Congress Set to Defy Bush on Iraq War
WASHINGTON - A fight between the U.S. Congress and President George W. Bush over the Iraq war is set to come to a head this week when Democrats are expected to send him $100 billion to pay for continuing combat while setting timetables for withdrawing troops.Bush has promised to veto any bill setting dates for removing U.S. combat soldiers from the Iraq war, now in its fifth year. 
But when a Democratic-controlled panel of Senate and House of Representatives members meets on Monday to iron out differences between their respective bills, the product is expected to contain 2008 withdrawal dates.
Many lawmakers have been speculating those dates might be nonbinding, as sketched out by a Senate-passed bill.
“The longer we continue down the president’s path, the further we will be from responsibly ending this war,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who on Thursday said the war in Iraq was “lost.”
The Nevada Democrat, who called for a change of course in Iraq, made his remarks during a week in which he and Bush traded barbs and as violence and killings in Iraq again spiked.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who holds a Democratic leadership position in the House, said final touches on the Iraq war language ought to be finished by this weekend. That will be the basis for Monday’s work session on the bill.
Last month, the House approved a bill setting a September 1, 2008, deadline for all U.S. combat troops to leave Iraq. The Senate’s softer approach calls for some troop withdrawals this year leading to a nonbinding goal of having most of the 146,000 soldiers leave Iraq by March 31, 2008.
Nearly all Republicans in Congress voted against the deadlines.
In recent days, however, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said Congress’ debate on deadlines was helpful. In Baghdad on Thursday, he also told Iraqi leaders that the United States cannot indefinitely commit troops.
The full House could vote on Wednesday on the controversial war-funding bill, the same day Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, is due to brief senators in a closed session.
Democrats say they are uncertain what will happen after Bush vetoes their war money bill. They know they will have to produce another bill to fund the troops in the war zone but they are split over what conditions they can attach and still win Bush’s signature.
Liberal Democrats, who want a quick withdrawal from Iraq, hope their leaders will keep the pressure on Bush by giving him only enough money to conduct the war for another two months or so, instead of for the next six months.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat, said “in two months it might be really clear” that Bush’s 30,000-troop increase was not succeeding in quelling sectarian violence.
She said her hope was that subsequent Iraq funding bills “could be used to bring the troops home.”
But that view is opposed by more moderate Democrats, who at least for now do not want Congress meddling too much in Bush’s handling of the war.
© Reuters 2007.
The answer is simple, just cut off all Iraq war funding & bring the troops home in an orderly withdrawal over the next 3 months.
I agree.
An old Turkish proverb says: No matter how far you’ve come down the wrong road, turn back.
Once you have decided to put on the brakes the idea is not to compromise with inertia and momentum but to oppose it with alacrity. If we have truly concluded that this is a bogus war, every future death as a result of our presence is no longer a casualty but a murder. We do not ask deluded killers to gradually wind it down. We ask them to stop.
It’s time for criminal complicity to end. As chimpy said, “you’re with ‘em or against ‘em.” Those that choose to stay “with ‘em” should be charged with complicity to lieing to the government, premeditated mass murder, and crimes against humanity. The time for obfuscation is over.
The main problem with the USA is that most of its people do not know the history of their country. It has been said that a society that does not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. US citizens prefer to wallow in the warm and fuzzy illusion that we are the best thing going on the planet… bringer of democracy and freedom to the oppressed.
I recall the words of Miguel de Escota of Nicaragua when asked if he had anything to say to the people of the United States. He said, “Tell them we are very concerned about them. We have long felt that any government that would wage a war against the poor peasants of Nicaragua would ignore the needs of it’s own poor. We have long felt that one day the people of the USA will be the most oppressed in the world”.
George Bush and Dick Cheney are not an exception in US history. Read Kinzer’s “Overthrow” which documents 110 years of regime change interventions. I’ll bet you most US citizens are unaware of this history. If they were to admit to it how would they continue to feel pride. There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people. The USA government has killed millions it it’s pursuit of Empire. Simon Bolivar said this in 1827, ‘Provedence seems to have ordained that the United States should plague Latin America with misery in the name of feeedom”. Think of the choice of words… misery in the name of freedom.
The Bush regime must be indicted for it’s crimes against humanity and the Constitution. This must be done not to get revenge but to change the course of US history. If it is not the USA will go the way of Empires that preceded it. The country will fall into chaos and the repression de Escoto spoke of will be felt by all of us. And that includes our children and grandchildren. Is that what we want for the generations to come?
If the body politic in the USA does not have the guts to demand war crime trials then an international body must take up the task.
When the day comes that the International Court brings charges that can be actually prosecuted and holds this disgusting cabal’s feet to the flames—we will ring the bells of justice all across this world. Until then I am ashamed of being an American.
