Democrats face a struggle over war strategy (LA Times)

[kentuck]

My comments:
It appears the resolution will pass the House. However, it is not a given that the vote in the Senate will end up the same as the last vote. Will it make Reid look weak? Whatever, there are underlying political consequences to these votes. The Repubs will take the "good news" coming out of Baghdad that they are finally "winning" the war, and the other shoe hasn't even dropped yet. Interesting comments and votes ahead today and tomorrow....
=========================

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-wardems16feb16,0,449848.story?coll=la-home-headlines

After the nonbinding House resolution passes, party leaders will have to agree on how to get Bush to actually change his Iraq policy.

<snip>

Congressional Democrats quickly and easily united behind a nonbinding resolution denouncing President Bush's plan to send more U.S. troops to Iraq. But after the measure's expected approval in the House today, party leaders will confront more divisive questions: how to force a determined president to back down from his plan, and whether to push for a complete withdrawal.

<snip>
In the Senate, meanwhile, a more immediate obstacle looms.

Facing procedural hurdles set up by Republicans, Democrats are still struggling to pass a nonbinding resolution that mirrors the House measure. On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said he would hold an unusual Saturday session to bring the issue to a head, although it remained unclear whether he had enough votes to break the deadlock that stalled action earlier this month.

<snip>
In an opening volley, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee today will start running newspaper ads in New Hampshire and Oregon — two states where antiwar sentiment runs strong — attacking Republican incumbents who face reelection next year and who voted with their party last week to block Senate debate on Iraq.

....more

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. It's not a war- it's an invasion. Stop the invasion. Get the UN to peacekeep.

Bring the boys back home. Detach the milinduscomplex from the Treasury feedbag.

"See, problem solved." -My 11th grade math teacher, Mr. Montel.

[Monkeyman]

2. My understanding no good news from Iraq

The so-called surge first move was 200 Iraqis backed up by only 2,500 soldiers got hit hard. Why did they deploy so few is what should be asked. No Numbers on the wounded or KIA's but there where a few.

[EVDebs]

3. NSA went after Quakers because Quakers posted about permanent bases

If the U.S. is ultimately leaving Iraq, why is the military building 'permanent' bases?
http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases.htm

Iraqis will never 'stand up' so the US will continually be forced to be there rather than 'stand down' as the liar in the WH has phrased it !

Democrats MUST make known this permanent base strategery of Bush and also that it is fuel for the insurgency

""A September 2006 poll of both Sunnis and Shias found that 71% of Iraqis wanted the U.S. to leave within a year, with 65% favoring an immediate pullout and 77% voicing suspicion that the U.S. wanted to keep permanent bases in Iraq.<31> 61% approved of attacks on U.S. forces.<32>""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_insurgency (scroll down to Analysis and Polls)

Republicans have to answer for this and the media is complicit by not putting this information OUT THERE.