Dems Make War On Bush's Iraq Plan

As GOP Opposition In Senate Grows, Democrats Push Resolution Opposing U.S. Troop Buildup

(CBS/AP)  In a calculated snub of President Bush, the Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee dismissed plans for a troop buildup in Iraq on Wednesday as "not in the national interest" of the United States.

"The president has made his decision," Vice President Dick Cheney fired back, a response that made it clear the administration would go ahead anyway. "We need to get the job done."

The committee vote, 12-9 along party lines, capped hours of debate in which Republicans and Democrats vented their frustration and anger — both with the administration and their own past unwillingness to change the course of a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops.

"There is no strategy. This is a ping-pong game with American lives," said Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

"This Congress was never meant to be a rubber stamp," added Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. "Read the Constitution. The Congress has the power to declare war. And on multiple occasions, we used our power to end conflicts."

Hagel was the only one of 10 committee Republicans to support the nonbinding measure.

He is also one of at least four senators on the committee thinking of running for president. "They know their votes are going on the record, and could be thrown back at them on the campaign trail," reports CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson.

In the wake of midterm election losses, Mr. Bush announced two weeks ago that he would order an additional 21,500 troops into the war zone. In Tuesday night's State of the Union address, he implored skeptical lawmakers to give the strategy a chance.

According to a CBS News Poll conducted online by Knowledge Networks immediately after the speech, a slim majority of speech-watchers — 52 percent — favor sending an additional 20,000 troops to Iraq. This is an improvement from before the speech, when just 43 percent of the same people supported sending more troops.

Several of the panel's 11 Democrats said they favored stronger legislation to register their opposition to the war.

Less than 24 hours after the speech Sen. Joseph Biden. D-Del., the panel's chairman, said tougher measures were likely to follow.

"Unless the president demonstrates very quickly that he is unlikely to continue down the road he's on, this will be only the first step. ... I will be introducing ... constitutionally legitimate, binding pieces of legislation. We will bring them up," he said.

Taken together, the committee's vote and Cheney's response suggested the Democrats and the White House were on a collision course — lawmakers drafting ever-stronger measures to change policy in Iraq, and the president exercising his prerogatives as commander in chief — and his veto pen.

"We are moving forward," Cheney said in an interview with CNN in which he was asked about the troop buildup. "The Congress has control over the purse strings. They have the right, obviously, if they want, to cut off funding. But in terms of this effort, the president has made his decision."

The vice president added: "We've consulted extensively with them. We'll continue to consult with the Congress. But the fact of the matter is, we need to get the job done."

If the president was almost humbly pleading with Congress to give his plan a chance last night, the Vice President today played what has come to be his typical role: the enforcer, saying firmly "We’re going forward," reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

Inside the Senate committee, all Republicans but Hagel opposed the measure, denying Democrats the strong bipartisan vote they had sought.

lieberwoman18 wrote:

"I'd like to see you threaten me..."

I'm sure you would - problem is, unlike your type, I don't threaten women.

[thgdriver]

Don't try ducking the "you people" label, we all know who that applies to.

The general has you nailed and now you try to duck for cover like you don't know who he means.

[exusmcsgt]

huskerarmy-

You are correct in that Iraq would require a perpetual military force to maintain unity if that were ever to be achieved. Don't worry, that's not going to happen.

Even those who do not understand military strategy will accept that force is not the solution for this situation, eventually.

The only question that remains is how much more will be thrown down the hole before that happens.

[dallison7]

According to what we read, the next step in Iraq appears to be a state of 'martial law'. That may quell the violence for a while, but what do you think will happen when it is over? The only possibility for any sort of calm in that region is to let these people fight it out. That is the ultimate outcome, regardless of what the US or any other country does. We are now spending precious blood and treasure for NO SANE REASON.

[huskerarmy]

So let's just say that by sheer brute force we are able to bring Iraq under control. Are the Sunnis just going to be good loosers and accept defeat graciously? The Shiites have made it clear that they are not interested in sharing power and the Sunnis are too large a minority to keep oppressed. What happens when we leave? The fact is that, even if we do bring Iraq under control, we will have to stay there forever to maintain it.

[exusmcsgt]

What-the-h*ll kind of would can that be????
Posted by dallison7 at 10:34 AM : Jan 25, 2007

I am sure I don't want to know, bro. He probably spent his youth torturing small animals.

[exusmcsgt]

My gut tells me we are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't.

