White House warns against Iraq pullout
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
Brushing aside criticism from the White House, Senate Democrats said Friday their next challenge to President Bush's Iraq war policy would require the gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops beginning within 120 days.
The draft legislation also declares the war "requires principally a political solution" rather than a military one.
The provisions are included in a measure that would repeal the authority that lawmakers gave Bush in 2002, months before the invasion of Iraq, and replace it with a far more limited mission.
Democrats have said they are likely to seek a vote on the proposal within two weeks. The odds against it ever becoming law are high, and the White House and Senate Republicans were quick to denounce it.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the administration "of course" would oppose an attempt to alter the existing authorization, and he warned that a pullout of U.S. troops could bring chaos to Iraq. "We're operating under a mandate," he said.
S
enate Republican leader Mitch McConnell R-Kentucky dismissed the proposal as an attempt by Democrats to produce "what could best be described as a Goldilocks resolution: one that is hot enough for the radical left wing, but cool enough for party leaders to claim that they are for the troops.
A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the White House is not only confused, but in denial.
"They can spin all they want, but the fact is that President Bush is ignoring a bipartisan majority of Congress, his own military commanders, and the American public in escalating the war," said Jim Manley. "The American people have demanded a change of course in Iraq and Democrats are committed to holding President Bush accountable."
As currently drafted, the Democratic legislation says the military "shall commence phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq not later than 120 days" after the bill's enactment. The goal is to complete the withdrawal by March 31, 2008.
In the interim, the military would be required to transition to a new mission involving "targeted anti-terrorism operations," as well as providing training and logistical support for the Iraqis and helping them protect their own borders.
The measure also pledges that Congress will "continue to support and protect" the armed forces, renewing a commitment that was included in an earlier nonbinding measure that also criticized Bush's plans to deploy an additional 21,500 troops.
Republicans blocked action on the measure last week, demanding that Democrats allow a vote on an alternative that would rule out cutting off funds for the troops.
At the White House, Fratto said that changes in the existing authority for use of military force were unnecessary even though it dates from the days when Saddam Hussein was in power and there was an assumption — later proved false — that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. The White House said that Democrats were in a state of confusion about Iraq but left room for compromise.
"There's a lot of ... shifting sands in the Democrats' position right now," Fratto said. "We'll see what Democrats decide to do."
He said the president would judge anything that comes out of Congress by whether it gives him "the flexibility and resources" necessary to proceed with Bush's decision to send 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq to secure Baghdad and Anbar Province.
"It's clear that if there are efforts to remove troops out of Baghdad, there are consequences for Baghdad," Fratto said. "The only credible analysis that we've seen — the (National Intelligence Estimate) report and others — are pretty clear on this, that it would bring chaos to Baghdad."
Senate Republicans recently thwarted two Democratic attempts to pass a nonbinding measure critical of Bush's troop-increase plan. Asked if Bush would oppose any effort to revoke his war authorization, Fratto said, "Of course we would."
In the House, a nonbinding anti-war measure was approved last week. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) has said she expects the next challenge to Bush's war policies to be a requirement that the Pentagon adhere to strict training and readiness standards for troops heading for the war zone.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., the leading advocate of that approach, has said it would effectively deny Bush the ability to proceed with the troop buildup.
But Bush's Republican allies on Capitol Hill have fought that as denying reinforcements to troops already in the war zone, leading to the alternative approach in the Senate.
The measure Bush won from Congress in 2002 authorized the president to use the armed forces "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate ... to defend the national security of the
United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq" and to enforce relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.
At the time, the world body had passed resolutions regarding Iraq's presumed effort to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Associated Press Special Correspondent David Espo contributed to this report.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
Showing posts with label Senate Dems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senate Dems. Show all posts
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Dems Seeks to Limit Iraq War
Don't neglect the one Bush is planning; you know, the one with Iran.
By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer
Mon Feb 19,
Senate Democrats pledged renewed efforts Sunday to curtail the Iraq war, suggesting they will seek to limit a 2002 measure authorizing President Bush's use of force against Saddam Hussein.
The top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the proposal had little chance of succeeding. "I think the president would veto it and the veto would be upheld," said Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Indiana.
A day after Republicans foiled a Democratic bid to repudiate Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq, Senate Democrats declined to embrace measures — being advanced in the House — that would attach conditions to additional funding for troops.
Sen. Carl Levin, who chairs the Armed Services Committee, said Democratic senators would probably seek to capitalize on wavering Republicans to limit the "wide-open authorization" Congress gave Bush in 2002.
"We will be looking at a modification of that authorization in order to limit the mission of American troops to a support mission instead of a combat mission, and that is very different from cutting off funds," said Levin, D-Mich.
Sen. Joe Biden, a 2008 presidential candidate who leads the foreign relations panel, said the 2002 authorization should be repealed to restate the president's authority and clarify the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq.
"I've been working with some of my colleagues to try to convince them that that's the way to go ... make it clear that the purpose that he has troops in there is to, in fact, protect against al-Qaida gaining chunks of territory, training the Iraqi forces, force protection and for our forces," said Biden, D-Del.
The Democratic-controlled Senate failed to force debate on a nonbinding resolution opposing the troop buildup. The 56-34 vote fell four short of the 60 needed, but Democrats quickly claimed victory, noting that a majority of senators — seven of them Republicans — effectively voted against the escalation.
