Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/fnf2

Pressure growing to plan Iraq exit
Bipartisan group pushes resolution
By Rick Klein, Globe Staff  |  June 16, 2005

WASHINGTON -- House Republican leaders are blocking a measure that would
require the Bush administration to swiftly produce an exit plan for the
war in Iraq, as critics in Congress from both parties step up the pressure
on the administration to identify a way for the United States to extricate
itself from the conflict.

Today, a small, bipartisan group of lawmakers, led by a Republican who
supported the war, plans to introduce a resolution calling for the
withdrawal of US troops from Iraq beginning in October 2006. The effort
follows a bid by Democrats to require the Bush administration to draw up,
within 30 days, an exit plan. The Democrats' bill was swept aside in
committee and is unlikely to reach the House floor for a vote.

But the bipartisan resolution, sponsored by Representative Walter Jones
Jr., a North Carolina Republican, could prove a more nettlesome challenge
for Bush's congressional allies.

With polls indicating that public support for the war has dwindled, more
lawmakers who supported the use of force in Iraq are openly voicing their
concerns about the lack of a clear, publicly stated plan to set limits on
the US presence there. Last week, the House International Relations
Committee voted 32-9 to call on Bush to develop a strategy to leave Iraq.
The White House rejects the idea, believing such a policy would only
encourage the Iraqi insurgency.

The political maneuvers are being made amid continuing violence in Iraq
and the recent controversy over a British government memo that called into
question the Bush administration's motives for going to war. Some
prominent Republicans seem worried that if Republicans vote for the
bipartisan bill in substantial numbers -- even if, in the end, the bill is
defeated -- it would be embarrassing for the administration and would
undermine Bush's authority.

Jones, who once made headlines by pushing to rename french fries ''freedom
fries" to protest French opposition to the war, will offer the resolution
urging Bush to start bringing US forces home in October 2006. By that
date, Jones said, the numbers of trained Iraqi security forces should be
sufficient to keep order and protect their own country.

''The American people are getting to a point here: How much more can we
take?" said Jones, whose resolution has one fellow Republican and two
Democrats as cosponsors.

''We have ousted Saddam Hussein. That's a victory. We've given them an
opportunity to develop a democracy. That is a victory. We're training
Iraqi troops. That will be a victory," Jones said. ''Have we achieved our
goals, and if not, what are those goals?"

Meanwhile, in the Senate, Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, is
signing up cosponsors for a resolution demanding that Bush produce a
timetable for reaching his goals in Iraq -- and for withdrawing troops
thereafter. Feingold quickly received the support of Senator Barbara
Boxer, Democrat of California.

Senator Lincoln D. Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island, said yesterday he
may sign on, too. Chafee, who opposed the war, said the growing demands in
both the House and the Senate for Bush to clarify his goals in Iraq are a
direct response to increasing public concern about the war.

''If the politicians are doing it, it's reflecting public opinion," Chafee
said.

Bush and his top aides have resisted setting a timeline for troop
withdrawal or talking publicly about specific goals. Doing so, they say,
would provide information useful to the insurgency -- an argument the
House GOP leadership has endorsed.

''I never tell my kids when my patience is going to run out, because
they'll usually try it," said Representative Mike Pence, Republican of
Indiana and a staunch Bush ally. ''Tactically, it's very unwise to signal
a timeframe to the enemy, because it essentially gives them a deadline for
how long they have to hang on."

Pence said he doesn't sense frustration among his constituents or his GOP
colleagues with the progress of the war in Iraq. But a Gallup poll
released this week indicated that 60 percent of Americans thought the
United States should bring home some or all of its troops, and only 42
percent said the Iraq invasion was worth it. Two years ago, a substantial
majority of those polled backed the invasion.

Tuesday, against that backdrop, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi,
Democrat of California, sought a vote on a resolution that would give Bush
30 days to set forth specific criteria for troop withdrawal. She wanted to
attach the resolution as an amendment to the defense appropriations bill,
which includes an additional $45 billion for military operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan.

But the House Rules Committee, on a 6-2 vote, stopped Pelosi's request on
procedural grounds, calling it out of order to tie such a policy question
to spending bill.

There is nothing unusual about Republican leaders brushing aside
amendments offered by Democrats. But in this case, said Thomas Mann, a
senior fellow with the Brookings Institution, GOP leaders seemed worried
about the possibility that some party lawmakers might break ranks and vote
for Pelosi's amendment.

''Increasingly, members of both parties are looking for an exit strategy
in Iraq or -- as some prefer to phrase it -- a victory strategy," Mann
said. ''If such a resolution passed, it would be widely seen as a stinging
criticism of the administration."

Representative James P. McGovern, a Worcester Democrat who serves on the
Rules Committee and who voted for Pelosi's amendment, said Republican
leaders are feeling heat from rank-and-file members and their constituents
over the lingering violence in Iraq.

''The Republican leadership is biting their fingernails off over this,"
McGovern said. ''This Congress has been negligent with regard to its duty
on Iraq. We didn't ask the right questions before the war. Now, no one is
being held accountable."

Jones, the representative who will introduce the troop withdrawal bill, is
being joined by a diverse group of lawmakers in what is the first
bipartisan legislation of its kind since the war started. His cosponsors
are Representative Ron E. Paul, a Texas Republican who is perhaps
Congress's leading libertarian, and two leading House liberals:
Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, and Representative
Neil Abercrombie, Democrat of Hawaii. Paul, Kucinich, and Abercrombie all
voted against the war.

As news of the bill spread, Jones was congratulated by a number of House
members in the lobby just outside the House chamber. Shelley Berkley, a
Nevada Democrat who voted to give Bush authorization to invade Iraq, said
members feel misled by the administration's prewar briefings that helped
them conclude Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

''Nobody would have voted for this resolution" if they had known then what
they do now, she said. ''There's a growing recognition that things have
gone terribly wrong in Iraq, and the acknowledgement that the
administration does not have a handle on the future of Iraq, or of
America's role in Iraq."


Susan Milligan of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Rick Klein
can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to