WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 (UPI) -- Top lawmakers Thursday praised President George W. Bush's address to the United Nations for its strong stance against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, but they continued to differ over how quickly Congress should move towards a vote that would allow the United States to go to war.
Republican leaders pushed for an immediate vote, but Democrats said they had many more questions that needed to be answered and would not be pinned down to an immediate time frame.
"We must vote to show support for the president right now. This is a question of leadership and action, because there is a serious threat," Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., told reporters.
"Let's wait and see what the international response is. Let's wait and see what level of support we get before we come to any conclusion," said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D.
The difference of opinion between the top senators struck at the heart of the on-going disagreement within Washington about how to deal with the threat posed by Iraq. President Bush's stated policy for Iraq is one of "regime change," and politicians and policy experts at this point widely agree that some action against Iraq is inevitable.
But there has also been considerable concern expressed by Democratic lawmakers and others that the administration is rushing into a policy of military action without first making a strong case that war is the only alternative. Bush's speech, which expressed a clear desire to work with the United Nations in crafting a response to Iraq, was seen Thursday on both sides of the aisle as beginning to address some of those concerns.
"He certainly opened the door to the recognition of the importance of inspectors inside Iraq, the importance of cooperation by Iraq, the importance of a coalition through the Untied Nations, to ensure that we put pressure on Iraq. I think that was the essence of his speech," Daschle said.
Bush was also praised for making the point that Saddam is an international concern, and for throwing down the gauntlet to the United Nations to live up to its obligation to enforce Security Council resolutions broken by Iraq since the Gulf War.
"It's the world's fight against Saddam Hussein. And the credibility of the United Nations is on the line as well here," said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del.
However, Democratic leaders said that they still had many questions that needed to be answered before they could vote for a resolution supporting a military strike.
Daschle said he predicted a lengthy series of hearings on Iraq in the coming weeks and added that Democratic lawmakers could not commit to a vote before leaving Washington next month.
His remarks were echoed by Democratic leaders in the Republican-dominated House.
"I just think its not wise or possible now to be setting a timeline, a definite timeline, for when all of this should happen," House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., said.
"We're trying to build an understanding among the American people and in the Congress. That is not done yet. We've hardly begun it. And in a democracy, you need to go through that. You don't rush to judgment because a few people have made up their mind," Gephardt said.
Democratic leaders also said they needed more evidence of the immediate threat posed by Saddam before voting for pre-emptive military action. While the Bush address was a good start, the case was not yet made, they said.
"If the administration brings us the evidence and makes a compelling case to the American public that a threat is indeed imminent, or that Saddam Hussein was actively involved in the tragedy of last September 11, we may very well come together in agreement. We are clearly not there yet," said Nancy Pelosi, the second ranking Democrat in the House.
Top Republicans did not dismiss the need for further congressional hearings on Iraq. But they stressed that immediate support by Congress was essential to give Bush a strong hand in negotiations with Iraq and allies.
Lott and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., challenged Senate Democrats to vote on a resolution before leaving Washington to campaign for the Nov. 5 elections. They said the Republican leadership would have the language of a resolution ready by the week of Sept. 23.
"I think it's vital for the Congress to show the world that we back this president and will give him the authority he needs to protect the American people and the world community," Lott said.
The Republican resolution will be worded broadly enough to support both continued inspections and military response. It will, Lott said, give the president full authority to "take all necessary actions to make sure that those weapons are found and destroyed, and of course, that this threat that he poses is dealt with," Lott said.
Lott shunned Daschle's assertion that Congress should wait for a U.N. decision and gauge international support before coming to a vote.
"We should show that we are united in our support of this president and in the goals that he has laid out. That's part of our leadership role in the world," he said.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said they would welcome the return of inspectors to Iraq, if Saddam would agree to an inspection regime that was sufficiently rigorous. But Republican leaders, like many former U.N. weapons inspectors, expressed considerable skepticism that inspections alone would do the trick. Lott stressed that Congress would need to be willing to go further in its support.
"Saddam Hussein is as likely to allow a robust and effective weapons inspection regime as I am to be the next astronaut. He's not going to do it," McCain said.
