Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) asked Army Lt. Gen. David H . Petraeus...yesterday if Senate resolutions condemning White House Iraq policy "would give the enemy some comfort."Senator John Warner waded in:
Petraeus agreed they would, saying, "That's correct, sir."
Warner (R-Va.), until recently chairman of the Armed Services Committee and a co-sponsor of one of those resolutions, later explained to the general that he needed to be more careful about appearing to wade into a political debate and warned Petraeus to not let himself be trapped into portraying members of Congress as unpatriotic for disagreeing with President BushApparently no one on the committe objected to the question before the General answered. General Petraeus gave a straight and obvious answer to a straight question. How could anyone think that the resolutions won't give comfort to the enemy?
That doesn't necessarily mean that the resolutions were wrong, only that making them has costs, and one of those costs is encouraging the enemy. That is why politicians should think before they vote for such resolutions: they have un-wished for, but predictable, consequences.
Instead of acting seriously, Senator Warner is trying to intimidate someone for pointing out the obvious. Or is he really so foolish that he thinks resolutions have no consequences beyond the Beltway?