Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
House Rejects Call for Withdrawal From Afghanistan
WASHINGTON - The House on Wednesday soundly rejected an effort by anti-war lawmakers to force a withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year.
A U.S. Army soldier of the 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment, 5th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, stands on the top of a mud house during his watch duty in the Badula Qulp area, West of Lashkar Gah in Helmand province, southern Afghanistan, Friday, Feb. 26, 2010. (AP Photo/Pier Paolo Cito) The outcome of the vote, 356-65 against the resolution, was never in doubt. (click here for the roll call) But the 3 1/2 hours of debate did give those who oppose President Barack Obama's war policies a platform to vent their frustrations.
Opposing the resolution was easy for almost all Republicans, who have been solidly behind Obama's decision to increase U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan from 70,000 to 100,000. Only five Republicans supported the measure.
It was a harder vote for some Democrats, particularly in an election year where opposing the war can be equated with opposing the troops. Several expressed discomfort with a war that has lasted 8 1/2 years and cost the nation more than 930 American lives and the treasury more than $200 billion, but said they were voting against the resolution because it was ill-timed and unrealistic.
Among the 'no' voters was Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., who gave an impassioned speech. The U.S. policy of needlessly sending troops into harm's way was "shameful," Kennedy said. He also lambasted the national media, calling their lack of attention to the loss of life in Afghanistan "despicable."
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, authored the resolution that would have directed the president to remove all U.S. troops from Afghanistan within 30 days of its adoption. If the president deemed that deadline unsafe, he would have had until the end of the year to end U.S. military presence in the nation.
Obama has said he wants to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan starting in July 2011.
Kucinich based his resolution on the 1973 War Powers Act, passed during the Vietnam War era to require the president to obtain congressional approval when he sends troops to a conflict for more than 90 days.
Congress authorized the use of military force to fight terrorists in 2001, after the Sept. 11 attacks, but Kucinich said both the Bush and Obama administrations had wrongfully used that authority as carte blanche to circumvent the role of Congress in sending Americans to war.
"Unless this Congress acts to claim its constitutional responsibility, we will stay in Afghanistan for a very, very long time at great cost to our troops and to our national priorities," Kucinich said.
Republicans warned that a precipitous withdrawal would be a serious mistake, allowing the Taliban to regain power and assuring that al-Qaida and other terrorist groups would again have a staging ground to launch attacks against the U.S. and the West.
"In the case of Afghanistan, President Obama has demonstrated great responsibility and a sense of the national security interests of the United States," said Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-Fla. "He deserves our support."
In the middle were Democrats such as Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who voted against the resolution despite "profound reservations" about committing troops and vast resources to one of the world's most corrupt nations. He said the debate was essential, "even though I don't agree with the resolution that somehow we're going to be able to pull the plug and be able to end this in 30 days or 30 weeks."
The bill is H. Con. Res. 248.
- Posted in
71 Comments so far
Show AllRoll Call?????
---- YEAS 65 ---
Baldwin
Campbell
Capuano
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Crowley
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
Doyle
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Ellison
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Grayson
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kagen
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Maffei
Maloney
Markey (MA)
McDermott
McGovern
Michaud
Miller, George
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Obey
Olver
Paul
Payne
Pingree (ME)
Polis (CO)
Quigley
Rangel
Richardson
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Serrano
Speier
Stark
Stupak
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Velázquez
Waters
Watson
Welch
Woolsey
{From Thomas.gov}
So, in the meantime, more of our soldiers and untold numbers of Afghan civilians get killed or permanently maimed over nothing.
Here's a suggestion for everybody: Don't hold your breath(s) waiting for Obama's proposed July 2011 withdrawal. It won't happen.
Oh, I'm not so sure.
He may be forced to withdraw forces from Af-Pak-Ye prematurely if they discover oil and gas reserves in Antarctica, putting it at risk from the International Islamofascist Terrorist Organization that hates us for our freedoms!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Obama's "withdrawal" leave behind some 50,000 US soldiers? I believe the US plans to remain in Iraq at least as long as it has remained in Japan and Germany.
Well, I'm glad we got THAT settled!
