Senate Democrats Want Vote on Iraq Withdrawal Plan

[kerrygoddess]

Senate Democrats Want Vote on Iraq Withdrawal Plan
June 19th, 2006 @ 12:34 am

Reuters reports that Senate “Democrats plan to offer a resolution in the Senate on Tuesday seeking a timetable for a phased withdrawal from Iraq.”

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said on Sunday in an interview on CNN, “Three years and three months and a bogging down, I think, suggests that the time has come for some discussion on where we go from here.”

“I don’t know why we are so afraid to stand up and say, ‘look, we want to see an end to this thing’,” she said.

Feinstein argued an open-ended deployment was unsustainable for the U.S. military, which needed to be free to deal with growing problems in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

There are approximately 129,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and the military death toll since the 2003 invasion reached 2,500 last week. Administration officials have said they would like to withdraw some troops before November’s midterm if conditions on the ground permit it, which could ease pressure on Republicans in their battle to retain control of Congress.

MORE & LINKS HERE - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3352

[Minnesota Libra]

1. Our Democratic leaders are standing up for the issues we find.............

.....important but it's the :puke:neocon/fundie controlled Congress:puke: that won't even allow this stuff to reach the House/Senate floor for debate, much less voted on.

[flpoljunkie]

2. Will Kerry support this Feinstein/Reid resolution?

Will Kerry still be introducing his amendment on a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq by year's end? I don't see why he wouldn't, but will Hillary Clinton?

Could get very interesting tomorrow.

[Mass]

3. He will do both.

The Feinstein proposition is carefully crafted so that everybody except Lieberman and a handful other ones can vote for it.

[flpoljunkie]

4. I think you're probably right. Will that handful include Hillary Clinton?

[blm]

5. No - I doubt she'd take that risk, since she wants to appear more

supportive of Bush than voting for Kerry and Murtha's withdrawal would allow.

[flpoljunkie]

6. Read couple of articles today praising HRC for her Iraq stance amid boos

from the "liberal anti-war crowd" at the Take Back American Conference.

The media refuses to acknowledge that the majority of the American people think the war in Iraq was a mistake and now support some kind of timeline for withdrawal.

[Mass]

7. This is NOT Kerry and Murtha's withdrawal. It is a call for a phased

proposition with a timeline (asking for Bush to provide it), but without any deadline. I imagine Hillary will vote for that.

However, the simple fact that there is such an amendment is a success. Without Murtha, Feingold, and Kerry, I doubt we would even have that.

[flpoljunkie]

8. No, it is not. It looks like a chance for Dems to unite and finesse issue

and present a "united" front. I imagine Hillary could vote for this perhaps meaningless resolution--like the one they passed last year--totally nonbinding.

[blm]

10. I know - - but when Kerry's amendment DOES come up, I doubt she will vote

for it while supporting the compromise bill instead. That way she can protect the centrist niche she has crafted.

[wisteria]

14. In a way, before the elections, it puts the ball in Bush's court.

and allows the Dem's to at least acknowledge it time to start moving on. It gives us talking points and charges of the President staying the same old wrong course. The American people are tired of the mess and want out. Let them push Bush and the repubs to come up with a real get out of Iraq plan- at least before the election.

I still believe in Kerry's plan. I KNOW he has it right. It is just so damn hard to get many of the other Dem's to make important and bold moves.

[wisteria]

13. She is making a mistake. If this is just posturing for 08, then she

is siding with the losing side. Kerry warned her-let it be known.

[flpoljunkie]

15. HRC definitely will not vote for Kerry amendment, but the Reid/Feinstein

amendment, I think is a different story. Perhaps we have miscommunicated.

[blm]

16. No - I understood the different bills - I expect Hill to support the mild

version , just as I expect ANY Dem will who wants SOME progress. I just don't expect that she would vote for the tougher withdrawal plan which is Kerry's.

[flpoljunkie]

18. We are in agreement. Levin was just on C-Span 2 to speak about this

amendment, a component of which is that we begin a phased redployment by the end of this year in consultation with the government in Iraq. Co-sponsors are Reed, Feinstein and Salazar.

