2 Key GOP Senators Challenge Bush On Iraq

Warner-Lugar Proposal Would Force President To Come Up With Plan To Narrow U.S. Mission

(CBS/AP)  Two prominent Republican senators have drafted a bill that would require President Bush to come up with a plan to dramatically narrow the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq.

The legislation, which represents a sharp challenge to Mr. Bush, was put forward Friday by Sens. John Warner and Richard Lugar and it came as the Pentagon acknowledged that a decreasing number of Iraqi army battalions are able to operate independently of U.S. troops.

"Given continuing high levels of violence in Iraq and few manifestations of political compromise among Iraq's factions, the optimal outcome in Iraq of a unified, pluralist, democratic government that is able to police itself, protect its borders, and achieve economic development is not likely to be achieved in the near future," the Warner-Lugar proposal said.

"They have performed reasonably well in the Baghdad operations of recent, but not, I think, up to the full expectations we had in January," Warner told CBS News.

Although the measure requires President Bush to present Congress with a plan to start a troop drawdown, it does not require the plan to be executed, reports CBS News chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod.

The measure would declare the initial congressional approval for the war "obsolete" and require the administration to report to Congress on plans to get combat troops out of the role of policing sectarian violence and starting to withdraw them.

Mr. Bush has asked Congress to hold off on demanding a change in the course of the war until September, when the top U.S. commander, Gen. David Petraeus, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, delivers a fresh assessment of its progress.

Warner, R-Va., and Lugar, R-Ind., are well regarded within Congress on defense issues. Warner was the longtime chairman of the Armed Services Committee before stepping down last year, while Lugar is the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee.

The Warner-Lugar proposal states that "American military and diplomatic strategy in Iraq must adjust to the reality that sectarian factionalism is not likely to abate anytime soon and probably cannot be controlled from the top."

Accordingly, Warner and Lugar say the president must draft a plan for U.S. troops that would keep them from "policing the civil strife or sectarian violence in Iraq" and focus them instead on protecting Iraq's borders, targeting terrorists and defending U.S. assets.

At the Pentagon, meanwhile, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the number of battle-ready Iraqi battalions able to fight on their own has dropped to a half-dozen from 10 in recent months despite heightened American training efforts.

Without providing numbers, the White House had acknowledged in its report to Congress on Thursday that not enough progress was being made in training Iraqi security forces — an issue that determines to a large extent when the United States may be able to reduce its forces there.

Pace, however, also said the readiness of the Iraqi fighting units was not an issue to be "overly concerned" about because the problem is partly attributable to the fact that the Iraq units are out operating in the field.

Appearing at a news conference with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Pace said that "as units operate in the field, they have casualties, they consume vehicles and equipment."

The Warner-Lugar proposal is the first major legislative challenge to Mr. Bush's Iraq policy endorsed by the two senators — and lent a more bipartisan imprint to congressional dissatisfaction with the war now in its fifth year.

Earlier this year, both Lugar and Warner expressed grave doubts about Mr. Bush's decision to send 30,000 extra troops to Iraq. But both have been reluctant to back binding legislation that would force the president's hand.

The legislation the pair is working on would direct Mr. Bush to present the new strategy to Congress by Oct. 16 and begin implementing it by Dec. 31.

The proposal also would seek to make Mr. Bush renew the authorization for war that Congress gave him in 2002. Many members contend that authorization — which led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 — was limited to approval of deposing dictator Saddam Hussein and searching for weapons of mass destruction.

[antoniof123]

Sad people are dying and the only thing some can do is spew forth hate. In the end we all die and go to the same place the grave.

[undermyboot]

Too late do a few old guard Republicans speak out against the insane babble of the war mongering morons who took us into this mess and still support it with blind ignorance. Anyone who thinks invading Iraq was a good idea is just a sh*t kicking fu*k who is the product of back- water incest. They are nothing but the last vestiges of the worst of humanity, and deserve nothing more than the cold last feel of my 9mil against their head. Good f'ing riddance. click. bang. gone. Just like the lame horses we used to put down back home. No longer of any use.

[randalds]

Ya see, I believe there is justice in our hearts.
Posted by donnie900

"Vengence is Mine Saith the Lord".
Posted by mudrose at 02:10 PM : Jul 13, 2007

Donnie900 and mudrose, a marriage made in heaven.
Posted by robertr121 at 04:29 AM : Jul 14, 2007

Where are they registered? Walmart? Target? 99 cent store? I want to get them a nice set of His and His towels for the wedding gift.

[sjc_1]

Reporters asked Bush why this would work this time and he said because the Iraq PM gave him assurances. I do not know if that was an excuse or a reason. It is very unlikely that Iraq or their government will become stable any time soon. So, we have to be realistic about what we intend to do and our expectation on the outcome.

Usually, people start making up their own policy guesses when they lose faith in the decisions being made, then micro management sets in. You are starting to see that now. Not many have a lot of faith in the decision makers so far and they want a change for the better.

I can recall after Viet Nam, Republican politicians were always talking about an "exit strategy" being necessary before taking on any war in the future. So what happened to that here? That only applied when a Democratic president takes us to war? They thought it would be such a walk in the park that they did not need one?

G.W. Bush said that we "would not stay any longer than necessary" in Iraq. That statement really says very little, but seemed to satisfy some people at the time. The question you need to ask is who decides what is necessary and when is that over with? Is it over with when the crime, assault and murder rate per capita is similar to other cities and nations?

[likeitis5050]

Earlier this year, both Lugar and Warner expressed grave doubts about Mr. Bush's decision to send 30,000 extra troops to Iraq. But both have been reluctant to back binding legislation that would force the president's hand.

Their guts are telling them he's nuts but they hate the idea of not being in the 'big dog' club anymore if stand up to him. What to do...what to do...tick tick tick.

[lars008-2009]

OK THE WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE STILL THERE
Posted by forthepeopl1 at 09:59 AM : Jul 14, 2007

yah... what are we still doing in bosnia...
korea... japan... germany...

[lars008-2009]

Demonic-rats vote for war with iran

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seen looking for a spider hole...

hahahahahahahaha

Senate Shows Support In 97-0 Vote
Lieberman Leads Way In Warning To Iran
The Senate Wednesday put aside a growing schism over the conduct of the Iraq war and rallied around a strongly-worded warning to Iran authored by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman.

The measure, an amendment to the defense spending bill, illustrates both growing concern lawmakers have about Iran's aggression and uncertainly about what to do. It passed in a 97-0 vote after Lieberman agreed to include a provision that nothing in his measure "shall be construed to authorize or otherwise speak to the use of armed forces against Iran."
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-iran0712.artjul12,0,3251634.story
Al-Qaeda %u2018planning big British attack%u2019
AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first %u201Clarge-scale%u201D terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1687360.ece
We must attack Iran before it gets the bomb
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=PWIBPXU2BZARZQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/05/16/wbolton16.xml
'Military plan against Iran is ready'
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181228588702&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[SIDNEYWILLIAMSMD]

congress and all media should be pounding what he has stated on tv many many times..put this in his face all day and night
Posted by forthepeopl1 at 09:59 AM : Jul 14, 2007

Good point but consider the heavy concentration of Al Qaeda in one place with no where to run. Maybe we should consider this an opportunity to mop up and kill these little maniacs, and let them collect their virgins. As long as it is a killing field and the Iraqi's do not tell us to leave...why not?

[SIDNEYWILLIAMSMD]

Jesus, Mary Mother of God: These two senators look like they died some time ago. Please someone inform them that they need better morticians. They do not look very natural. Suggest Pantene, botox, and maybe a little testosterone. What difference does it make if these guys are re-elected. Suggest the republicans deny them the nomination based on their geriatric status.

[forthepeopl1]

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave "any time they want," though he acknowledged the forces need further weapons and training.

OK THE WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE STILL THERE, AS THE PRESIDENT HAS STATED ONCE AL-MALIKI TELLS US HE DOESN'T WANT US THERE WE WILL LEAVE.

ITS TIME FOR OUR SEN/REPS TO REMINDE HIM OF WHAT HE HAS STATED..NOW LETS GET THE F/U/C/K/ OUT OF THERE.

so how about looking up how many times this dirt bag of a president and his side kick cheney has told all america that if they say they dont need us than we will leave.

so how about it mr president you said many times we will leave if they dont need us. so how about it..

congress and all media should be pounding what he has stated on tv many many times..put this in his face all day and night

[donnie900]

I have on my desk a monitor.. A television monitor, that I monitor the world from. And yesterday? Yesterday it was international headline a President's peckkkertrack on a ladie's skirt. And today? Its a national security hell machine.

Same monitor. Same commercials. Different story.