Reading the comments above gives me a sense of hope for America’s future. I envision the day when the major US History textbook in high schools throughout the nation is Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States.”
When you oppose the REPS you must not only withdraw your support but must also act to defeat them. If you simply withdraw support but do not try to defeat them you will have the same effect on the REPS as a person who has committed suicide. That person also withdraws support and cannot act to defeat. Watch the actions of the DEMS and see if what they do can be put in the withdraw support column or the act to defeat column? Is there an unwritten rule that REPS attack to defeat and DEMS simply withdraw support? Is this the real reason the DEMs “appear” to be spineless when in fact they are acting out their accepted role of playing Colmes to Hannity’s lead?
It has been said that the US political system is like a bird with two right wings. Such a creature can not change direction. It can only fly in circles.
Read Zinn’s People History, and Blum’s Killing Hope, Kinzers Overthrow. Learn then teach.
dear mr president:
with this gift of 100 billion dollars we express our open defiance.
take that!
love and kisses,
the congress
The main problem with the USA is that most of its people do not know the history of their country. It has been said that a society that does not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. US citizens prefer to wallow in the warm and fuzzy illusion that we are the best thing going on the planet… bringer of democracy and freedom to the oppressed.
“Tell them we are very concerned about them. We have long felt that any government that would wage a war against the poor peasants of Nicaragua would ignore the needs of it’s own poor. We have long felt that one day the people of the USA will be the most oppressed in the world”.
Provedence seems to have ordained that the United States should plague Latin America with misery in the name of feeedom”. Think of the choice of words… misery in the name of freedom.
It’s tough to summarize America’s historic hubris more simply or eloquently than this.
Solution : Americans can either get off the couch , turn the set off , vote for a progressive even with no pundit-predicted chance of winning or suffer the fate as Miguel de Escota has so astutely suggested.
In the same vein, read “Lies my teacher told me”
the problem is most americans dont know the history of Iraq. If our moronic , lemming president knew how to read and read the history of Iraq we wouldnt be there now but obviously oil is more valuable than people’s lifes to this imbecillic cretans.
getting back to this article, i think the democrats are being silly. setting a precise date for withdrawal is a really bad idea. what the bill should call for is a specific phase of withdrawal over the course of an unspecified amount of time; what they WOULD specify is how many troops are to be removed per phase. then, with iraqis taking the lead, we use the corps of engineers AND all of the exiled iraqi professionals to rebuild the country.
but we really ought to stay as long as is feasible without a military presence. once the iraqis see that we merely intend to help them in the only way we ought to help them, then perhaps there can be a peaceful democratic iraq (not this country’s government’s goals, but the actual population’s). unfortunately-amente, it looks like even without our presence the country might destroy itself…we had just better hope it doesn’t happen, because we have a moral obligation because we destroyed iraq to begin with (first by supporting saddam, then by killing it with sanctions).
Perhaps now is the best time for Congress stand up and tell Mr.Bush, “If you vetoe this bill, you may as well start using the available funds to bring the boys home.”
Harry Reid needs to stop using the Retard (GOP) Party frame about the ‘war’ being lost or ‘the job finished’. You can win or lose a war, but this isn’t a war–it is an illegal invasion and occupation. You NEVER win in an occupation… you might skim some cream for a while, but that’s as good as it gets. He needs to reframe and deny the oppositin frame. This is an occupation for unstated reasons, not a ‘war’ for ‘freedom’ or any other noble sounding cause, regardless of what noble fantasies Bush may have. C’mon Dems, stop playing in their court!
It sure would be nice to hear the Democrats counter some of the talking points BushCo is using to frame this issue. For instance, they keep saying that de-funding the war would amount to not “supporting the troops”. I wish someone would point out that it would be the commander in chief who was not supporting the troops if, faced with a funding cut, he failed to take steps to withdraw them.
THE ANSWER TO BUSH’S UPCOMING VETO IS SIMPLE. Propose another bill, also with limited funds and a binding withdrawal date. If Bush vetoes this one, the Congress will have done all they could to carry out the will of the people. Congress is legally to make the laws. The president’s job is to enforce them, not to oppose them.
I aagree with the last three posters. Why would Congress have to submit another bill if Bush vetos? By passing one, they’ve provided him the funds he asked for! HE”S the one who is guilty of not supporting the troops by his damned veto!!!! Let him stew in his own juices if he wants to play hardball. They have no obligation to come up with something that this spoiled frat boy can live with. I am amazed at the frickin stupidity and gutlessness of the Dems. VETO EQUALS NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS!!!!
Bring the all soldiers home, get the corporations out of Iraq, dump the WTO, World Bank and IMF. Dump all free trade agreements! Put Bush, Cheney, Douglas Feith , Paul Wolfowitz
Ashcroft, Powell, Rice, Gonzales and many others behind bars. This would be a start and prehaps US citizens should start educating themselves about the history of this country. Read a little Zinn!