[kerrygoddess]

22. However - no timetable with Feinstein/Levin

Feinstein/Levin amendment says:

"The amendment does not address the speed or pace of the redeployment, i.e., it doesn’t establish a timetable for redeployment and it does not call for a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. It urges that phased redeployment begin this year as a way of moving from an open-ended commitment and Iraqi dependency." - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=3364

[flpoljunkie]

23. And yet the Feinstein/Levin amendment expected to garner only 38-40 votes!

What a sad commentary this is, that the Dems can't even line up behind this amendment which establishes no deadline for redeployment. And I doubt there will be any Republicans willing to stand up to their leadership and vote for even this Feinstein/Levin amendment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/19/AR2006061901007.html

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada backs the resolution and his aides say they expect 38 to 40 Democrats and a few Republicans to vote for the symbolic statement. However, they don't expect to get the 51 votes needed to attach the resolution to an annual military bill.

The resolution would urge, but not require, the administration to begin "a phased redeployment of U.S. forces" in 2006 and, by year's end, give Congress its plan for "continued redeployment" thereafter.

Additionally, the resolution calls for American troops, which have been focused on combat operations in Iraq, to more quickly switch to "a limited mission of training and logistic support of Iraqi security forces, protection of U.S. personnel and facilities, and targeting counterterrorism activities."

[Nimrod2005]

9. This is a positive step in the right direction, I predict by November

majority (large majority) of dems. will have gone on record endorsing an end date to the maddness, they will all endorse Murtha and Kerry.

[gratuitous]

11. The Democrats don't have a plan! Cheap grandstanding!

Of course, this will be mouthed by the exact same talking chuckleheads who gushed all over the airwaves last week about the House non-binding resolution. See, it's a cheap political stunt if the Democrats do it, and bold statesmanship if the Republicans do it. All clear?

[kerrygoddess]

17. Got it...

They who cry grandstanding are the biggest of them all!

[kerrygoddess]

12. John Kerry has “Real Courage in Setting an Iraq Strategy”

John Kerry has “Real Courage in Setting an Iraq Strategy”
June 19th, 2006 @ 9:00 am

As the Senate Democrats prepare to “call for phased pullout” on Iraq this week, comes a Letter to the Editor from former Senator Gary Hart, about John Kerry’s “real courage in proposing a realistic plan to extricate our troops” from Iraq.

Real Courage in Setting an Iraq Strategy
Monday, June 19, 2006

The Post applauded President Bush’s courage in continuing an open-ended commitment to an American military presence in Iraq and disparaged what it termed political expediency on the part of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) in calling for a reasonable timetable for phased withdrawal of our forces <”A Boost From Mr. Bush,” editorial, June 14>.

Mr. Bush’s political capital is waning because he misled Congress and the American people, because we have experienced 21,000 American casualties as a result, because a mere 23 percent of the world’s people respect our nation, because he has no strategy worth the title, and because he is responsible for a military and foreign policy disaster. To “stay” an undefined and unlimited “course” may demonstrate many things but it does not demonstrate courage.

MORE & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3353

[kerrygoddess]

19. Kerry/Feingold Amendment vs Feinstein/Levin Amendment

For comparison on the two different amendments in the news today:

Kerry/Feingold - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3362

Feinstein/Levin - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3362

[kerrygoddess]

21. Sorry ! Wrong Link for Feinstein/Levin

Feinstein/Levin: http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=3364

[Hippo_Tron]

20. DUers are going to be pissed when this doesn't get over 40 votes

Frankly I have to say that I will be too. Party unity on this issue is what is going to keep us from taking back congress.

[flpoljunkie]

24. The Dems will be fortunate to get 40 votes for Feinstein/Levin amendment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/19/AR2006061901007.html

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada backs the resolution and his aides say they expect 38 to 40 Democrats and a few Republicans to vote for the symbolic statement. However, they don't expect to get the 51 votes needed to attach the resolution to an annual military bill.

The resolution would urge, but not require, the administration to begin "a phased redeployment of U.S. forces" in 2006 and, by year's end, give Congress its plan for "continued redeployment" thereafter.

Additionally, the resolution calls for American troops, which have been focused on combat operations in Iraq, to more quickly switch to "a limited mission of training and logistic support of Iraqi security forces, protection of U.S. personnel and facilities, and targeting counterterrorism activities."