On the recordOctober 8, 2002
when September 11, 2001, happened, I was in New York City. And as the enormity of what terrorism could do to my city hit me, I was stunned. Then I wept with all of those innocent people who were simply doing their jobs and living their lives when one moment of hate lost their lives. There has, however, not been any conclusive evidence that links al Qaeda to those responsible for the tragedy with Iraq. Some question whether those who oppose this resolution are forgetting those who died on September 11. Some question our patriotism. Though I should not have to affirm my patriotism, I say simply that I love my country, I love my city of New York, and I am not afraid to deal with those who attacked it. It is the most basic of our purposes as a national government to defend our Nation. But here we speak of a different matter. If our ultimate goal is to disarm Iraq and all chemical and biological weapons, how does giving our President this right to go to war accomplish that goal? Would not working with the U.N. to implement a program of rigorous inspections move us closer to our goal? This new doctrine announced by the President that the U.S. has the right to engage in a preemptive strike, which he seeks to implement through this resolution, frightens me and establishes a troubling precedent. This is a doctrine better left unused. It contravenes a half century of developed international law of which the U.S. has been a champion.
Source
govinfo.gov