Obedient Servant,
In case you missed our response on a previous, now buried thread, we take the liberty of reposting it here, appropriately updated in token of our appreciation for your contributions:
"Coupling artistry, high style and an indefatigable humor– all laced with steely insight–your postings alone make the "Common Dreams" site a must read. We will certainly pass on your regards to Jill. Many and sincere thanks.
Perhaps the recycled, absentee intervention we posted from Jill Bains on the Tom Hayden article of a few days ago would have been more apposite on this thread. The final vote speaks for itself. It seems her points were entirely prescient: 99% of the American populace could be opposed to wars of state terror and they would still continue unabated, with even more virulence. Conceptually and actionably the sphere of representative government has come to an end.
We see here, going over her filed and saved archives from her tenure on this blog that she appropriately, delegated your work its own 'folder.' Sioux Rose, along with a few others, also has a designated folder. Stay well and keep the masterpieces coming as the spirit moves."
Warmest regards,
-Vashkar and Kim
Thanks much! I appreciate your kind comment.
-- Regards, Yr Obd't Servant
The name Jill Bains sounds familiar. I will be happy to read what she said in the past from the archives. The sooner more people wake up, the sooner they will have to come to grips with reality and elect anti-war politicians for real. Thank you for the kind reminder and wherever she is, I wish her well and look forward to reading her posts when she returns.
Vashkar and Kim, Jill Bains was a great to communicate with. Some she and I had our disagreements and where she thought I was seriously flawed, she'd give me a kick in the stomach response but I would think about it but where she would agree with me, she would add a lot of interesting thoughts and explanations. She is a fierce independent but she means well. I know that like RichM, the word "liberal" is not her favorite word. I'm starting to question myself at times on whether being a moderate liberal is worthwhile anymore as opposed to being an unapologetic progressive like many on this forum. I remember at one post where Jill was angry at me for saying that the politicians more than the people are at fault but I have to admit that as I find myself learning my lesson the hard way that she was right that it is a combination of the people and the politicians who are to blame. I hope Jill returns but in the meantime, I will go back and reread her posts because I think she means really well even if she sounds like tough love at first. I wish both of you and Jill the very best and await her return.
Sold out Dims endorse imperialist murder along with their Dopelganger Repgilicons again, shocking? Not... Kucininich and Paul are the only Congress-critters who have anything even close to integrity in Con-gress.
I appreciate those who voted in favor of this resolution and I appreciate Dennis Kucinich for introducing it. It seems that most Democrats and Republicans are united in fighting costly, immoral wars. Diverting most of the huge sums we spend on the wars and military development would provide us with the funding we need for jobs creation, health care,
housing for all, education, and infrastructure repair. I cannot understand why so many are in favor of these immoral wars in third world countries.
One word to our war-mongering, economically deficient government: GREECE!
just read that only 15% percent (65 members) of the House of Representatives supported the Dennis Kucinich resolution to immediately end our imperial occupation of The Republic of Afghanistan. The other 85% of these so-called "Representatives" are just worthless lying war pigs...
Phooey...
o/t:
This whole push by Obama and the top dog Dems for the worthless Senate Health Care Deform Bill has made me so disgusted that I stopped reading and commenting on progressive blogs as well as not watching Keith, Ed and Rachel on MsNBC for the last several days. Thank god for Sponge Bob and Turner Classic Movies (TCM)... Ed Schultz has always been big on US imperial occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq; now after being on MSNBC for a year or so, he has sold out to the corporate insurance pigs on health care. Sickening... This health care deform, Senate style is textbbook fascism, the government and the corporations ganging up against the people...
my wife just phoned me from a dinner where she mentioned something about Obama being a Neocon and she was basically ejected from the table. Next thing you know Sponge Bob is going to be supporting the creep.
Dennis Kucinich, thank you, again, for standing up for what's right, for your courage and steadfast resolve. I read on Raw Story how Markos Moulitsas, founder of Daily Kos, trashed Dennis on Countdown last night because Dennis opposes the Senate so-called health insurance "reform" bill. < http://rawstory.com/2010/03/moulitsas-kucinich-health-reform/ >. Moulitsas, you sell out, you tool, you apologist for the DLC, you are symbolic of everything that's wrong with our broken system, whereas the only flaw I see in Dennis Kucinich is his continued membership in the Democratic Party.
The reality is that the USA requires oil to run the machinery of industry, and needs the power that comes from the profit of war.
