Democrats call for pullout by fall 2008

Congressional Democrats have finally agreed on a timetable to leave Iraq. In an AP story  released today Nancy Pelosi stated  that Democrats intend to attach a measure to the legislation providing President Bush with the nearly $100 Billion in supplemental  spending he has requested for Afghanistan and Iraq. That is another $100 billion in spending on a war that the administration insisted on the outset would not cost over $50 billion. This supplement alone is twice the original cost estimate given by the administration.  Speaker Pelosi says:

....the measure would mark the first time the new Democratic-controlled Congress has established a "date certain" for the end of U.S. combat in the four-year-old war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.

The AP story goes on to say:

According to an explanation of the measure distributed by Democratic aides, the timetable for withdrawal would be accelerated if the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki did not meet goals for providing for Iraq's security.

As described by Democrats, the legislation will require Bush to certify by July 1 and again by Oct. 1. whether the Iraqi government is making progress toward providing for the country's security, allocating its oil revenues and creating a fair system for amending its constitution.

They said if Bush certified the Iraqis were meeting these so-called benchmarks, U.S. combat troops would have to begin withdrawing by March 1, 2008, and complete the redeployment by Sept. 1.

Otherwise, the deadlines would move up.

If Bush cannot make the required certification by July 1, troops must begin a six-month withdrawal immediately. If Bush cannot make the second certification, the same six-month timetable would apply.

Democrats also added a measure that would require the president to  "adhere to its existing standards for equipping and training U.S. troops sent overseas and for providing time at home between tours of combat", and then gave the president an out by allowing him to issue wavers of these standards at his discretion. Democrats stated that the point of the measure was an attempt to embarrass the president into adhering to the standards. They apparently haven't figured out that nothing embarrasses this President.

As expected the administration spoke out against the measure as did the Rubber Stampers. They insisted that the very few generals that Bush could find willing to go along with his escalation plan should be making the decisions regarding the deployment of troops.  But If Bush was ever really letting commanders on the ground make decisions about the war, he put a stop to that nonsense a long time ago. He and only he makes decisions regarding troop deployment and everyone has finally figured that out.

According to the AP story the Senate was working on a different measure to have the troops out even earlier, by March 2008.

This is exactly what the Democrats needed to do. Unless pressure is brought to bear on Bush he has no intention of bringing an end to this debacle he has created. It is his intention to pass that on to his successor so that when Iraq is ultimately mired in civil war he can say it wasn't his doing. But no matter what he does this will always be Bush's blunder. He will always be held responsible for the chaos and carnage he created. Bravo to Speaker Pelosi for demonstrating the leadership necessary to bring Democrats together to stand up to this President. It is Long past time to bring this occupation to an end.

__________________________

Work and struggle and never accept an evil that you can change -- Andre Gide

sounds like progress

thankfully

__________________________

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

I Just Can't Feel ...

good about this so easily. Ultimately, Bush vetoes such a bill if it ever crosses his desk. And you know the Senate will pevert it. As I see it, congress has only one of three options if they truly want to end this war and save lives:

1) Impeach and remove Bush and Cheney;
2) Invoke the War Powers Act;
3) Cut off funding.

Impeaching and removal isn't likely. Cutting off funding as we've seen can be distorted into, "not supporting the troops." Best bet is therefore to invoke the War Powers Act and force the Administration to bring the troops home in 90 days.

This bill is just playing politics and window dressing. It's symbolic and the war going badly hurts Republicans. That's nice. But more blood is being spilled in the meantime and we're losing in Afghanistan. At the end of the day, what does this change or accomplish?

Memo to Congress: if you're afraid of using your power then what's the good of having it?

I hear what you are saying.

I think the Dems need to use the Libby verdict as a jumpoff point to really push investigations. It seems, unfortunately, the Serious People are saying that we need to push legislation. But they have to know that's bull. We won't get any decent legislation without clout and it will take investigations to amass that clout.

That jury just gave the Dems a huge green light. Are we gonna hit the gas or what?

__________________________

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

It's About Electoral Politics ...

in 2008. It's more important to them to have symbolic victories while the war bleeds the GOP then actually using their power to save lives.

I don't expect

I don't expect this legislation to really impact the war in any significant way.  I think it is a political statement more than anything but as such it has great value. During the reign of the rubber stampers Democrats were not allowed to introduce legislation or add amendments of any kind to existing bills. They were powerless to act in the Congress. The President, knowing this would insist that Democrats had no plan for Iraq, therefore had no right to criticize. How many times did we hear, if you don't like it  what is your alternative. What this measure does is two important things. It says here is our alternative and secondly it says to the Republicans if you don't like our plan to end this war, what is your alternative. Of course the Dem's aren't going to let the Republicans offer their own plan so it puts them in the position of supporting an open commitment which as an untenable position as far as the voters are concerned.

__________________________

Work and struggle and never accept an evil that you can change -- Andre Gide

If the Symbolism ...

is used judiciously to educate voters and build support for more effective actions that really do have an impact - then I agree. In that case this bill would have value if it built momentum. But I don't have much faith the Democrats will do anything beyond symbolism. I hope I'm wrong.

Belive me

I share your skepticism. Democrats historically haven't been known to come together the way Republicans have. This is going to be uphill all the way. Sisyphus will have an easier time with his rock than Speaker Pelosi with her bill.

__________________________

Work and struggle and never accept an evil that you can change -- Andre Gide