in Trump-won districts.

    “Regardless of where you’re coming from, what state, who your constituency is, I think what you’re seeing is unity in our caucus now,” Lee told reporters this week on Democrats' largely united front against Trump's recent aggression with Iran.

    In 2001, Lee — the daughter of an Army officer — was the sole member of Congress to oppose a war authorization for President George W. Bush. Since then, she has repeatedly sought to roll back both that decree and the Iraq-specific measure in 2002.

    Lee has kept the debate alive by regularly forcing votes when she can — in committee, on the floor. And gradually, support has ticked up, with lawmakers of both parties growing weary of America’s longest war.

    “She definitely leads by her presence, but she’s not a person who slams her fist on the desk. When she speaks, she’s definitely listened to,” said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who serves alongside Lee in the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

    “It’s like a Jedi trick or something,” Gallego said.

    The big step toward an AUMF repeal comes after another major victory for anti-war advocates earlier in Trump's presidency, when both chambers of Congress approved a war powers resolution for the first time in history. Trump ultimately vetoed the measure, which would have ended U.S. intervention in the civil war in Yemen as a rebuke to Saudi Arabia over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

    Lee has climbed the ranks of the Democratic caucus, including stints as chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Progressive Caucus. She made a failed bid for Democratic Caucus chairman last year, but was hand-picked by Pelosi to join her leadership team in a new role.

    Part of that success, colleagues say, is Lee’s willingness to fight without aggravating or isolating her colleagues — earning her reverence in the House among Democrats and some Republicans.

    At one point on Thursday, Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) ran into Lee just outside the room where Democrats held a belated wedding reception for her and her new husband, complete with a three-tier cake.

    Mullin approached Lee and said, “Congrats on your engagement!” She told him they had already wed, and he wrapped his arms around her in a big hug, though Mullin still fiercely opposes her anti-war stance.

    “They know where she’s coming from, they know what her beliefs are, and they know that she’ll push as hard as she can,” said Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), who first met Lee while serving in the California state legislature.

    “But at the same time they understand that she’s a realist and she understands that you can’t just go from A to Z. Sometimes you have to take these baby steps,” she added.

    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said she sought out a meeting with Lee in California after she won her election but before she came to Congress.

    “I asked her, how did you have the fortitude to do what you did in Afghanistan, and so many other issues?” Ocasio-Cortez said. “One of the things she said is that, you really have to pick your corner and to stand on it, and eventually everyone tends to come around to you.”
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...ar-iran-097145



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Toothless non binding resolution. This should show you how serious the Congress is at wanting to end hostilities with Iran. Fake bills from fake political hacks.
    The Lee bill repeals the 2002 AUMF and is legislation. The Senate is voting on a binding resolution next week.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    The Lee bill repeals the 2002 AUMF and is legislation. The Senate is voting on a binding resolution next week.
    Oh so this wasn't about the non binding war powers resolution shenanigans or Iran. Is this designation to make low information voters feel like congress voted to repeal war with Iran even though the resolution they voted on about Iran was non binding and won't even go to the president to sign? This is some real CIA level $#@!ery. Does the CIA run the democrat party???

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    The Lee bill repeals the 2002 AUMF and is legislation. The Senate is voting on a binding resolution next week.
    Thanks 4 posting this read and thanks for setting the record straight. Only way we will in these wars is for honest publican like Thomas massie and Rand Paul to work with honest Democrats like Barbara Lee and Tulsi Gabbard.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Thanks 4 posting this read and thanks for setting the record straight. Only way we will in these wars is for honest publican like Thomas massie and Rand Paul to work with honest Democrats like Barbara Lee and Tulsi Gabbard.
    No worries. Lee has balls. She was the only No vote on the 2001 AUMF against 'terrorists'. Even Ron voted for it though I suspect if he didn't he would been thrown out of the GOP. I think he regrets that vote more than anything.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Oh so this wasn't about the non binding war powers resolution shenanigans or Iran. Is this designation to make low information voters feel like congress voted to repeal war with Iran even though the resolution they voted on about Iran was non binding and won't even go to the president to sign? This is some real CIA level $#@!ery. Does the CIA run the democrat party???
    Be patient. Stuff is happening. Trump will veto anything but it should embarrass him in an election year particularly as he promised to stop these wars.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    No worries. Lee has balls. She was the only No vote on the 2001 AUMF against 'terrorists'. Even Ron voted for it though I suspect if he didn't he would been thrown out of the GOP. I think he regrets that vote more than anything.
    I have seen Ron Paul say otherwise. He voted to go after the people who funded and attacked us. He spoke about and knew about blowback before 2001 aumf. He defends that vote when he gets called isolationist.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    I have seen Ron Paul say otherwise. He voted to go after the people who funded and attacked us. He spoke about and knew about blowback before 2001 aumf. He defends that vote when he gets called isolationist.
    Can you find a link for me? I've never seen him mention it.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Be patient. Stuff is happening. Trump will veto anything but it should embarrass him in an election year particularly as he promised to stop these wars.
    He can't veto the Iran resolution. It doesn't go to his desk to sign.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Can you find a link for me? I've never seen him mention it.
    Its in a bunch of his interviews normally when he gets called isolationist. Im suprised you haven't heard him say it because it was a common neocon talking point for years.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Its in a bunch of his interviews normally when he gets called isolationist. Im suprised you haven't heard him say it because it was a common neocon talking point for years.
    can't say I've seen him mention it...

