Iraq Debate Mostly Follows Party Lines
Lawmakers in the House of Representatives spoke passionately Wednesday on the wisdom of sending more U.S. troops to the troubled conflict in Iraq, but President Bush was already looking beyond the debate to a coming battle over troop funding.
Mr. Bush, at a news conference, noted that, while lawmakers "have every right to express their opposition" to his Iraq policy, the House resolution disapproving his decision to send more than 20,000 additional forces to Iraq did not have the force of law. He focused instead on a vote coming soon on providing emergency funds for the war.
"Our troops are counting on their elected leaders in Washington D.C. to provide them with the support they need to do their mission," he said.
Entering the second of a four-day marathon debate on Iraq war policy, the partisan lines were clearly drawn, with some exceptions. Democrats backed the resolution opposing the escalation of troop strength while Republicans, for the most part, vehemently opposed it.
"It sends a message of no confidence and no support to our troops in the field, weakening their morale while encouraging and emboldening the enemy," Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican, said Wednesday.
There's little doubt that on Friday, Congress will vote to oppose the troop surge, setting the stage for a much bigger battle over the additional funding the president wants to fight the war, reports CBS News correspondent Bob Fuss.
Democrat Dennis Kucinich, who unsuccessfully sought his party's presidential nomination four years ago, said the United States "illegally attacked and invaded Iraq in a war based on lies. Now those same lies are being used to tell the American people we must escalate and continue to fund the war in the name of the troops."
Mr. Bush, at a White House news conference, held his ground.
Noting discussions he has had with lawmakers, Mr. Bush said: "They have told me that they are dissatisfied with the situation in Iraq. I have told them that I was dissatisfied with the situation in Iraq."
"We weighed every option," he said. "I concluded that to step back from Baghdad would have disastrous consequences in America. And the reason why I say 'disastrous consequences' is, the Iraqi government could collapse and chaos could spread."
In a daylong debate Tuesday, Republicans used emotional pleas from former prisoners of war, political talking points on religious extremism and even Arab ambassadors to rail against a Democratic attempt to put Congress on record against the troop buildup.
"If we let Democrats force us into a debate on the surge or the current situation in Iraq, we lose," Reps. Peter Hoekstra and John Shadegg said in a letter to their Republican colleagues. "Rather, the debate must be about the global threat of the radical Islamist movement," they wrote.
The long-awaited floor debate on Iraq is the first since Democrats took control of Congress in the November elections. It also comes as the war approaches the four-year mark with more than 3,100 U.S. troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis dead.
Democrats made clear the nonbinding resolution was the beginning of a longer campaign to bring the Iraq war to an end.
"A vote of disapproval will set the stage for additional Iraq legislation, which will be coming to the House floor," House speaker Nancy Pelosi said. She was one of 55 Democrats and 37 Republicans to speak on the issue during 11 hours of debate Tuesday.
As Mr. Bush told reporters he would mostly ignore the House resolution, a small group House Republicans opposed to his Iraq strategy took to the floor.
Rep. Walter Jones, a Republican, who is co-sponsoring the resolution, called the troop buildup "too little, too late," while another Republican, Howard Coble, cited the high death toll and the "astronomically unbelievable" monetary costs of the war as his reason for wanting to turn over control to the Iraqi government.
"It is clear to me that an increase in American forces alone cannot resolve this conflict," said a third Republican, Rep. Michael Castle.