Congressional leaders are pondering their next move after President Bush’s recent veto of an Iraq war spending bill that included timetables for U.S. troop withdrawal. It’s shaping up to be a political war of attrition.
Bush is insisting on a bill with no strings attached. He’s not likely to get it. Although Democratic leaders seem ready to drop the withdrawal timelines, they’re now proposing a bill with firm benchmarks of progress for the Iraqi government on goals such as oil distribution and militia disarmament. Iraqi failure to meet benchmarks might be tied to U.S. troop withdrawal.
Several key Republicans, such as House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also are talking about benchmarks as a compromise position they could support.
This approach might be harder for the Bush administration to oppose, since it has proposed any number of benchmarks for the Iraqi government, which has largely ignored them.
Meanwhile, U.S. generals said this week to expect higher U.S. casualties in coming months. That growing sacrifice will bolster Congress’ demands to see clear progress in Iraq, within months.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- HLP on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
57 Comments
Leave out the extras and leave in the benchmarks tied to troop redeployment is sound. Though I have not found much of what is called “pork” to be unwarned this is a serious issue and deserves as clean of bill as possible. The only problem with putting in a reporting clause is that Bush&Co. have failed on numerous occasions to give the reports required in the past. Or when giving a report, diluted it and sugar coated it till it bares no resemblance to the ground assessments they get from commanders in the field.
It’s really very simple. Cut-off all funding and be done with it.
Bring the troops home.
Allowing soldiers to be killed for the sake of Bush’s ego is a bit much.
“That growing sacrifice will bolster Congress’ demands to see clear progress in Iraq, within months.”
“Growing” sacrifice? “Clear progress in Iraq, within months?” Have I been asleep for four years?
Its too bad that more of our troops have to die so the president can try to buy time politically. When September rolls around, and our brave troops are sacrificing still for Bush’s ‘legacy,’ and the congressional Republicans see the writing on the wall and start running away from Bush in earnest, I wonder how our fanatical friends on the right will react. Will their love of the Republican Party trump their mindless devotion to their Dear Leader? Or vice-versa? Perhaps their heads will collectively explode when they think of the profound damage that their leaders, fed by their fanaticism, have done. But knowing the 28-percenters and the way their feeble minds work, probably not.
ddub claims to be a conservative republican, but only does so in the hidden sanctity of his blog. He conveniently displays his true Liberal ideology on every piece he writes outside of his blog.
He wouldn’t want his newly acquired friends on the Wichita Voice to leave.
Wait, the fisters already used him and abandoned his blog.
What’s the matter Republican, get up on the wrong side of bed? Or are you cranky because you see where your party is going? You’re out of sync with 72% of Americans. Why do you hate America?
Car bomb kills 16 people in IraqBy RAVI NESSMANAssociated Press Writer
http://kansas.com/519/story/63907.html
Buried near the bottom of the article:
“…..Also Monday, the military announced a U.S. soldier was killed by small-arms fire in western Baghdad the day before, bringing to nine the number of American personnel slain Sunday….”
“O God, our Heavenly Father, we remember before Thee this day,those who laid down their lives in the service of their country.
We remember their courage and devotion to the Sovereign and the country they served.
We pray that their labours be not in vain but that their spirit may live on in us and the generations to come.
We pray that liberty, truth and love may spread over all the world ’til war shall cease to be.We remember our brethren who are in sickness or distress.
We remember the widows and other dependants.
We dedicate ourselves to Thy service in the name of those whose memory we revere.
We ask this in the name of our Lord.” “Amen”
The troops are waiting for the money and by keeping it from them, we are hurting their morale. They are sitting over there thinkins “well they sent us into this mess and now they don’t want to support us”. The Democrats and Bush need to quit playing games with the lives of our troops and send the damn money to them. Bush needs to realize that, as badly was he wishes to be a king or dictator, he is in the wrong country for that. He has to deal with Congress and he is going to have to accept some things he might not like.
Repube hates America because it has turned its collective back on his way of thinking.
Getting real, true info out of this administration could be next to impossible. Don’t hold your breath.
“…House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also are talking about benchmarks as a compromise position they could support.”
When one’s argument is weak, one resorts to what is called a Lie of Omission. The above statement would have one believe that John Boner sides with the radical Libs, but that is not the case.The wichita eagle = liars
Isnt Dubya the Wichita Voice guy?
Republican. Wrong again. Yawn.
Its seems that republicans are becoming more defensive by the day. I believe the Eagle said that Mr Boehner COULD support benchmarks. Does everything have to be taken to the extreme? I thought you guys were conservative? Nothing that the administration has done could be classified as conservative. Now you can’t mention the right without somebody attacking you. The liberals don’t seem nearly as “radical” as the conservatives at this point.
A clean bill YES; a stripped bill NO:
Include full restoration of ALL National Guard equipment; training costs; Walter Reed etc; VA; and ALL other currently externalized costs of Bush’s war.
