Monday, October 16, 2006

troop reduction?

from the Chicago Tribune:
Way forward in (out of?) Iraq


For all the buzz that Republican heavyweight Jim Baker has generated with his public talk about an alternative to the “stay-the-course’’ or “cut-and-run’’ approaches to the war in Iraq, it will be some time before the bipartisan Iraq Study Group which Baker co-chairs will offer any glimpse at any alternative course of action.

“We're not trying to outsource the president's job as commander-in-chief,’’ Snow said.

Honestly, that's the one job in the whole country we wouldn't mind being outsourced.


“The Iraq Study Group was created pursuant to an act of Congress, and certainly we'll want to hear what the Democrats and Republicans on the bipartisan panel have to say,’’ Snow said. “But the president also listens to a lot of other voices, and he's going to do what he thinks best pursues the aim that we have always said we want to achieve, which is a democratic Iraq, an ally in the war on terror, that is able to sustain, govern and defend itself.’’

"I hear the voices" - G. W. Bush 4/18/06, frightening isn't it. Guess he's still hearing them.


“I think what Jim said was that there are options other than cut and run and staying the course,’’ he said. “And if you look carefully at his statement it was simply a statement of fact. He was not advocating anything… He was saying there are other options, and that is correct. He and I can’t walk out the door without people giving us recommendations.’’
Why don't they just listen to John Murtha.

To Redeploy U.S. Forces from Iraq.


MR. MURTHA introduced the following joint resolution, which was referred to the Committee on ____________________________

Whereas Congress and the American People have not been shown clear, measurable progress toward establishment of stable and improving security in Iraq or of a stable and improving economy in Iraq, both of which are essential to "promote the emergence of a democratic government";

Whereas additional stabilization in Iraq by U.S. military forces cannot be achieved without the deployment of hundreds of thousands of additional U.S. troops, which in turn cannot be achieved without a military draft;

Whereas more than $277 billion has been appropriated by the United States Congress to prosecute U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan;

Whereas, as of the drafting of this resolution, 2,079 U.S. troops have been killed in Operation Iraqi Freedom;

Whereas U.S. forces have become the target of the insurgency;

Whereas, according to recent polls, over 80% of the Iraqi people want the U.S. forces out of Iraq;

Whereas polls also indicate that 45% of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on U.S. forces are justified;

Whereas, due to the foregoing, Congress finds it evident that continuing U.S. military action in Iraq is not in the best interests of the United States of America, the people of Iraq, or the Persian Gulf Region, which were cited in Public Law 107-243 as justification for undertaking such action;

Therefore be it

1) Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
2) Congress assembled,
3) That:
4) Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is
5) hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable
6) date.
7) Section 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S. Marines
8) shall be deployed in the region.
9) Section 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq
10) through diplomacy.

No, they couldn't debate that resolution, they chose to mock Murtha, a 37 year Marine Veteran, by rewriting his resolution and introducing it as a "cut and run proposal." Duncan Hunter worded it as follows:


Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately. Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.
I think Atrios is right as long as Bush is president they'll be no troop reductions.


Post a Comment

<< Home