Posted by luvNY at 10:34 AM

I would contend that we are more "damned" if we do than if we don't. Iraq will disentegrate either way. I can't see any sense in increasing an investment in a proven losing situation.

[etharp2]

In my daily activities, I ask people I meet who asked you for your opinion? I am told by the news reports (whatever source) that the majority of americans do not support the president's decisions about the war on terrorism, etc.. Am I part of the majority or the minority, because no one has asked me nor anyone I talk to daily has been asked. Who make the decision that I am in the majority or minority? Is there some polling research company that make phone calls and asks? I wonder how citizens begin to distrust news anchors, et. al., when they say the majority of americans? The United States is the adjacent 48 states, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and Swains Island. Can a list be provided to show an individual citizen if they are in the majority or minority? Or are the two words based upon our votes on election days? Questions of life? Ed Tharp

[grumpas]

generial: Most of us knew when Bush started the Iraq war it was going to turn out this way! It always does when you start dealing with radical fundamentalist's religions! It's like uncorking that old bottle of deadly plagues! It was the same way in the old Yugoslavia! But, Bush would not listen to the voice of reason and neither would any of the rest of you who were listening to Bush's lies on Iraq! You seem to have the misguided notion (like Bush) all we have to do is stay and the situation will eventually cure itself! Well, I sincerely hope for our troops sake he is right! But, no one believes that fairy tale anymore! We all know it's going to be a bloodbath after we leave! It's going to be one if we stay! So what's the difference other than our servicemen are getting killed and it's costing us a fortune? It's a mess that should have never been started! It had literally nothing to do with terrorism! Bush used the Army for his own private war! It's time to bring it to an end!

[luvny-2009]

My gut tells me we are dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. Bush has set himself in a win win situation. If no troops go he blames the Dems and he'll be the first to stick that finger at them. If we do send more troops we'll be getting TOO MANY of OUR kids back in a box. More troops will help temporarily, it's a bandaid fix and will look good for a short time but again once we try to pull them home it will all start over again. They will sit and wait until we do, then back they come. It will be like taking a handfull of sand off the beach, it just fills back in. Bush is going to screw around until his a$$ is out of there (unless we can impeach him first) and dump it on our next President. He's a con man and very good at it.

[dallison7]

Shows what world he lives in, eh?
Posted by exusmcsgt at 10:32 AM : Jan 25, 2007


What-the-h*ll kind of would can that be????

[dallison7]

"you people," who are "you people?" LOL



Posted by huskerarmy at 10:29 AM : Jan 25, 2007


I think he means everyone who doesn't agree with Bush. About 216 million people in this country... plus the rest of the world.

[exusmcsgt]

The "Tee hee hee"'ing was beginning to freak me out - he's like an immature schoolgirl.
Posted by mcdazz at 10:30 AM : Jan 25, 2007

And the really sad thing is that he thinks he's filleting others with that stupidity.

Shows what world he lives in, eh?

exusmcsgt wrote:

"When I think about how difficult his existence must surely be, considering his approach to others, I really do feel sorry for him."

"However, that does not translate into my cutting him any slack."

At the end of the day, I pity him.

He brings it upon himself - I think he gets a kick out of it.

The "Tee hee hee"'ing was beginning to freak me out - he's like an immature schoolgirl.

[dallison7]

It sure doesn't seem to have any effect, does it?
Posted by exusmcsgt at 10:26 AM : Jan 25, 2007

What, again, is the definition of insanity? "Doing the same thing over again and expecting differnet results?"

[huskerarmy]

"do you people really think that if we withdraw united states troops from Iraq the situation will come under control ?"

Did someone actually suggest that if we pulled out, Iraq would "come under control?"

"...and their views on us will get worst."

Can you say with a straight face that "their views on us" have gotten better under Dubya?

"you people," who are "you people?" LOL

[exusmcsgt]

He must like it.
Posted by dallison7 at 10:26 AM : Jan 25, 2007

It sure doesn't seem to have any effect, does it?

[dallison7]

I have a feeling he's been getting slapped all of his life.

But as long as he keeps up the stupidity, I'll continue to slap him.
Posted by exusmcsgt at 10:20 AM : Jan 25, 2007


He must like it.

[dallison7]

generial

We heard the same *** during the Vietnam war. The longer we stay, the longer we fight. And, the more sophisticated the enemy gets. Endless occupation... great strategy!

[exusmcsgt]

dallison7-

I have a feeling he's been getting slapped all of his life.

But as long as he keeps up the stupidity, I'll continue to slap him.