There is no excuse for disparity.

[donnie900]

Thats the real evil in all this. The possibility that Bush? And Cheney? And Rumsfeld? And all those others are genuinely trying to solve America's problems best they can, not being evil. And their only evil is the doubt cast in every world's citizen's mind about their true intentions based on fictional story writing and psychotic ramblings. A conspiracy manufacturing machine of high endeavor it can only ever see as propaganda, but that isn't.

Something very very terrible happened in America on september 11th. It'd be a terrible shame if what people did to stop it from happening again was overburdened by clouds of suspicion and false accusations. By people whose minds have become ultimately paranoid.. and lonely psychotic. And want the rest of the world to join them..

[donnie900]

"If this is not evil, then nothing we have ever fought against is evil, and nothing we have ever fought for is good."

I don't think people are debating whether or not these things are evil. I think that people don't believe them. I think that, since you're studying evil, one should examine that aspect of it. That thats one of the reasons why its allowed to do the things it does. Because people don't believe what other people are telling them it does.

Thats one of the really mind boggling things about National Security. Its like this big open field for the fiction writers to write about, only limited by their imaginations. And no way to confirm it. Facts that, instead of effecting people the way a normal fact would, linger in the back of their brains. Not as facts, but instead as a consciouses rage. And ultimately, disparity.

[omnibus66]

On January 19, 2009, Bush will issue a full pardon to Cheney for all past crimes, and then immediately resign. After the new President Cheney is sworn in, he will then issue a full pardon to Bush for all past crimes. You read it here first.

[mcvet]

loyalty is just not that big of a thing to Republicans. Who can forget when Bush won over Kerry by a narrow margin and said...."I have political capital and I'm gonna use it". I guess Bush did'nt count on his so called buddies selling him out.
Posted by tribe at 03:48 AM : Jul 14, 2007

What the CITIZENS these men were elected to represent doesn't matter? You know you fascist have hated the Constitution AND our Government Of the People from the very start. I just wish you'd stop the pretending and be honest. YOU want a dictator or King that is so obvious. You want the Party Line to be the ONLY view and the Fuhrer the ONLY leader. Come on, everyone knows it now so why hide? Sieg Heil Bush!! See how easy that is? Come on say it with me... SIEG HEIL BUSH!! Now wrap the Confederate Battle Flag around you!! Boy doesn't that feel good? ROFLMAO What a bunch of losers! No wonder the entire world hates you idiots!

[mcvet]

The main thing that threatens the US is the stupidity of the American people.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 07:06 PM : Jul 13, 2007

Very well put.
Posted by robertr121 at 05:45 AM : Jul 14, 2007

You do mean the ONE's who voted for the INCOMPETENT Southern Fascist don't you? The REST have been right about this from day one. Yep that's right all you Nazi's the "bad guys" have been on the mark about WMD's, Iraq, Cheney, Bush and all the rest from day ONE! Don't think so? Go back and review your OWN postings!! Sieg Heil Y'all. ROFLMAO

[r9119111]

For the sake of our Republic, impeach first Cheney then Bush right now. I am only one, but I do exist and am an American Citizen.

[r9119111]

For the sake of our Republic, impeach first Cheney then Bush right now. I am only one, but I do exist and am an American Citizen.

[searingtruth]

"The main thing that threatens the US is the stupidity of the American people."
tuckerndfw

Aaahhh, yes.

It is always the millions of people who are stupid and the five or ten leaders who are blessed with wisdom and foresight.

Except for in America.

Honestly, Bush, Cheney and all the henchmen that have supported the "Unitary Executive" theory of American dictatorship are simply going to be put in prison, for the rest of their lives.

It's an American thing, which you and your beloved Fuhrer could never understand.
ST

"I love my fuhrer. If he wants to break the law, that%u2019s OK. He is the law."
1942, Warsaw Ghetto, Unknown German Citizen, Observing a decomposing mass

A Future of the Brave - www.searingtruth.com

[brianbwb-2009]

"The main thing that threatens the US is the stupidity of the American people.
Posted by tuckerndfw"

I would also agree, but pose a question, since Bush's boys control the courts, including the Supreme, and have congress and the senate cowering like scared bunny rabbits, what are the possible actions that even the smartest, can take?

It seems that only by a drastic and extreme series of acts can the corruptors ever be called to account, a la China, method of dealing with them, try them, and if guilty, one or two in the temple.