Iraq Withdrawal Bill Moves To Senate

Senate Republicans promised Thursday to uphold President Bush's veto on a bill that would order troops home from Iraq. Democrats said they would pass it anyway.

"The president has failed in his mission to bring peace and stability to the people of Iraq," said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.V., chairman of the Appropriations Committee. He later added: "It's time to bring our troops home from Iraq."

The Senate vote comes a day after the House passed the measure by a 218-208 vote. The $124.2 billion bill requires troop withdrawals to begin Oct. 1, or sooner if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks.

The debate came as the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, told reporters at the Pentagon that that the war effort likely will "get harder before it gets easier."

The bill sets a nonbinding goal of completing the troop pullout by April 1, 2008, allowing for forces conducting certain noncombat missions, such as attacking terrorist networks or training Iraqi forces, to remain.

The legislation is the first binding challenge on the war that Democrats have managed to send to President Bush since they took control of both houses of Congress in January.

The withdrawal dates in the bill "would be the day that al Qaeda would declare victory . . . and much the world would agree," said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.

Echoing that sentiment, Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain said earlier Thursday that he is completely against the legislation.

"A date of troop withdrawal is a date for certain surrender," the Arizona senator told CBS' The Early Show.

Democrats said the bill was on track to arrive on the president's desk on Tuesday, the anniversary of Mr. Bush's announcement aboard the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln that major combat operations in Iraq had ended.

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001, and still goes on," Mr. Bush said on May 1, 2003, in front of a huge "Mission Accomplished" banner.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called it a "ridiculous P.R. stunt" if Democratic lawmakers timed the sending of the bill to the anniversary of Mr. Bush's speech. "That is the height of cynicism, and absolutely so unfortunate for the men and women in uniform and their families who are watching the debate," she said Thursday morning.

Mr. Bush since has acknowledged that the war campaign has not progressed as he had hoped. After the November elections in which Democrats swept up enough seats to take the majority, Mr. Bush announced a new strategy that involved sending additional forces to Iraq.

Meanwhile, Petraeus depicted the situation in Iraq as "exceedingly complex and very tough." He said there have been some improvements in the two months since Bush's troop buildup began, but "there is vastly more work to be done across the board. ... We are just getting started with the new effort."

Asked at a Pentagon news conference Thursday about the impact on the effort in Iraq if that legislation passed, Petraeus said, "I have tried to stay clear of the political minefields of various legislative proposals."

The huge bill would fund the war, among other things, but demand troop withdrawals begin on Oct. 1 or sooner if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks. The bill sets a nonbinding goal of completing the troop pullout by April 1, 2008, allowing for forces conducting certain noncombat missions, such as attacking terrorist networks or training Iraqi forces, to remain.

In the House, two Republicans — Reps. Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland and Walter Jones of North Carolina — joined 216 Democrats in passing the bill. Voting no were 195 Republicans and 13 Democrats.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said Democrats were still considering what to do after Mr. Bush's veto. He said one option would be funding the war through September as Mr. Bush wants but setting benchmarks that the Iraqi government must meet.

"I think everything that passes will have some sort of condition (placed) on it," he said. Ultimately, Murtha added, the 2008 military budget considered by Congress in June "is where you'll see the real battle," he said.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has said the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to pay for operations in Iraq well into July. Lawmakers and Capitol Hill staff aides view mid- to late May as the deadline for completing the war spending bill to avoid hardships.

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt told reporters Wednesday that Republicans would be open to legislation that would condition foreign aid for Iraq on the government's ability to meet certain standards, such as reaching a political compromise on sharing oil revenues.

"I think that discussion is the discussion we need to have. ... We have for months now favored that kind of inclusion in a bill that may be very important at resolving this impasse that we're in," Blunt said.