-Caveat Lector-
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: March 8, 2007 4:47:32 PM PST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Democratic Congress Says NO to Commander in Chief --
Battle of Wills Begins
White House Hangs Veto Over Pullout Plan
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
Thursday, March 8, 2007
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/03/08/
national/w151502S49.DTL&type=politics
(03-08) 16:19 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --
House Democratic leaders vowed Thursday to pass legislation setting
a deadline of Sept. 1, 2008, for the withdrawal of U.S. combat
troops from Iraq, a challenge to President Bush's war policy that
drew a blunt veto threat in return.
"It would unnecessarily handcuff our generals on the ground, and
it's safe to say it's a nonstarter for the president," said White
House spokesman Dan Bartlett.
Little more than two months after Democrats took control of the
House and Senate, Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said the bill
would set "dates certain for the first time in the Congress for the
redeployment of our troops out of Iraq."
Officials said the deadline would be accelerated — possibly to the
end of 2007 — if the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-
Maliki failed to meet commitments for taking over security
operations, distributing oil revenue and opening his nation's
constitution to amendments.
Pelosi said Democrats would add their war-related provisions to the
administration's request for nearly $100 billion to pay for the
fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The plan is to bring the bill to a vote by the end of the month,
making it the first major test of the Democrats' power since they
rode a wave of anti-war voter sentiment to midterm election
victories last fall.
Across the Capitol, Senate Democrats readied a less sweeping
challenge to the commander in chief.
Their version would set a target date of March 31, 2008, for the
withdrawal of combat troops — but no deadline. The measure says
U.S. forces could stay beyond that date only to protect U.S.
personnel, train and equip Iraqi forces and carry out
counterterrorism operations. "We can't stay in Iraq forever," said
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Reid has considerably less leeway than Pelosi, since Senate rules
give Republicans greater power than their counterparts have in the
House.
Presidential politics also figure in his calculations. Illinois
Sen. Barack Obama, a candidate for the White House, told reporters
the measure includes some of the key provisions of a bill he
introduced earlier this year setting a March 31, 2008, target for
withdrawal. "It expresses the central insight that we can't have
our troops policing a civil war," he said.
Of the 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, roughly 60,000 are combat
forces and the rest are support troops.
Bartlett attacked the House measure in comments to reporters aboard
Air Force One as Bush flew to South America. "Obviously, the
administration would vehemently oppose and ultimately veto any
legislation that looked like what was described today," he said.
House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio led the GOP
counterattack.
"General (David) Petraeus should be the one making the decisions on
what happens on the ground in Iraq, not Nancy Pelosi or John
Murtha," Boehner said, referring to the Pennsylvania Democrat who
has been heavily involved in crafting legislation designed to end
U.S. participation in the war.
Pelosi and other Democratic leaders have struggled in recent days
to devise an approach on the war that would satisfy liberals
reluctant to vote for continued funding without driving away more
moderate Democrats unwilling to be seen as tying the hands of
military commanders.
Democratic aides said their greatest concern was persuading
liberals to come aboard, and they were hoping anti-war
organizations would come out in favor of the House measure.
Rep. Maxine Waters of California said she told Pelosi she intended
to vote no, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas said she "would
have a very difficult time" supporting it.
Within the House, the Progressive Caucus supports a plan to limit
the use of war funds for withdrawing troops, training Iraqis and
other non-combat missions. It is doomed to failure, but Democratic
leaders have been discussing whether to allow a vote on it if in
return, liberals would then swing behind their bill.
At the same time, Rep. Dennis Cardoza of California said a meeting
of moderate and conservative Democrats produced strong expressions
of support. "I think that this legislation gives the generals
adequate flexibility to do what they need to do on the ground," he
said. "At the same time it gives a certain finality that is being
demanded by the American people."
Officials said a Wednesday night meeting of first-term Democrats
produced little opposition. "For me it supports the troops,
supports the veterans and holds the president accountable," said
Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado.
Democrats can afford only 15 defections and still be assured of
passing their legislation in the House. Few Republicans are
expected to vote in favor.
Seeking support, the leadership added $1.2 billion to Bush's
request for military operations in Afghanistan and $3.5 billion for
veterans' health care and medical programs at facilities such as
the recently criticized Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.
Domestic spending would rise $12 billion over the administration's
request — and there apparently were no plans to offset the spending
to prevent increases in the deficit.
Searching for votes elsewhere, Pelosi signaled she was considering
adding a House-passed minimum wage increase to the military
spending bill, along with $1.3 billion in tax cuts that cleared
earlier in the year.
A provision to require Bush to get authorization from Congress to
take major military action against Iraq ran into turbulence from
lawmakers concerned about the implications for ISRAEL.
As described by Democrats, the legislation would require Bush to
certify by July 1 and again by Oct. 1 whether the Iraqi government
was making progress toward providing for the country's security,
allocating its oil revenues and creating a fair system for amending
its constitution.
If Bush certified the Iraqis were meeting those benchmarks, U.S.
combat troops would have to begin withdrawing by March 1, 2008, and
complete the redeployment by Sept. 1.
Otherwise, the deadlines would move up.
If Bush cannot make either certification, the law requires a six-
month withdrawal to begin immediately.
The legislation also requires the Pentagon to adhere to its
existing standards for equipping and training U.S. troops sent
overseas and for providing time at home between tours of combat.
Bush would have authority to waive these standards, though, meaning
they could not be used to prevent the buildup of troops in Baghdad
that the president ordered in January.
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's
free from AOL at AOL.com.
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
