Reply With QuoteIt appears that your elected democratic officials are posturing for the 08' election.
http://cbs2.com/topstories/topstorie...193181553.html
Iraq has achieved only spotty military and political progress toward a democratic society, the Bush administration conceded Thursday in an unenthusiastic assessment that war critics quickly seized on as the House voted to withdraw U.S. troops by spring.
The measure passed 223-201 in the Democratic-controlled House despite a veto threat from President Bush, who has ruled out any change in war policy before September.
"The security situation in Iraq remains complex and extremely challenging," the administration report concluded. The economic picture is uneven, it added, and the government has not yet enacted vital political reconciliation legislation.
The unsatisfactory grades include failure to pass laws to share oil revenue, to reduce sectarian violence and to purge militia members from the police, reports CBS News chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod.
As many as 80 suicide bombers per month cross into the country from Syria, said the interim assessment, which is to be followed by a fuller accounting in September from Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in the region.
Results in Iraq are judged "less than satisfactory" in part because Iraqi troops are not even-handed, tending to split along sectarian lines, reports CBS News correspondent Allen Pizzey from Baghdad.
Talk of U.S. troops pulling out quickly strikes fear in the hearts of Iraqi politicians, Pizzey adds.
"I think the result is damaging the reputation of the United States world-wide," said Tariq al-Hashemi, Iraq's vice president. "At the same time creating a possibility that my country might slide into civil war or to a security chaos."
A resolute President Bush pushed aside the mixed progress report on Iraq, declaring he will not yield to mounting pressure to leave, adds Axelrod.
"I believe we can succeed in Iraq, and I know we must," Bush said at a White House news conference at which he stressed the interim nature of the report.
Describing a document produced by his administration at Congress' insistence, he said there was satisfactory progress by the Iraqi government toward meeting eight of 18 so-called benchmarks, unsatisfactory progress on eight more and mixed results on the others.
To his critics including an increasing number of Republicans he said bluntly, "I don't think Congress ought to be running the war. I think they ought to be funding the troops."
Democrats saw it differently.
A few hours after Bush's remarks, Democratic leaders engineered passage of legislation requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops to begin within 120 days, and to be completed by April 1, 2008. The measure envisions a limited residual force to train Iraqis, protect U.S. assets and fight al Qaeda and other terrorists.
The vote generally followed party lines: 219 Democrats and four Republicans in favor, and 191 Republicans and 10 Democrats opposed.
"The report makes clear that not even the White House can conclude there has been significant progress," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
To Bush and others who seek more time for the administration's policy to work, she said, "We have already waited too long."
Republicans sided with Bush at least for now. The bill "undermines Gen. Petraeus, undermines the mission he has to make America and Iraq safe," said the House GOP leader, Rep. John Boehner of Ohio. "What we have here is not leadership, it's negligence."
The 25-page administration report was issued in the fifth year of a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,600 U.S. troops and is costing U.S. taxpayers an estimated $10 billion a month.
Bush announced last winter he was ordering thousands of additional troops to the war zone, but the full complement has only arrived in recent weeks. "The full surge in this respect has only just begun," the report said.
It warned of "tough fighting" during the summer as U.S. and Iraqi forces "seek to seize the initiative from early gains and shape conditions of longer-term stabilization."
The president sampled the report at his nationally televised session with reporters.
"Iraqis have provided the three brigades they promised for operations in and around Baghdad. And the Iraqi government is spending nearly $7.3 billion from its own funds this year to train, equip and modernize its forces," he said.
But in other areas, he added, they "have much more work to do. For example, they've not done enough to prepare for local elections or pass a law to share oil revenues."
The report was blunt at points and more opaque at others.
While Iraq has begun to show progress in providing services, "citizens nationwide complain about government corruption and the lack of essential services, such as electricity, fuel supply, sewer, water, health and sanitation."
At another point, it added, "The prerequisites for a successful militia disarmament program are not present."
In addition to citing a Syrian connection for terrorists, it also said Iran has continued to foster instability in Iraq.
It cited measured progress on the economic front. "Unemployment has eased slightly and inflation is currently abating," the report said. It omitted mention of a June 1 Pentagon report estimating an annual inflation rate at 33 percent and the Iraqi government estimate of joblessness at 17 percent.
In an evident jab at critics of Bush's war policies, the report also said progress toward political reconciliation was hampered by "increasing concern among Iraqi political leaders that the United States may not have a long term-commitment to Iraq."
Despite rising pressure from Republicans in Congress for a change in course, Bush was adamant.
"When we start drawing down our forces in Iraq, it will (be) because our military commanders say the conditions on the ground are right, not because pollsters say it'll be good politics," he said.
Before Thursday's House vote, GOP aides said they hoped to suffer only a few party defections, but the administration faced a more volatile situation in the Senate. There, three Republicans have already said they intend to vote for a separate withdrawal measure, and several others have signed on as supporters of a bipartisan bill to implement a series of changes recommended last winter by the Iraqi Study Group.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., who announced his intention to seek a change in policy last week, issued a statement that said the administration's most recent assessment "confirms my worst fears that while the Iraqi government is making some progress on some benchmarks, it's not moving fast enough to make meaningful or lasting progress."
Even so, it appears the president's allies have the support to block a final Senate vote in a showdown expected next week.
If the report changed any minds in Congress, it was not immediately apparent.
"It is time for the president to listen to the American people and do what is necessary to protect this nation. That means admitting his Iraq policy has failed, working with the Democrats and Republicans in Congress on crafting a new way forward in Iraq and refocusing our collective efforts on defeating al Qaeda," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
But Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said Congress has already decided it will be September before the administration's strategy can be evaluated properly. "Certainly the young soldiers and Marines risking their lives today on the streets of Baghdad and Ramadi would agree and they deserve our patience."
It appears that your elected democratic officials are posturing for the 08' election.
Apparently so are Republicans
This cracks me up since we just dropped the last troops for the surge a couple weeks ago.
Yep, more pointless, do nothing posturing to bolster the enemy (well I guess that makes it not entirely pointless) since the Democrats want us to loose this war.
Yep, more pointless, do nothing posturing to bolster the enemy (well I guess that makes it not entirely pointless) since the Democrats want us to loose this war.
honestly, did you think this was a war we could win at any point during the Iraq conflict?
this is loosely similar to "peace in our time"...if we stop fighting the war will end.
The speeches in the hallowed halls of the house were impassioned BS that demonstrate Hitler's theory regarding a legislature.
One thing is certain, this issue must be dealt with prior to the '08 presidential campaign's serious season. We can't have the perspective presidents doing anything other than promising yet another chicken in every pot.
So, Nancy was scared of Cindy and took action. I'm impressed with how concerned she is with her career. Like it or not, crazy is driving the democratic agenda train in DC.
Whenever the war gets debated its always the same story. The republicans war mongers stuffing haliburton with blood moiney and the democrats are spineless cowards. Everyone wants to point fingers so they can prove they are right and belong to the correct politcal party. We forget that we're all on the same team here. The majority of Republican and Democrats don't like war. Most sane people don't.
So, instead of pointing fingers, someone in Washington needs to have the courage to put politics aside and bring everyone together to come up with a solution to move the situation in Iraq forward. That is, when we stop fighting there it won't be a haven to promote terrorism but rather an example to the rest of the middle east of what democray has to offer.
Im not convinced the path we're on is making satisfactory progress and I don't think waiting until September will change that. On the other hand, pulling out now or in the spring will turn Iraq into Afganistan after the Russians left in the 80s, a haven for terrorism/anti-Americanism. So what do we do? I don't have all the answers, but unless we get a true LEADER to bring all the minds to the table with one goal in mind, we will continue to see this blame game continue. And, yes don't be fooled it is a game. I say bring back Colin Powell.
Whenever the war gets debated its always the same story. The republicans war mongers stuffing haliburton with blood moiney and the democrats are spineless cowards. Everyone wants to point fingers so they can prove they are right and belong to the correct politcal party. We forget that we're all on the same team here. The majority of Republican and Democrats don't like war. Most sane people don't.
So, instead of pointing fingers, someone in Washington needs to have the courage to put politics aside and bring everyone together to come up with a solution to move the situation in Iraq forward. That is, when we stop fighting there it won't be a haven to promote terrorism but rather an example to the rest of the middle east of what democray has to offer.
Im not convinced the path we're on is making satisfactory progress and I don't think waiting until September will change that. On the other hand, pulling out now or in the spring will turn Iraq into Afganistan after the Russians left in the 80s, a haven for terrorism/anti-Americanism. So what do we do? I don't have all the answers, but unless we get a true LEADER to bring all the minds to the table with one goal in mind, we will continue to see this blame game continue. And, yes don't be fooled it is a game. I say bring back Colin Powell.
Good post and right on the money.
"someone in Washington needs to have the courage to put politics aside and bring everyone together...." - It will be easier to win the war outright in the next week than find that person.
Yep, more pointless, do nothing posturing to bolster the enemy (well I guess that makes it not entirely pointless) since the Democrats want us to loose this war.
The majority of the American people want this war over. More Reps, on a daily basis, are calling for an end.
since the Democrats want us to loose this war. Yet another well thought out brilliant comment from Smoken Sorcerer. Keep making ignorant statements such as this and your Heavyweight title will be lost.
Come on man, you have to be brighter than this. Or maybe you aren't
honestly, did you think this was a war we could win at any point during the Iraq conflict?
Good post
Whenever the war gets debated its always the same story. The republicans war mongers stuffing haliburton with blood moiney and the democrats are spineless cowards. Everyone wants to point fingers so they can prove they are right and belong to the correct politcal party. We forget that we're all on the same team here. The majority of Republican and Democrats don't like war. Most sane people don't.
So, instead of pointing fingers, someone in Washington needs to have the courage to put politics aside and bring everyone together to come up with a solution to move the situation in Iraq forward. That is, when we stop fighting there it won't be a haven to promote terrorism but rather an example to the rest of the middle east of what democray has to offer.
Im not convinced the path we're on is making satisfactory progress and I don't think waiting until September will change that. On the other hand, pulling out now or in the spring will turn Iraq into Afganistan after the Russians left in the 80s, a haven for terrorism/anti-Americanism. So what do we do? I don't have all the answers, but unless we get a true LEADER to bring all the minds to the table with one goal in mind, we will continue to see this blame game continue. And, yes don't be fooled it is a game. I say bring back Colin Powell.
Also a good post!
For one our guys are fighting a dam PC war. If we took the Bush compassion handcuffs off and didn’t have a news camera up their Azz, Plus our own Presidentand Government accusing/prosecuting them of War crimes
Posting Permissions
