Where I Stand — Mike O’Callaghan: The White House request

Friday, Sept. 20, 2002 | 5:40 a.m.

BY THE TIME YOU read this column, every commentator in our country will have his or her say on Iraq. Allow me to take a look at the resolution draft that President George W. Bush has sent to Congress as compared to the requests made by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 and by President George Bush in 1991.

Johnson's Gulf of Tonkin Resolution gave him carte blanche approval to turn our armed forces on North Vietnam. This power would only expire "when the President shall determine that the peace and security of the area is reasonably assured by international conditions created by action of the United Nations or otherwise, except that it may be terminated earlier by concurrent resolution of the Congress."

The Johnson resolution whizzed through Congress two days after he addressed that body. In his opening remarks to Congress, he said, "Last night I announced to the American people that the North Vietnamese regime had conducted further deliberate attacks against U.S. naval vessels operating in international waters, and I had therefore directed air action against gunboats and supporting facilities used in these hostile operations. This air action has now been carried out with substantial damage to the boats and facilities. Two U.S. aircraft were lost in the action." Several years later both Congress and the people questioned if they had received enough information from that address. I need not repeat the results of what happened in Vietnam.

Twelve years ago Saddam Hussein's Iraqi army invaded Kuwait and was a deadly threat to Saudi Arabia. The Iraqi rape and plunder of that small oil-producing country shocked every decent human being in the world. Bush sought and received the support of the United Nations, and made a very strong case for meeting the challenge with military forces. He enclosed these facts with the request, made five and a half months after the invasion of Kuwait, for a resolution under the war powers residing in the Legislative and Executive branches of government.

It was an impressive request that ended by saying, "In summary, diplomatic and economic pressures have not diminished Iraq's intransigence despite five and one-half months of unparalleled international effort, and continued reliance upon them alone could risk achieving the basic objective of bringing about Iraq's complete and unconditional withdrawal from Kuwait."

Both Nevada senators, Harry Reid and Richard Bryan, joined eight other Democrats, including Joe Lieberman and Al Gore, in voting for the president's resolution. Bush had staged in that area a large military force with other nations before requesting the resolution. Also over that period of time he presented real facts and figures to support his request.

Bush, in 1991, had impressed Reid enough to have him rise to his feet on the Senate floor and fully support him and his request. Reid remarked, "Until he shows me otherwise, I believe that George Bush, a man who has seen the face of war, will act with the utmost concern for protecting the lives of our service men and women."

Last Thursday I read the White House discussion draft, which in the end requests that a resolution state, "The President is authorized to use all means that he determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolutions referenced above, defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region." It doesn't mention a resolution to be discussed in the U.N. since Hussein said they could send in arms inspectors. I would hope that our president has more precise information than his discussion draft presents. There must be more information than presented because it comes no place near the amount of good reasoning that his father presented to Congress in 1991. It sounds more like what Johnson gave Congress in 1964.

Like most Americans, I want to see Saddam Hussein in a cage or a casket. There's no doubt that the United States and loyal allies can put him in one of them.

Unlike the president's father, neither he nor a large number of his White House and cabinet advisers have seen the face of war. He should start by demanding Congress immediately provide a first installment of $100 billion for military upgrading and staging for an attack. If we are going to do the job right this time, and there's no reasonable alternative, then, as fight referee Mills Lane would say, "Let's get it on."