Here is Senator Byrd's dire warning to his colleagues and the BA as war looms.

Senator Byrd's Feb. 12 speech on the Iraq war

Some excerpts:

To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.

Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.

This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list.

High level Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation.

Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher. This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.

In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding scores of essential programs for our people.

In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequences for years to come.

In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences for years. One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly impossible to exact retribution. But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest superpower on the planet.

Senator Byrd has been consistently fearless in his fight against this war. I watched him try in vain to stop congress from handing Bush their war powers. I have heard he has a racist past but I have to applaude him for his efforts now when he's needed and while the rest of Congress has rolled over and played dead.

Its really sad if this one man is the only voice of rational thought left in American politics. How can it be that a nation which prides itself on its democratic traditon, has let matters slide to the point where there is no political opposition?

As much fun as it is to be lectured by the one of the most racist Sentators in the US, I would be more interested in having an actual question to debate.

Agreed.

Darcaine

Shhhhhh Jaime, You are supposed to overlook the obvious...

I agree with Jaime, what question is there here to debate?

I thought it was simply posted to spark debate. I thought the implied question was, "Any thoughts?" I could be wrong.

My "thoughts' are there are too many issues addressed to have any unopenended debate.

We should give Dingo a chance to form a question.

This, from Byrd's Speech, is a blatant lie.

Any student of Economics knows that Fiscal and Domestic policy take time to have an effect on an economic system.

I would like to see where Byrd got these numbers...

Bush didn't have a large surplus when he came into office? Bush doesn't have a huge deficit now?

No, Bush came into office with a projected surplus. There is a huge difference between projected revenue and money in the bank. Several factors can and have affected the economy, and NO it wasn't all because of tax cuts. (That's one of those pre-reply's)
I, too await Dingo to hopefully clarify this thread, Byrd's comments can splinter into a dozen different topics.

Okay. What do you think of Senator's Byrd assessment of the situation? To be more specific what do you think of the Senate handing broad war powers to the president to engage if he wishes in a preemptive strike against a country that has never attacked us, is militarily crippled and has UN inspectors checking out every site our or anybody elses intelligence services will give them? Is the principle of checks and balances between the executive and the legislature of concern here? Do we want a decision of such consequence determined by one man? Is this democracy?

Feel free to question any part of Byrd's speech. I hardly see the necessity for me to extract questions from a speech available for everybody to read.

And yes, a follow up Jamie. What does Byrd's past racism have to do with his assessment of the BA and their policies foreign or domestic? Shouldn't these matters be addressed on their merits?

Senator Byrd is a laughingstock and disgrace to the Senate. A former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, and utterly the worst pork barrel politician ever to walk the Senate floor. He is a culprit in the do nothing democratic party during Bill CLinton's reign, when our current terrorism crisis grew from a mole to a fully metastisized cancer. IF he is the mouth piece of the democratic opposition, then holy smackers, democrats need a new spokesman, preferably one that is not senile and old enough to have voted for Grover CLeveland.

HR,

Are the attacks on Byrd instead of a refutation of his concerns about going to war without any meaningful debate simply a tacit acknowledgment that he has a point and it is better to assail his character than to try to refute his words?

So Byrd wants to know how the Senate can stand idly by as we approach the war with Iraq.

I'd say the main reason is that the time for debate was before Congress authorized the use of force by the President. Once that vote was taken, it was and is the duty of our elected officials to stand solidly behind our President. Failing to do so only weakens our position and raises the threat to our armed services.

You have a point. The passage of that vote by this congress was irresponsible and wrong.

However, as long as there is a chance to rectify a bad situation they need to act.