Posted on 11/12/2006 7:40:13 AM PST by shrinkermd
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats, who won majorities in the U.S. Congress in last week's elections, said on Sunday they will push for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq to begin in four to six months.
"The first order of business is to change the direction of Iraq policy," said Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), a Michigan Democrat who is expected to be chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee in the new Congress.
Levin, on ABC's "This Week," said he hoped some Republicans would emerge to join Democrats and press the administration of President George W. Bush to tell the Iraqi government that U.S. presence was "not open-ended."
Bush has insisted that U.S. troops would not leave Iraq until the Iraqis were able to take over security for their country.
"We need to begin a phased redeployment of forces from Iraq in four to six months," Levin said.
Speaking on the same program, Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), a Delaware Democrat who is expected to head the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he supported Levin's proposal for a withdrawal.
No see, Iran gets nuclear weapons. They put in the centrifuge array in the next year, they run it for another year to get enough U-235 for a few bombs. They wait for a dem prez and for enough for 6-10 and then they test.
Safely a nuclear power and able to deter all the world's pansies, they then ramp the production lines to 10-15 bombs a year. They won't use them right away.
No, they run the lines for 5 years or so, so they have enough to keep a few score, to threaten everyone in their region. Then they can afford to smuggle some abroad for terror blackmail, and to sell a few to Al-Q or whoever it is by then, and to send 10-15 to Hezbollah and Hamas.
10 years from now they will actually be going off in innocent cities in the west and Israel.
Dishonor and harm to our faithful supporters in the region, that doesn't even make it to the radar screen. We are too used to it.
No it won't.
Nancy said it will be alright.
Nothing will happen. Now that they are back in charge.
Actually if Iran gets involved it would mean the return of our troops post haste and the Demonrats being blamed. Her Thighness would not stand a chance, why do you think Hillary won't speak out against the war in Iraq?
Somehow, I get the feeling that the RATs won't be able to pull the same stunt they pulled in 1973-75 because it'll give their enemies something to attack them on, plus, unlike in 1973-75, we have radio talk shows that'll prevent them from hiding behind the "we represent the wishes of war-weary people" smokescreen they used to abandon Vietnam.
It's obvious that their plan is to pull another Vietnam 1975, but God help them if they do, because every true American won't stand by and let them committ the same crime twice. They won't hide it this time.
Yeah, but all those battles happened under a democrat President, which makes them all okay. According to the libs, only Republican-led wars are immoral.
That's one of the main reasons the libs are against everything Bush does; because he's a Republican. If a liberal democrat had approved "warrantless wiretaps", "secret CIA torture camps", and all the other stuff they're throwing a temper tantrum over, you wouldn't hear a peep from the so called "human-rights activists" or the liberals.
Sorry, I disagree! Israel will not sit by and wait to be distroyed, they will strike first reguardless of polotical sensabilties of UN dictators and anti-semites in the barbaric MiddleEast.
I do not believe Iran will get the bomb by making it themselves, they may procure one from North Korea or force thier friends the russians to help them.
Unlike us the Irealis will not hesitate to use thier Bomb if thier future may depend on it.
This was exactly the goal of bj, madelaine halfbright and company.
This, after the latest polls show that by 60-70%, people in the U.S. are afraid that the Democrats will force troops to leave Iraq "too soon". Too bad a lot of them didn't think about that BEFORE THEY VOTED!!!!!!!
They will blame Bush for Iraq's defeat anyway.
The faster they lose this war the better for them.
Better yet. If the generals were whining that rumsfeld was holding them back, well, now they have carte blanche. Let's see those plans roll off the shelves. Don't hang back just to get a cushy retirement, a CNN talking head gig, and a possible NSC position.
Also, considering the future alignment of congress the people just elected, any such fictional future law to starve our troops out of Iraq would require veto override and that would take 67 Senators. That dog don't hunt.
And, any conflict then would be far, far worse than the so called quagmire now.
Exactly my point.
The war we are in now is at least as deadly or more so with portable nukes involved. And an enemy that doesn't travel in huge armadas to deliver knock out punches.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.