“Congress Set To Defy Bush”? You’re kidding, right? Congress isn’t going to do squat. Clearly, the Democrats are too afraid to really do anything. What a bunch of friggin’ bone-headed, good for nothing, ne’er to wells. Sure, give Bush another $100B, who cares? I mean, does anyone out there actually believe these Democrats are prepared to do what needs to be done? If you’re honest with yourselves, you’ll say no.
Let him Vetoe it. That means no more funding immediately, right? Sounds OK to me. It’s even better than giving him 100 billion and giving a deadline.
Any thoughts?
Sounds like any other addiction — here’s $100B and after that, I promise to stop smoking, promise, promise.
Things aren’t going to be any better after $100B, 200, 300 or 800. Just a waste of money and life. Isn’t there anyone decisive in this government anymore? We destroyed the NAZIs in less time than we’ve been frittering away life and money on fighting “insurgency” (BTW insurgency = the pissed off people of IRAQ). When the mil talks of “terrorists” in IRAQ what, exactly, do they mean? Is that an Iraqi with a T emblazoned on his forehead, or what?
Similar to the Turkish aphorism at the head of this discussion, here’s an old southern saying: “When you’ve dug yourself into a hole, the first thing you should do is STOP”.
Congress wants to give Georgie $100 Billion and a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. Georgie wants the $100 Billion and NO timetable. Here’s my suggestion: How about a timetable and NO MONEY??? Gee, how come nobody thought of that?
key89 April 22nd, 2007 1:26 pm
“I envision the day when the major US History textbook in high schools throughout the nation is Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States.””
What a glorious vision!
It would be great if the Democrats and/or progressives would seize the moral high ground on the “war” and Troop support.
The war in Iraq is not lost. It was won many times over: it was militarily proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that there were no WMD in Iraq - a great victory; Saddam’s gun rests comfortable in Bush’s desk - another great victory.
To say the Troops efforts have been in vain and in a losing cause gets one no where except to the losing side of an arguement. And since military loss is not the case one need not go there.
Concentrating on the losses of human contact thus diplomacy, and the losses of humanity itself through torturous death and torturous existence and how to remedy these is the path to the moral high ground, leadership of the “mob”, and the number one need for focus.
thanks for the links endCapitalism… very helpful…
As for the above article, Congress is politicking as usual. Nothing here folks, Bush will veto, Congress will not override due to lack of votes (2/3rds majority is required to overturn a veto) and the whole thing will serve as yet another distraction from the real issue - we have had an illegal government occupying the capital since 2000. The Senate, Supreme Court and many house members should all be impeached first. Anyone who had anything to do with the decision which put GWB in office, and all who voted to abdicate the Congress’ authority to declare war should all be impeached regardless of their party affiliation. Then we can look to the White House next.
It is possible that the Republicans want out of this situation as much as anyone. They might secretly want deadlines because it might get the attention of the Iraqis but they don’t want to appear as quitters. So they will pin the label of losers on the Democrats while “reluctantly” going along with some deadlines which may or may not work. Everyone knows we’ll be leaving some day. What the Republicans want is to be able to blame the Democrats for “cutting and running”.
The best solution I’ve heard: Give each Iraqi an equal share of their oil stock and leave.
Bush is in a poker game. He started with a 7-2 in his hand, trying to get everyone to believe he had pocket aces. When he met resistance, he just kept on bluffing and betting and now everyone knows he has nothing in his hand and didn’t hit the flop or the turn. So all the other players are betting back, but he won’t give up. Somehow he thinks he might just hit a hand on the river and show everyone. But it ain’t gonna happen because it doesn’t matter if no one has the aces or the kings or any huge hand - it’s just about all better than what Bush has. But he just keeps firing at the pot, which is so big now everyone involved thinks they are pot committed.
You really do have to know when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em. Sometimes bullying just does not pay off.
When the troops come home the war will continue.
The blackwater private army will stay at a cost of a thousand dollars per soldier per day.
Funding by congress is no problem; remember Iran-Contra?
And the nonexistent free press will insure our lack of attention if not complete ignorance.
USA is a militaristic nation. If not this war in Iraq it will be somewhere else. We can all see that by now surely. Just listen to the National anthem and consider what it is the USA worships….the military.
It is pathetic. The military business guys have this country by the balls. We are screwed without some MAJOR changes not just window dressing or pulling out of one conflict.
Militarism will be the downfall of the USA.
We must pressure our congressmen/senators to IMPEACH BUSH and his top rat faced bastards. Please write and/or call your representatives in Washington and tell them to impeach the rats. Call or write once a week til they do it!