| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Home Front: Politix | ||
| Senate Foreign Relations Committee rejects Bush troop “surge” | ||
| 2007-01-25 | ||
| WASHINGTON - US President George W. Bush on Wednesday received a stinging rebuke of his Iraq policy, as a Senate panel condemned his plan to pour more US troops into the war-ravaged country. By a 12 to nine vote, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a resolution slamming Bush’s plan to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq, just one day after he But US Vice President Dick Cheney bluntly dismissed the no-confidence measure, telling CNN television: “It won’t stop us.” The bipartisan resolution written by the panel’s chairman, Joseph Biden, fellow Democrat Carl Levin, and Republican senators Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel, criticized an escalation of US forces in Iraq as “not in the national interest.” “My intention was to send the first of many messages — direct and unequivocal — to the president: Stop what you are doing,” Biden said during the hearing. The Democratic chairman added that he was likely to submit even tougher, binding Iraq legislation if Bush fails to heed the message of the proposed symbolic measure.
The draft bill is only one of several proposals slamming Bush’s surge plan, including some that would cap the number of troops, cut off funding for the deployment of additional troops or gradually pull US forces from Iraq altogether. One bill deemed most acceptable to many Republicans — proposed by Republican Senator John Warner, former head of the Senate Armed Services Committee — opposes an escalation in troops and urges the president to reconsider his options. Biden said at the hearing he would be willing to work with Warner to craft acceptable language for a revised measure before it goes to the full Senate for approval. Republicans on the Senate panel also expressed dissatisfaction with the way things are going in Iraq, but said the resolution would make matters even worse. “This vote will force nothing on the president, but it will confirm to our friends and allies that we are divided and in disarray,” said Republican Senator Richard Lugar, the committee’s former chairman and a highly respected voice on foreign policy matters.
| ||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #8 I guess they don't have the guts to say what they really think: That Arabs are violent by nature and can't understand democracy and like being ruled by violent dictators. Kinda like the DemocRats' other main belief: That minorities (blacks and hispanics only; Asians don't count since everybody knows how smart they all are) can't make it on their own and have to have the government hold their hands and give them everything they have. F*cking bigots, the lot of them. *spit* |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2007-01-25 19:54 |
| #7 Senate Foreign Relations Committee rejects Bush troop “surge” Might as well call it the Senate Giving Aid and Comfort to the Enemy Committee. Words cannot express my contempt. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2007-01-25 19:35 |
| #6 If the surge fails, they're on record being against it. If it succeeds, their water carriers in the press will spin it as failure. So either way - they gain political capital. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2007-01-25 18:07 |
| #5 Sulla Don't ask me to come defend you bunch of possers. Trade one republic for fleeting spasms of ego and power. Go read Livy dudes, before its too late. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-01-25 16:08 |
| #4 I was annoyed before but now I am downright pissed. IF the surrender monkeys and their enablers truly believe that this war is not right and that sending reinforcements is wrong they should de-fund it immediately. Don’t wait a Day, Month, or a Year bring the troops home starting on Friday. No “Non Binding Resolutions” or puff speeches about “Lies” , “Missteps”, or “Wrong Direction” step up and demand that the troops there be withdrawn TODAY. How about it are they Leaders? I doubt it, because they are on record against an immediate withdrawal but there actions seem to support a slow painful defeat. IMHO the surge work before to stabilize the country for elections and it can work again. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2007-01-25 11:14 |
| #3 The upside to this is at least they held a committee hearing before anyone voted. |
| Posted by: badanov 2007-01-25 06:13 |
| #2 Decapitation = Assassination = "justified" anti-US retaliation Amer Hirsohima looming, ala JERICHO + "24"??? DEMS > WE KNOW AMER'S ENEMIES WANNA HURT US OR KILL US, ERGO MUST PROTECT OURSELVES + USA BY MAKING SURE USA GETS ATTACKED. Still comes down to COURAGE OF LEADERSHIP, EVEN UNTO BODILY HARM-DEATH, vs NOT BEING BLAMED FOR ANYTHING, the merits of a DEAD FREE HERO vs LIVING/CONTROLLED SLAVE. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-01-25 01:21 |
| #1 Time to name names. News reports indicated all 11 D's on the committee plus one R (Hagel) voted for the resolution, all remaining R's voted against. Interesting that news article didn't give a complete list of those for and against. Here it is: For the Resolution: Joseph R. Biden Delaware Christopher J. Dodd Connecticut John F. Kerry Massachusetts Russell D. Feingold Wisconsin Barbara Boxer California Bill Nelson Florida Barack Obama Illinois Robert Menendez New Jersey Benjamin L. Cardin Maryland Robert P. Casey Jr. Pennsylvania Jim Webb Virginia Chuck Hagel Nebraska -------------------------- Against the resolution: Richard G. Lugar Indiana Norm Coleman Minnesota Bob Corker Tennessee John E. Sununu New Hampshire George V. Voinovich Ohio Lisa Murkowski Alaska Jim DeMint South Carolina Johnny Isakson Georgia David Vitter Louisiana This was not a bipartisan resolution. Make your list and check it twice |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-01-25 01:17 |