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    can't say I've seen him mention it...
    Normally he says something along the lines of "i'm not an isolationist, i voted to go after the people who attacked us on 9/11". You can disagree with the foreign policy that encourages people to attack our country while voting to defend our country from being attacked. Its not really counter intuitive if you really think about it. Its like cleaning up messes and encouraging messes not to be made.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Normally he says something along the lines of "i'm not an isolationist, i voted to go after the people who attacked us on 9/11". You can disagree with the foreign policy that encourages people to attack our country while voting to defend our country from being attacked. Its not really counter intuitive if you really think about it. Its like cleaning up messes and encouraging messes not to be made.

    The problem is the AUMF was so wide it could be used to intervene in any country on the planet and that's exactly what they've done. I suspect deep down he regrets having such an open ended authorization.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    The problem is the AUMF was so wide it could be used to intervene in any country on the planet and that's exactly what they've done. I suspect deep down he regrets having such an open ended authorization.
    I don't believe thats what the aumf said lol. There are other bills and things that are open ended but thats not what he voted for.

    IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all
    necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organiza-
    tions, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,
    or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
    or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent
    any future acts of international terrorism against the United States
    by such nations, organizations or persons

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    I don't believe thats what the aumf said lol. There are other bills and things that are open ended but thats not what he voted for.

    IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all
    necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organiza-
    tions, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,
    or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
    or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent
    any future acts of international terrorism against the United States
    by such nations, organizations or persons
    Yes but they're still using it to this day to occupy Afghanistan and I believe its been used to justify other interventions like under Obama in Libya and Syria.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Yes but they're still using it to this day to occupy Afghanistan and I believe its been used to justify other interventions like under Obama in Libya and Syria.
    Than maybe it just needs to be amended so that the president has to clarify how those nations are determined to be involved with terrorism and how much is spent on preventing. I think right now their argument is that terrorists are being created in those nations who can be hired to attack America or American interests for the right price so its preventing attacks. Maybe there are better ways to prevent attacks that dont endanger the lives of Americans. The only options I have seen tried is to stop them from being created or bribe them which probably costs more and doesn't guarantee they don't attack us.

  21. #18

    No respect for phony Barbara Lee.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    No worries. Lee has balls. She was the only No vote on the 2001 AUMF against 'terrorists'. Even Ron voted for it though I suspect if he didn't he would been thrown out of the GOP. I think he regrets that vote more than anything.
    Barbara Lee is way over-rated and does not deserve the "anti-war" respect so many give her!

    She and the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus sponsored and voted for the resolution that pushed Obama to (unconstitutionally!) send our troops into Somalia! This was after Boko Haram kidnapped those school girls. They didn't care then, about the fact that some men would loose their lives over an unfortunate situation that was, nonetheless, none of our business.

    THEN, once a black guy was was amongst the murdered (LaDavid something?) they had the gall to feign shock and outrage over the fact that we had troops in Somalia, along with the rest of America! They literally pretended they had no idea they were there, or why, and of course, the media covered for them. By that time, Trump was in office and that clowny bitch in the sequined cowboy hat made a damned circus out of the guys death, and just wouldn't get her fat ass off the television.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Can you find a link for me? I've never seen him mention it.
    I hate to say it, but the little warmonger is right about this.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    I hate to say it, but the little warmonger is right about this.
    I think Ron never realized it would still be used to this day. OBL is dead the mission is over but they're STILL using it to occupy Afghanistan and using it to chase alleged bad guys all over the globe.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Yes but they're still using it to this day to occupy Afghanistan and I believe its been used to justify other interventions like under Obama in Libya and Syria.
    The 2002 version is more widely abused. That's the one that pertains to Iraq.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    I think Ron never realized it would still be used to this day. OBL is dead the mission is over but they're STILL using it to occupy Afghanistan and using it to chase alleged bad guys all over the globe.
    I suspect he knew the danger full well but also knew this was the best he was going to get. I have never heard Paul say we should not have gone after Bin Laden, and we needed something to go do that.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    The Lee bill repeals the 2002 AUMF and is legislation. The Senate is voting on a binding resolution next week.
    But the bill that passed does not repeal the 2002 AUMF. The media has been intentionally misleading about this.

    The Barbara Lee-Massie bill was never voted on. The one that passed was different. A fraud. Sure, it “sends a message”, but that is all.

    The real bill was buried by Pelosi and the media.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    They are what they hate.” - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The Barbara Lee-Massie bill was never voted on. The one that passed was different. A fraud. Sure, it “sends a message”, but that is all.

    The real bill was buried by Pelosi and the media.
    i read that Pelosi is going to bring up the Lee bill soon. No idea when.

    Pelosi vows vote to end 2002 Iraq War authorization

    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...-authorization



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    I read that Pelosi is going to bring up the Lee bill soon. No idea when.
    That would be great. We’ll see if it happens.

    And then Lou Dobbs and the other teocons will attack Matt Gaetz and Massie again for supporting it.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    They are what they hate.” - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.



Similar Threads

  1. Tucker: DC insiders push for war with Iran (1/6/20)
    By Warlord in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2020, 08:49 PM
  2. Anti-sanctuary push in California
    By seapilot in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-22-2018, 10:53 PM
  3. Barbara Boxer, Rand Paul work together on Iran bill
    By twomp in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-22-2015, 07:08 PM
  4. Anti-tax automated push polling in NH
    By jgmaynard in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-27-2007, 12:51 PM
  5. Anti-Romney push polls
    By Bradley in DC in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •