House Democrat calls for immediate troop withdrawal

Disgusting that the republicans are making charges like this...

Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind

"He is conflicted between his ideals as a Marine and as an American and the anti-war crowd that dominates his party," said Buyer, an Army reservist. "He has to play against his principles, and it must eat him inside."

 

If I were an Iraqi citizen, I would be very motivated to keep my head low and wait for things to settle down, say 10-15 years, especially since the US appears not to be in any hurry to leave.

If I as an Iraqi citizen knew that the US would be gone in two years, I would be very motivated to make sure that the country got its act together asap, because if we did not the civil war that would follow would likely end badly, with many people dead and a new improved Saddam v. 2.0.

 

I don't know about that. The main impediment to stability right now is the insurgency. That is happening now, and will continue if the US leaves. It seems the necessity to support a resolution is the same in both cases. Honestly I am not opposed to setting benchmarks for our departure - but that is more to resolve our status as opposed to a feeling that a sense of urgency will be created by our imminent departure. But I think I have a different picture of the situation in Iraq than some of you do. To me it looks like there are a lot of positive signs: the insurgency is breaking from the AQ style foreign fighters, there are indications at least that the indigineous insurgents are considering joining the political process, religious and nationalist figures both are encouraging joining that process, the infrastructure is getting built back up and oil production will be increasing ten fold within the next year or so bringing with it the requisite revenue to generate more social spending. There are encouraging signs that while the Shiites are religiously close to Iran, they have a greater nationalist cause that conflicts with becoming Irans lackeys. More and more Iraqis are both taking part in the process and signing up to help bring stability to Iraq by joining up with police and army units. I think maybe our real focus should be on that though and while we're doing it I don't know if that's the number 1 priority like it should be.

 

Developing news...

IRAQ PULLOUT VOTE TONIGHT

Flash: Murtha will be only Democrat to speak to resolution, sources say...

House Republican leaders tell Democrats they will bring pullout vote written by GOP to the floor, trying to get Democrats on record as being 'cut and run,'

Democrats have yet to see resolution;

One hour of debate on rule, One hour of debate on actual resolution, and vote...

Vote expected to draw roughly 100-200 of the houses 435 congressmembers...

http://www.rawstory.com/

 

looks like the folks on the gorund in eye-rack don't see eye-2-eye w/ murtha:

http://pajamasmedia.com/newsml/html/2005/11/18/6436806_US_Commander_Cou.shtml

--
A day after [Mutha's] comments, a U.S. field commander in Iraq countered the position of the usually pro-military congressman.

"Here on the ground, our job is not done," said Col. James Brown, commander of the 56th Brigade Combat Team, when asked about Murtha's comments during a weekly briefing that American field commanders routinely give to Pentagon reporters.

Speaking from a U.S. logistics base at Balad, north of Baghdad, two days before his scheduled return to Texas, Brown said: "We have to finish the job that we began here. It's important for the security of this nation."

 

It would be a shame to politicize this decision that is so important.

 

First I'm not for an immediate withdrawal for Iraq we started this mess, we should not have invaded but now that we did, I think we have the responsibility to help these people.

I do think we could probably get out if we wanted by allowing other countries to take the lead but we would never agree to that because then we not reap the rewards for REAL reason we invaded the country in the first place, OIL.

People need to ask yourselves, "Would you be happy if Turkey (a US ally and member of NATO) came in and took control of Iraq and we got out 100%, no bases, no contracts, nothing but out,and Turkey managed to stabilize the country form a parlimantary governmen, would you be happy?"

All the supposed reasons for our involvement would have been met. A democratic government, no Saddam, on WMD's (not that there were any), all these meet. Would you be happy?

If you would not be, then you need to think about why we are really there.

 

Two politicized wrongs don't make a right?

 

If I was a project manager, or a manager, requesting funds from upper management, or clients, or my boss. If I told them the following:

1. My intention is noble, and I will try my 110% solely for the purpose of serving you and your interest only.
2. I don't have definite objectives/deliverables for this particular project.
3. I don't have a time line to accomplish this project, because if I set a date, it's undermining our advantage against competitors, and limiting our ability to fully utilize all our resources to serve you best.
4. I don't have an estimation for how much it could cost, not even a ball park guess, but I demand a blank check. Of course, one thing I would like to promise, that is that because of my noble intention, I will make sure that I spend the money as I see as necessary. So, just trust my judgement.
5. I don't know how much resource exactly I would need, but I do demand control over all of your resources, and I will pull them from other projects whenever I think it's necessary. Because this project is the biggest one for you, I can assure you.
6. I would like reiterate that all I am going to do is to serve your interest only, based on my intention, dignity, and faith.

Now, what do you guys think? Will I get the project, or I will be kicked out by security guard, and receive a court order to forbid me to be anywhere near the word "project"? But, that's based on the premise that I was a project manager. However, if I was the president of United States of America, I would be just fine.

 

You or I may not agree with Murtha, but you can't deny that his plea for immediate pullout was heartfelt and sincere. And he was offering a alternative to “stay the course.” After the republicans lambasted him for suggesting such an idea, they now want to force a vote that they know won't pass to embarrass him and other democrats who might feel that way.