After a week of contentious debate in Congress, the White House scoffed at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 has become "the worst foreign policy mistake" in U.S. history.
"The war is tough, but the solution is not to get out," press secretary Tony Snow said. "It is to provide the kinds of resources and reinforcements our forces need to get the job done, and at the same time say to the Iraqis `You guys got to step up.'"
Snow said it was important to remove Saddam from power and noted that a majority of senators voted in 2002 to authorize force in Iraq.
He said Bush should not see votes in Congress in opposition of his new Iraqi strategy as a rebuke. "The strategy has barely had a chance to begin working," Snow said.
The House passed a nonbinding resolution Friday that rejected the president's 21,500-troop buildup in Iraq. The vote put Bush on the defensive going into a far more consequential confrontation over paying for the plan.
House Democrats have said they will attempt to place restrictions on Bush's request for an additional $93 billion for the military in an effort to make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops.
Levin said limiting the 2002 war authorization would sidestep constitutional questions. Some legal experts have said that restricting money or attaching conditions could arguably encroach on Bush's powers as commander in chief to control tactics and operations.
"One thought is that we should limit the mission to a support mission — in other words, an anti-terrorist mission to go after al-Qaida in Iraq, to support and train the Iraqi army, to protect our own diplomatic personnel and other personnel in Iraq," Levin said.
Sen. Jack Reed (news, bio, voting record), D-R.I., agreed. Senate Democrats are "sitting down already ... and trying to work out a new approach," he said.
Snow said the president understands the importance of debate about the war on Capitol Hill and understands lawmakers' anxiety about the war.
"What I would say to members of Congress is: Calm down and take a look at what's going on, and ask yourself a simple question: If you support the troops, would you deny them the reinforcements they think are necessary to complete the mission?'"
Levin was on "Fox News Sunday," Reed spoke on NBC's "Meet the Press," Snow and Reid appeared on CNN's "Late Edition," and Biden and Lugar were interviewed on "Face the Nation" on CBS.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer
Mon Feb 19,
Senate Democrats pledged renewed efforts Sunday to curtail the Iraq war, suggesting they will seek to limit a 2002 measure authorizing President Bush's use of force against Saddam Hussein.
The top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the proposal had little chance of succeeding. "I think the president would veto it and the veto would be upheld," said Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Indiana.
A day after Republicans foiled a Democratic bid to repudiate Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq, Senate Democrats declined to embrace measures — being advanced in the House — that would attach conditions to additional funding for troops.
Sen. Carl Levin, who chairs the Armed Services Committee, said Democratic senators would probably seek to capitalize on wavering Republicans to limit the "wide-open authorization" Congress gave Bush in 2002.
"We will be looking at a modification of that authorization in order to limit the mission of American troops to a support mission instead of a combat mission, and that is very different from cutting off funds," said Levin, D-Mich.
Sen. Joe Biden, a 2008 presidential candidate who leads the foreign relations panel, said the 2002 authorization should be repealed to restate the president's authority and clarify the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq.
"I've been working with some of my colleagues to try to convince them that that's the way to go ... make it clear that the purpose that he has troops in there is to, in fact, protect against al-Qaida gaining chunks of territory, training the Iraqi forces, force protection and for our forces," said Biden, D-Del.
The Democratic-controlled Senate failed to force debate on a nonbinding resolution opposing the troop buildup. The 56-34 vote fell four short of the 60 needed, but Democrats quickly claimed victory, noting that a majority of senators — seven of them Republicans — effectively voted against the escalation.
After a week of contentious debate in Congress, the White House scoffed at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 has become "the worst foreign policy mistake" in U.S. history.
"The war is tough, but the solution is not to get out," press secretary Tony Snow said. "It is to provide the kinds of resources and reinforcements our forces need to get the job done, and at the same time say to the Iraqis `You guys got to step up.'"
Snow said it was important to remove Saddam from power and noted that a majority of senators voted in 2002 to authorize force in Iraq.
He said Bush should not see votes in Congress in opposition of his new Iraqi strategy as a rebuke. "The strategy has barely had a chance to begin working," Snow said.
The House passed a nonbinding resolution Friday that rejected the president's 21,500-troop buildup in Iraq. The vote put Bush on the defensive going into a far more consequential confrontation over paying for the plan.
House Democrats have said they will attempt to place restrictions on Bush's request for an additional $93 billion for the military in an effort to make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops.
Levin said limiting the 2002 war authorization would sidestep constitutional questions. Some legal experts have said that restricting money or attaching conditions could arguably encroach on Bush's powers as commander in chief to control tactics and operations.
"One thought is that we should limit the mission to a support mission — in other words, an anti-terrorist mission to go after al-Qaida in Iraq, to support and train the Iraqi army, to protect our own diplomatic personnel and other personnel in Iraq," Levin said.
Sen. Jack Reed (news, bio, voting record), D-R.I., agreed. Senate Democrats are "sitting down already ... and trying to work out a new approach," he said.
Snow said the president understands the importance of debate about the war on Capitol Hill and understands lawmakers' anxiety about the war.
"What I would say to members of Congress is: Calm down and take a look at what's going on, and ask yourself a simple question: If you support the troops, would you deny them the reinforcements they think are necessary to complete the mission?'"
Levin was on "Fox News Sunday," Reed spoke on NBC's "Meet the Press," Snow and Reid appeared on CNN's "Late Edition," and Biden and Lugar were interviewed on "Face the Nation" on CBS.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
