Posted on 02/06/2007 4:09:01 PM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - Democratic critics of the Iraq war seized the offensive at both ends of the Capitol on Tuesday, disclosing plans for a symbolic rejection by the House of President Bush's decision to deploy additional troops and filing legislation in the Senate to require withdrawal of U.S. military personnel.
"We're going to stand by our soldiers, but we're not going to stand by a failed policy that exposes more of our soldiers to death and suffering," said Sen. Richard Durbin (news, bio, voting record) of Illinois, rebutting charges that the war's critics may be undermining the morale or even the safety of U.S. forces.
Democrats pressured Bush to change course as Defense Secretary Robert Gates told lawmakers that U.S. forces might be able to start leaving Iraq before the end of the year — if daunting conditions including subdued violence and political reconciliation are met.
He also said that the buildup in troops is "not the last chance" to succeed in Iraq and added, "I would be irresponsible if I weren't thinking about what the alternatives might be."
The Pentagon is in the midst of implementing Bush's order to raise troop levels by 21,500, part of a plan to help quell sectarian violence in Baghdad.
New checkpoints in evidence in Iraq's capital city, and there were reports of inspections of increased numbers of vehicles. At the same time, more than 50 people were killed or found dead during the day, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said insurgents were responding to the new security measures by killing as many people as possible.
The war has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops so far, and officials announced two more deaths. The casualties included a soldier killed Tuesday at a security post southwest of Baghdad and a Marine who died Monday in Anbar Province.
Bush's decision to dispatch additional troops has become a flashpoint for critics of his Iraq policy in the new, Democratic-controlled Congress, whose lawmakers were elected last fall by a war-weary electorate.
Officials said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) of California and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (news, bio, voting record) of Maryland had both pledged to the Democratic rank and file that the House would vote next week on a nonbinding measure critical of Bush's plan to add 21,500 additional forces. They also reassured lawmakers clamoring for more robust action that the vote would merely be the first attempt to pressure the president to shift course and that future legislation will be binding.
Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Pelosi, said the measure brought to the floor next week would focus on "our opposition to the surge in troops" but has not yet been drafted.
Pelosi said last month the measure would declare that the troop increase was "not in the national interest," language once included in a Senate measure, but now abandoned.
Democrats intend to allow all lawmakers time to speak on the issue across three days of debate beginning next Tuesday.
Rep. John Boehner (news, bio, voting record) of Ohio, the House Republican leader, said in an interview the GOP would prepare an alternative to the Democratic measure. He said it would include a call for a bipartisan committee to oversee the war effort and lay out a series of standards by which officials could judge whether the Iraqi government was living up to its commitments to help end the violence.
"If you're not for victory in Iraq, you're for failure," Boehner told The Associated Press. "The consequences of failure are immense. I think it destabilizes the entire Middle East, encourages Iran and on top of that, it's pretty clear that the terrorists will just follow us home."
Under House rules, Democratic leaders have the authority to advance legislation to the floor for three days of debate, and there is little doubt they will have the votes to prevail.
That stands in contrast to the Senate, where Republicans have so far blocked an attempt by Democrats to hold a full-fledged debate on the war.
Gates and other administration officials have been sharply critical of efforts to pass legislation expressing disapproval of the increase in troops, even in nonbinding form.
That has had no noticeable impact on Democratic critics of the war, though. Some of them argue that Bush's policies have led to a situation in which U.S. troops are thrust into the middle of a civil war in Iraq.
Two bills were unveiled during the day to force the president to move toward a troop withdrawal.
"The only people who believe there is a workable military solution for the conflict in Iraq is the Bush administration," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in announcing legislation that would require Bush to "complete the redeployment" of American troops within a year.
Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) of Illinois, a Democratic presidential hopeful, joined two House members in proposing a measure to block Bush from implementing his planned troop increase, and to begin a withdrawal by May 1, with all combat brigades out by March 31, 2008.
"This is what I think has the best chance of bringing our troops home," said Obama.
Apart from legislation, Democrats have embarked on an effort to undermine public support for the war by holding numerous hearings.
At a daylong session, Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., accused the former U.S. occupation chief in Iraq of haphazardly doling out billions of dollars after the U.S.-led invasion
Waxman said 363 tons of cash was loaded onto airplanes and sent into the war zone in 2003, adding that U.S. officials had "no way of knowing whether the cash would wind up in enemy hands."
L. Paul Bremer III, who was head of the Coalition Provisional Authority, said he had done the best he could to kickstart the Iraqi economy, which he said was "flat on its back" after years of rule by Saddam Hussein followed by the U.S.-led invasion. He said the money belonged to Iraqis and had come from the U.N.-run oil-for-food program and from seized Iraqi assets.
One Republican accused Democrats of trying to embarrass the administration. "It's old news," said Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va.
The liberals in this country are content to throw an entire generation overboard in the mideast in pursuit of power.
I guess when the Democrats voted on going to war in Iraq before 3/03, they WERE voting for failure.
Ask a DemonRat if they want America to win and all you'll get is "What exactly does "win" mean?"
Senator Durbin also believes that American soldiers are comparable to Pol Pot, Nazis, and Soviet Communists. I guess it is not surprising that he wants to withdraw individuals he believes are so intrinsically evil.
Why do we have to pretend that these democrats support our troops?
They do not.
"We're going to stand by our soldiers..."
Bull! Why don't you ask the soldiers what they think should be done, you lying traitor.
Good to know that freak on the other site I'm on doesn't speak for all Canadians.
"I wish the democrats would believe in something for god's sake."
They do; absolute power and the destruction of America by any means necessary.
Asking the soldiers what they think would be tantamount to allowing someone the freedom of thought which is not in the Democratic Party's constitution.
Waxman said 363 tons of cash was loaded onto airplanes and sent into the war zone in 2003, adding that U.S. officials had "no way of knowing whether the cash would wind up in enemy hands."
b.f.d.
They were replacing the currency weren't they? The only way to know that the cash wouldn't end up in enemy hands would have been to shoot all of Saddams military in the back as they ran away when the invasion happened. Democrats would have loved that wouldn't they? At times I think it is too bad we didn't do it.
The democrats are far less powerful than they this idiot journalist and all the liberal media think they are. They are weak and incompetent but of course nothing will stop them and their media from still living in a delusional world where they see themselves all powerful and mighty.
LOL... exactly. This idiot journalist does not want to face the bitter reality that his traitors friends in the democrat party are so weak and so incompetent to even be able to pass a "non binding" resolution.
The democrats are far less powerful than they this idiot journalist and all the liberal media think they are. They are weak and incompetent but of course nothing will stop them and their media from still living in a delusional world where they see themselves all powerful and mighty.
--
lol.. Bump that!
That's it in a nutshell.
I hope everyone sends a white flag to Dickhead Turbin and other members of Congress who are representing the Taliban and Al-Quida!
Funny how democrats have no plan at all, except to oppose ours. So I'm guessing their plan after 9/11 was to let bygones be bygones? What a great way to keep America safe. It's also ironic how there have been no further attacks on US soil since 9/11. Just coincidence I'm sure!
"Freedom has a price that bitching never pays!"
Bumper Sticker/T-Shirt
http://www.cafepress.com/titillatingtees.103061821
I wish I knew this David Espo schmuck's e-mail address. Everytime I see a piece of AP propaganda, it seems to have his name on it. I'd love to give him a piece of my mind...
"Ask a DemonRat if they want America to win and all you'll get is "What exactly does "win" mean?"
They want us to lose. A loss for the Bush Administration is a win for them. They'll blame any ensuing catastrophe on Bush.
The AP exists to elect Democrats.
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.