Do not include honeybees; bridges to nowhere; etc.
Hold firm on deadlines for progress by the Masliki government.
If the Republicans want another handout without any kind of performance conditions – LET THEM HOLD A BAKE SALE!
“The liberals don’t seem nearly as “radical” as the conservatives at this point.”
Who is it that wants to pull out right now, not tomorrow?Who is it who believes 9/11 was an inside job?Who is it who thinks Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened, but did nothing?Who is it who wants a “Living Wage”?Who is it who believes in the phony man-made global warming?
Answer: residents of LibWorld
LEAVE IRAQ NOW.
Are those things “radical” fleet? I don’t believe that 9-11 was an inside job. That’s ridiculous. I don’t believe that Bush knew that 9-11 was going to happen and did nothing. I was actually behind this president after 9-11 as was the entire country. I am sorry that he misspent his political clout on Iraq and cost America its crediblity. I have not heard any liberal politician say that we should pull out today. All Patriot Redeployment plans that I have seen lead us out of Iraq in the next year. I agree that there should be a living wage. But I also believe that the AMT Tax should be abolished. And I am not going to even touch Global Warming. Its like evolution. Either you believe it or you don’t.
It’s looking like there are no lengths that those on the left will not go to in order to lose the war in Iraq just so they can make President Bush look bad and capture the White House come next election.
Who is it who shouts into the wind to hear the sound of his own voice?
That’s right: it’s Cindy.
“It’s looking like there are no lengths that those on the left will not go to in order to lose the war in Iraq just so they can make President Bush look bad and capture the White House come next election.”
OMG! Is that the new republican meme? The newest variation of “stabbed in the back”?
If you cons would actually govern instead of working on your memes, you might have SOME chance of regaining one of the three branches of govmt.
heheheh. On second thought…
Keep working those memes!
Libs do not have to make Prez. Shrub look bad. He does that all by himself. This isn’t Monica Gate. That was a smear campaign. This is a war started on false pretenses. This is a gov’t that cannot control spending. This is an administration that has ruined our credibility on the world stage. Libs have nothing to do with the prez’s low approval rating. He is an idiot, that has been exposed as such. The Lib’s couldn’t do the damage he has done to himself if they tried.
ksfarmgrrl,
Indeed. It’s all they have left, given that all their policies have gone south, their candidate pack looks like the seven dwarves, and their coalition is fragmenting.
Mike,
Indeed. But I still wish we had spent the years from 2000-2006 actually trying, instead of kowtowing to the Empty-Suit-In-Chief.
Here is an interesting Washington Post Op-Ed by Liz Cheney from January. Pro-war apologetics on behalf of her dad the V-P.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/22/AR2007012201103_pf.html
Then click “Read Comments”
Boy, those comments were scathing!! Really though, Dick’s 5th deferment really shouldn’t be the one telling us why we should be/stay at war.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/22/AR2007012201103_pf.html
“We are fighting the war on terrorism with allies across the globe, leaders such as Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan and Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan.”
This struck my funny bone, “across the globe”, because I’m trying to remember what 2 countries are still behind us!! Okay, it’s probably more than 2, I’m being sarcastic. Is it more than 2?
Conservatives really are getting down the in the gutter now by saying every one that disagrees with Bush are the ones that want America to lose the war.
I don’t hate Bush (my Bible teaches me not to hate) but I vehemently disagree with George W. Bush on his policies, both foreign and domestic. I believe GWB has taken America down the wrong path and we are now deep into an unwinnable war. I question Bush’s motive for the Iraq War. Somehow Bush managed to get the Christian Conservatives to drape the Iraq War in the America Flag, Democracy and the true God is on our side. There are many people with blood on their hands and I still see the only reason for the Iraq war was for the control of the oil.
I thought that from the beginning of the war but I still gave Bush the benefit of the doubt. But with every move Bush has made, it has become clearer and clearer that the real reason for the war was the oil.
How arrogant of Consevatives to label me as a hater of America just because I disagree, dislike and distrust George W. Bush.
As for the funding bill, I am all for giving as much funding to the soldiers as they need. And if need be, curtail payments to Halliburton for awhile and funnel those funds to the soldiers.
Here is an idea for victory in Iraq.
1. Set up a system to immediately distribute $50 billion annually to Iraqi citizens. Bypass the Iraqi government. Generate goodwill on the part of the Iraqi people.
2. Build security fences on the east and west sides Iraq’s oil pipeline system at a 50-mile perimeter.
3. Clear out all the Iraqis from this pipeline-protection corridor.
4. Install ground sensors and video surveillance to detect potential intruders.
5. Station 100,000 U.S. troops within the corridor, and post 10 men per mile along the fencelines.
6. Site rapid-response tank and artillary units every 20 miles, and helicopter gunship and A-10/FA-16/18 bases every 50 miles to provide rapid air defense if incursions are detected.