In the end, and the end is coming quickly, the wars over oil to destroy the world.
If one is enjoying the oil wars just wait until the water wars which are already beginning to simmer.
Where do think the Afghanistan pipeline leads too...
Keep in mind alot of Chinese oil companies have bidded on that same Iraqi oil.
The pipeline is TAPI -- I for India no C for China.
Though this line ends in a Pakistan seaport built by China, but I would say controled by the USA now.
In fact the AfPak war is I believe largely to prevent China from reaping any oil benefits of the port.
The USA, in general is trying to counteract China's strength by capturing control of the worlds Gas and Oil reserves and pipelines.
There are also two pipe lines from Iran planned to go all the way to India through the same region of Pakistan as TAPI, which are stalled at Pakistan(in an unbuilt phase) because of a fee dispute.
China is negating USA's strategy by going renewable and coal.
Yes China owns the USA as a debtor, but at this time is still useful as a market for China. And presently the USA is vastly superior militarily, maybe.
scribe, excellent comment.
Accurate, well said, but, of course, utterly disappointing in its deadly truth.
You capture the total subsuming of our democracy by this evil EMPIRE when you write, "With the putrefaction of representative democracy in full flower here in the USA, it's hard to imagine any of this ending anytime".
Best,
Alan
Two American Parables for the Darkness visible–
"Your ideas are terrifying and your hearts are faint. Your acts of pity and cruelty are absurd, committed with no calm, as if they were irresistible. Finally, you fear blood, more and more. Blood all the time." –(Paul Valéry)
"It is not to be thought that the life of darkness is sunk in misery and lost as if in sorrowing. There is no sorrowing. For sorrow is a thing that is swallowed up in death, and death and dying are the very life of the darkness." –(Jacob Boehme)
–Song Chen
Our empire with its 5 wars and 175 military installations is bankrupting us. 14 trillion and growing. We cant sustain the empire. Churchill and DeGaulle told us how to retrench.
"It was a harder vote for some Democrats, particularly in an election year where opposing the war can be equated with opposing the troops."
Buying into that tired old meme shows an astonishing lack of resolve.
Agree. Every two years is an election year and this isn't the troop's war, it is the politicians war. Associated Press that copied the "equated with opposing the troops" from the Republican talking points.
"Every two years is an election year."
That's an excellent point, and taking it into consideration, the AP article would have been more accurately worded by saying, "It was a more difficult vote for Democrats, because they have allowed Republicans to define opposition to the war as abandonment of the troops, and because this happens to be an election year, they are afraid of the attack ads that the Republicans will surely be running."
The following paragraph from this article makes no sense:
"It was a harder vote for some Democrats, particularly in an election year where opposing the war can be equated with opposing the troops. Several expressed discomfort with a war that has lasted 8 1/2 years and cost the nation more than 930 American lives and the treasury more than $200 billion, but said they were voting against the resolution because it was ill-timed and unrealistic."
What the hell was so hard for the Democrats about this simple call for withdrawal? We don't have money to get anything done domestically and we're in national debt up to our eyeballs. I don't understand what is so unrealistic or ill-timed about withdrawing from a war while it isn't as bad as it will be if we get stuck there for years. This is like saying "Oh I feel bad about your illness but now is not the time to cure it because I can't be unrealistic." The Democrats lost in 2002 and 2004 because they supported the war but won in 2006 for opposing it. They had better start praying that their base voters aren't paying attention to this because this is vote has seriously broken whatever anti-war credibility the party had.
"...whatever anti-war credibility the party had"
Are you dreaming? The D party never had any antiwar credibility. Stop voting for parties. Vote for people who have credibility. If you can find any.
If by true anti-war credibility you meant that the Democrats never had it, then you are correct. When I said whatever anti-war credibility the party had, I was talking about credibility relative to the average voter voting Democrat. Today's vote should show enough of the voters who voted Democrat in the past that this party is nowhere close to anti-war. To be honest with you, I am ready to vote for truly credible progressives but the question remains how many of the Democratic voters are ready to do the same without fear? I am not the one who needs to be preached at. It is the voters in the real world still unaware of this bad vote who need to be informed.
