Support Growing For Iraq Resolution

Democratic support is building around a resolution that would rebuff President Bush's plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq, and more Republicans are looking for ways to sign on to the measure.

As the White House scrambled to secure the dwindling backers of Mr. Bush's war policies on Capitol Hill, Republican Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon signaled that a simple wording change could persuade him to join the Democrats.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said House Democrats would back a Senate Democratic resolution declaring that the troop increase is "not in the national interest of the United States."

Pelosi said Friday that the conflict In Iraq "is not an obligation of the American people in perpetuity." She said Mr. Bush "has to answer for this war. He has dug a hole so deep he can't even see the light on this. It's a tragedy. It's a stark blunder."

Senate leaders expect to begin action on the nonbinding measure next Wednesday.

Senate Democrats, backed by two Republicans, unveiled legislation Wednesday that criticized Mr. Bush's decision. "It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq," the nonbinding Senate measure states.

Smith said his reluctance to back the resolution hinged on the word "escalating," which he said is a partisan term that unnecessarily inflames the issue. He said he is working with Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Ben Nelson, D-Neb. on a "constructive, nonpartisan resolution that expresses the opposition of the Senate to the surge."

Pelosi's commitment came as Mr. Bush and senior administration officials worked to limit Republican defections.

"He said, 'If you can help us out, I really appreciate your help,"' Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., said after a White House meeting with the commander in chief.

At a news conference, Pelosi said, "That resolution will be supported by Democrats in the House." But she also offered no indication that Congress will be able to prevent Mr. Bush from carrying out his plan.

Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the House majority leader, said, "As a practical matter, we know that the president has the constitutional authority ... to increase the troops."

Democratic leaders in both houses of Congress have said repeatedly they will not support any attempt to cut off funds for troops already deployed.

Sen. Joe Biden, the Delaware Democrat who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, said the panel will debate the resolution criticizing Mr. Bush's troop escalation on Wednesday.

Republican lawmakers in both houses are expected to draft alternative legislation, in part to give party members a measure to support rather than merely oppose what Democrats draft. Officials said one possibility under discussion is an alternative that supports the troop increase as long as the Iraqi government meets certain conditions.

Administration supporters have expressed concerns the president faces a bipartisan repudiation of significant proportions.

So far, Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe of Maine have said they back the resolution.

Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., echoed Smith's opposition to the troop increase but also said "there are some things in the resolution I don't agree with, and so we're kind of looking at language."

Even a Republican senator who won't speak out against the president for fear it will hurt the war effort told CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer there is virtually no enthusiasm among Senate Republicans for the plan.

With the exception of Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham, the senator said almost no one among Republican senators is enthusiastic about enlarging the force.

Mr. Bush's meeting with lawmakers was his third session in as many days as he struggles to build support for an increase in troops for a war that is opposed by the public and played a role in Republican setbacks in last fall's elections. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley traveled to the Capitol to meet with House Republicans.

The president's troop buildup also came under withering attack Thursday from a panel of retired generals on Capitol Hill, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.

"The proposed solution is to send more troops and it won't work. The addition of 21,000 troops is too little and too late," former Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar said.

Hoar once commanded all American forces in the Middle East and has nothing good to say about the war.

"This administration's handling of the war has been characterized by deceit, mismanagement and a shocking failure to understand the social and political forces that influence events in the Middle East," Hoar said.

Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who commanded a division in the first Gulf War and was consulted by the president in drawing up the new Iraq strategy said, "They're going to try to muscle this thing out in the next 24 months with an urban counterinsurgency plan that I personally believe, with all due respect, is a fool's errand."

Even a supporter of the president's plan, former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Jack Keane, acknowledged that success depends on an unknown quantity — the performance of Iraqi Prime Minister al-Malaki and his government.

"Who is Maliki and who is the Maliki government? And I don't believe our government, I don't pretend to speak for them, but I don't believe our government truly knows that answer," Keane said.