So who's politicizing the decision?

 

Damn, hold on boys. I didn't place blame on any particular party. What I said was this is so important its a shame if more emphasis went to political football than making the right decision.

 

Too bad he doesn't define the mission, its goals, and its benchmarks for success. He makes the claim that we aren't finished, but the problem that many of us have with all of this is that we don't have the foggiest notion what it is going to take for us to bring our boys home.

 

I would be disappointed if the contracts etc went to the freakin French, Germans, Chinese, or Russians since those bastards certainly didn't lift a finger to help the Iraqis. But I would certainly be happy if Iraq emerged a stable and democratic state, absolutely. That would go far and above over concerns over contracts, bases etc.

 

<Yawn>

 

It appears that the Republican leadership is attempting to do just that, or should I say do more of it. If I were the Democratic Leadership, I would tell them to take their "resolution," and go to hell.

It's a pity that the Republican Party has treated this entire war, both before and after it began, as a political power play. What Murtha said, as anyone who has made the least attempt to examine his record would see, was from the heart. It is not an attempt to "politicize" the issue, not in the way being crowed about by Bush, Cheney, Hastert and the rest of the little men crying out their lies. If anything, it is an attempt by him to put some sanity into an insane Republican foreign policy, one that has been a ****-up from the get-go, regarding Iraq.

I think the language being used by Bush, Cheney, Hastert and the rest during the last few days is a slap in the face to the country, not just to patriotic Democrats who are trying to find a strategy to deal with this mess, something the Bush Administration has never been capable of doing. It is despicable. If I were someone like Murtha, and that language was used to my face, I would slap the b*stard that said it, hard. Cheney, the little cowardly weasel, wouldn't have the balls to take on an old veteran like Murtha to his face. He isn't worthy of shining his shoes. Cheney deserves a damned good ass kicking. How I wish he would get one. The best we will be able to do is deliver a political one, in the '06 elections.


How do you feel about the language being used against Murtha, Hayes? I'm curious.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

How about either when the insurgency is being fought adequately by the Iraqi army or it has ended all together.

We're already seeing Sunni groups beginning to join the political process. Why be so bleak....?

 

I really hope this passes, insh'allah I hope this passes.

 

Boy

Forget about Alito getting a free pass.


House GOP Seeks Quick Veto of Iraq Pullout By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - House Republicans maneuvered for swift rejection Friday of any notion of immediately pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, sparking a nasty, sometimes personal debate over the war and a Democratic lawmaker's own call for withdrawal.

Furious Democrats accused the GOP of orchestrating a political stunt, leaving little time for debate and changing the meaning of a withdrawal resolution offered by Democratic Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania.

For those reasons, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sent word to rank-and-file Democrats to vote — with the Republicans — against immediate withdrawal of American troops.

Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said of the nonbinding resolution, "We want to make sure that we support our troops that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. We will not retreat."

Democrats went to the floor to denounce the vote, being staged before Congress left Washington for a two week break. And they gave Murtha a standing ovation as he entered the chamber Friday during the Iraq debate and took his customary corner seat.

"This is a personal attack on one of the best members, one of the most respected members of this House and it is outrageous," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, responded: "This is not a stunt. This is not an attack on an individual. This is a legitimate question."

GOP leaders decided to act little more than 24 hours after Murtha, a hawkish Democrat with close ties to the military, said the time had come to pull out the troops.

By forcing the issue to a vote, Republicans tried to place many Democrats in a politically unappealing position — whether to side with Murtha and expose themselves to criticism, or oppose him and risk angering the voters that polls show want an end to the conflict.

But Democrats claimed the effort had backfired because their party members planned to vote against withdrawal — and the GOP version of Murtha's resolution.

Murtha offered a resolution that would force the president to withdraw the nearly 160,000 troops in Iraq "at the earliest practicable date." It would establish a quick-reaction force and a nearby presence of Marines in the region. It also said the U.S. must pursue stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

But House Republicans planned to put to a vote — and reject — their own symbolic alternative resolution that simply said: "It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately."

With stinging rhetoric, Democrats criticized the GOP alternative. They said House Republican leaders killed Murtha's thoughtful approach.

The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.

"He asked me to send Congress a message — stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message — that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.

Democrats booed and shouted her down — causing the House to come to a standstill.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/congress...l_jlCSs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

 

If the Democrats had any sense, they would abstain from the vote, unanimously. Murtha as well. This is a disgusting stunt. It's worse than disgusting. Democrats should stand together and say, "The time to play politics with the security of our nation is over. The Republican Party is doing this as a meaningless, partisan attack. The nation, and our fighting men and women deserve better. We choose to ignore this sick and twisted political ploy. The American people need a real discussion about what to do with the mess the Bush Administration has created."

And then walk out. All of them.
Hopefully, it would be put far more eloquently than I could ever hope to manage. I'm sickened by the actions of the Republican leadership, from the President on down. Time to quit playing their game and get real. The politics of fear and slander, the way the Republicans who stole the Party from the Republicans I've known for decades have been operating for so long, needs to come to an end. It's past time to fight back. The American people deserve no less.



Keep D&D Civil.