65 only. Remember that. And go back to the history of vietnam from 1961 while JFK was bombing and creating concentration camps....up until...what was it 1975???
stop relying on the ballot box to stop this madness. ...and third party is even more NUTS.
you stop the war machine by a general strike....one...that fails...and then do it again...
shut down the machine.
you attack out of control gov'ts....NOT by relying on their common sense....but by relying on people power.....
stop typing and start organizing...bottom up....
A general strike in the US is impossible, in part because the vast majority of the labor force is made up of non-union members who cannot imagine how one goes about going on strike, the logistics involved in supporting a strike. There has been no successful strike in the US since the suburbanization of the citizenry was accomplished.
Labor supports the Democrats. Who is it going to support? Labor knows that there are only two parties in this country that win elections, so who is it going to support? For my part, I'm voting for anyone who is not D or R in the next election. It's like recycling. I know it doesn't do much good, but makes me feel better.
We'll see. The future hasn't happened yet. A mass movement hasn't happened recently, but it could. The antiwar movement in the 60's definitely had an effect.
General strikes are useless. We can shut down the machine from the comfort of our own homes by doing 3 simple, non-violent things:
1- stop paying taxes; 2- withdraw ALL of our savings from the American banking system; 3- consume only the bare minimum to survive.
Repeat steps 1 to 3 until all wars stop, universal health care is passed and minimum wage is increased to a survivable level.
Ardeth 1:37 --- Very correct and we consume less when we plant, urban gardens are one of the best movements in the USA.
Won't happen. The most active and vociferous group in the country is the neocon tea party types in the thrall of Fox News and right wing radio. They believe we are at war for our very existence, Obama is a weakling socialist if not communist, and cap and trade and health care reform are Commie plots. (Even as their jobs go off to China and their health insurance becomes too expensive.)
Your comments are only true of those who voted for the 189 Dems. Those who voted for the other 60 made the right choice. Wouldn't you say?
Just because a blind pig finds an occasional acorn is no reason to laud the blindness.
That may be the least appropriate analogy I've ever heard. Kucinich and the others who stood up to the ignorance and corruption ... were just lucky?
One vote for the right cause does not a competent legislator make.
doubledee and naturally,
Both of you have more in common. Please unite.
Do you see animosity here? I do not, only a difference in our opinions of legislators who sometimes, and certainly not often enough, make the right decision.
You might be right. My apologies.
"Republicans warned that a precipitous withdrawal would be a serious mistake."
That's also what three out of four Democrats said, by the way.
That's also what they told us about the Vietnam War—for ten long years. Back then, Nixon called it "peace with honor." We couldn't just withdraw, we had to have that "honor."
It's the same bullshit, just different terms.
And, hey, how did that precipitous withdrawal from Vietnam in 1975 work out for us? Was it a "serious mistake?" Has Vietnam ever attacked the U.S.? Where's the mistake?
Why bother congress with such matters in a mailtary dictictatorship and why bother the public when there is so much tabloid tittle tattle to get on with.
We withness a screwed up nation in demise.
"ILL-TIMED AND UNREALISTIC" Let this excuse made by anti-war Democrats to explain their vote against the resolution be chiseled on the tombstone of every man, woman and child killed as this disastrous "war" continues.
Of course it's "ill-timed": with an election coming up for God's sake how unrealistic it would be to think we wouldn't be creamed by the voters when the Repubs waved their banners of "soft on terrorism" in those elections. Gotta get re-elected, you know, and then we can find a better timed and realistic time to end this travesty. Say you want me to hold the football for you ONCE AGAIN? Okay, just this one more time. Congress and the American voters are the all-time Charlie Brown losers.
That's wrong. Two-thirds of Americans want to bring the troops home now. It's only the bought-and-paid-for congress that claims it's unrealistic.
But then, it may be unrealistic because war-hawk Obama could come to your state to campaign against you (as he did against Joe Lieberman's anti-war opponent Ned Lamont).
Well said and right on the mark. It could be called the boogeyman factor. When i was growing up it was the commie threat. The new moniker for those who "aren't with us" is terrorist. Nice versatile term that can be used domestically as well as anywhere else in the world. And without a general uprising of we the people, and the shutting down of American cities, i don't see this changing anytime soon.
The bankruptcy and collapse of the USA cannot come quickly enough to get those stupid people out of their hegemonic delusion.
War is not healthy for children and other living things