Cheney Presses Case for Iraq Action

August 26, 2002

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) - White House lawyers have told President Bush he would not need congressional approval to attack Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that inaction ``could have devastating consequences for many countries, including our own.''

Answering critics of the administration's campaign to oust Saddam, Cheney said, ``What we must not do in the face of a mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or willful blindness.''

Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said White House counsel Al Gonzales advised Bush earlier this month that the Constitution gives the president authority to wage war without explicit authority from Congress.

Fleischer and Cheney teamed up to counter growing criticism about Bush's ``strike first'' doctrine, particularily how it might be used to in a pre-emptive attack against Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction program.

``There are people who still think this is a 20th century world,'' Fleischer said as Bush vacationed at his nearby ranch. ``In the age of terrorism, the calculation is entirely different.''

Addressing a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Nashville, Tenn., Cheney made a strongly worded case for toppling Saddam. ``This nation will not live at the mercy of terrorists or terror regimes,'' Cheney said.

Cheney said he recognized that many, including some prominent Republicans, were urging caution in confronting Saddam at this time. But he said they were displaying ``deeply flawed'' logic.

``We will not simply look away, hope for the best and leave the matter for some future administration to resolve,'' he said.

Despite the go-ahead from his legal advisers, administration officials said Bush has not ruled out seeking lawmakers' approval if he decides to attack Iraq.

``Any decision the president may make on a hypothetical congressional vote will be guided by more than one factor,'' said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, who declined to confirm that Bush had received an opinion from Gonzales on the matter.

``The president will consider a variety of legal, policy and historical issues if a vote were to become a relevant matter. He intends to consult with Congress because Congress has an important role to play.''

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the decision of going to war ``should not be treated like a technicality.''

``For the good of the country and for the long-term success of whatever approach we take, President Bush should follow his father's lead and support a vigrorous and constructive debate on Iraq,'' he said, through a spokesman.

One of the administration officials said Gonzales also concluded the current president has authority to act against Saddam under the congressional resolution that authorized his father's actions in the 1991 Gulf War. Saddam has not complied with the terms that ended that war, the official said.

Furthermore, the official said Bush was told he also could act against Iraq on the strength of the Sept. 14 congressional resolution approving military action against terrorism.

Both of the officials said Bush had not decided whether to use military force against Saddam.

Still, the existence of a legal opinion - along with earlier reports that the Pentagon is drafting attack plans - reflect the seriousness of preparations within the highest reaches of government to pave way for war against Iraq if Bush so chooses.

The legal advice became public Sunday as Republicans sounded a mixed message for Bush about whether, when and how to use military action to remove Saddam from power.

The Bush administration's policy is that Saddam is trying to develop weapons of mass destruction and is refusing to allow international inspectors to find and destroy them, as Iraq agreed to do after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas said Sunday the decision to act is the commander in chief's, but he expects Bush to consult with Congress first.

``The president says he's going to consult with the Congress, and he has. The president has taken the advice of many of us in Congress; he wants input from Congress,'' DeLay said. ``He has said he's going to come to Congress when he decides what needs to be done and when it needs to be done, and I expect him to do that.''

While saying Bush properly ``is trying to keep the (anti-Iraq) coalition together,'' DeLay rejected a suggestion by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III that Bush first get a resolution of support from the U.N. Security Council.

The president answers only to the American people through Congress, DeLay said.

Baker, secretary of state to President Bush's father, wrote in Sunday's New York Times that a Security Council resolution was necessary as political cover for any U.S. military action.

``The only realistic way to effect regime change in Iraq is through the application of military force,'' Baker wrote.

But he added: ``Although the United States could certainly succeed, we should try our best not to have to go it alone, and the president should reject the advice of those who counsel doing so. The costs in all areas will be much greater, as will the political risks.''

http://webcenter.newssearch.netscape.com/aolns_display.adp?key=
200208261349000173087_aolns.src