This corridor would extend to Iraq’s port facilities, and include a sea-lane corridor through the Gulf and Strait of Hormuz defended by the world’s most powerful navy.
7. Staff the oil-production facilities only with American engineers and technicians to prevent insider sabotage.
8. Boost oil production to 15 million barrels per day over the next several years (5.4 BBL annually). The U.S. will take ownership of the oil, and distributes to individual Iraqi citizens the proceeds at a price of $30/BL. That’s $162 billion going directly to the Iraqi economy. That’s a lot more money than they have ever seen.
9. The U.S. imposes a 20-year Iraqi debt-repayment moratorium to its international creditors, to allow Iraq’s economy to get on a sound footing.
10. Ship most of this oil to the U.S., thereby providing oil to America at an affordable price (e.g. $40 /bl end cost).
11. Given Iraq’s proven and cheaply produceable reserves of some 112 BBL, this would provide 20 years of production. However, it is estimated that Iraq may very well possess an additional 100-200 undiscovered bbl, so Iraq has a potential 40-60 year production potential, at 5 bbl annually.
12. Use this time window to mount a massive alternative-energy development initiative in the U.S., so that we require less and less imported oil progressively over the next two decades. Iraq’s reserves will last longer, and when we no longer need oil imports at all, Iraq can be given independent ownership of its oil reserves to sell at full profit-receipts to international markets.
13. If Iran tries to foil this scheme by attacking the oil corridor, give them one warning to cease and desist, or receive pinpoint tactical weapons destruction of 25% of Iran’s oil-production facilities. Blockade all of Iran’s ports to prevent oil exportation and refined-fuel importation. (Iran exports petroleum but has to import finished products.) Plus freeze all Iran’s international bank assets. Without oil production Iran has no money to mount any kind of disruptive military operations. It won’t have money to build nuclear weapons plants. Without fuel, it can’t send tanks, trucks or planes into Iraq.
If these actions are insufficient, e.g. if Iran sends ragtag fighters across the border, then beef up the corridor-protection force, and warn Tehran that it’s going to get an H-bomb in four weeks. Drop millions of leaflets and radio and TV broadcasts warning Tehran’s citizens to either make their government stop the incursions, or else evacuate their families from the capital. If the warning doesn’t work, drop the bomb. Also use pinpoint strikes to destroy Iran’s telecommunications systems, and use our massive firepower to take out Iran’s naval and air forces.
Also warn Iran that for every new assault on the Iraqi pipeline from the east, it gets two H-bombs, plus destruction of an additional 25% of its oil-production facilities, and 100% of its electrical generation facilities.
Warn Iraq’s Sunni western and southern troublemakers that they will get the same treatment. They have enough forces to seal their borders. They just need a sufficient incentive.
These people respect power. Right now, we’re trying to do urban counter-insurgency, which isn’t our military’s strong suit. It makes us fight with small arms that the insurgents have.
The terrain is treeless semi-desert and desert. It’s not like Vietnam where the enemy was able to sneak in under heavy jungle and cloud cover. Our UAVs and manned recon planes can detect convoys crossing the border and insurgent camps assembling to assault the oil-transport corridor, and we can take them out before they get even close.
I’m not for war. But if we’re going to do it, we need to maximize our probability of victory.
BUMPER STICKER:
“It will be a great day when the military has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.”
I saw a better one linked to funding for schools, but the above works almost as well. (Thanks for the reminder, Ben!)
Also warn Iran that for every new assault on the Iraqi pipeline from the east, it gets two H-bombs, plus destruction of an additional 25% of its oil-production facilities, and 100% of its electrical generation facilities.Posted by: Mark | May 08, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Nice. Take the war directly to the civilian population. At least Mark is honest in his desire to be pure evil. Murder innocent bystanders for oil.
Mark – That was a very well thought out plan, much more thought out it seems than Bush/Cheney’s plan. But it’s way too aggressive, and I don’t believe we’ll just have Iran to worry about if we go into Iraq and try to take over their oil!!
Tom,
Indeed. “No blood for oil” and all that, although as we all hear endlessly from the Wingnuts, this war was never about oil!
On a slightly different tack, the next time any Wingnut here or elsewhere tries to claim that to leave Iraq would be to do Al Qaeda’s bidding, we don’t have to take their word for it: we can refer to the #2 Al Qaeda guy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who, it turns out, doesn’t like the Democrats’ plan because it would REMOVE American troops from serving as a source of conflict in Iraq.
“Al-Qaeda’s second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri said a US congressional bill calling for a troop withdrawal from Iraq was proof of Washington’s defeat, according to a web video posted on Saturday.
“This bill reflects American failure and frustration,” Zawahiri said. “But this bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap.”
A White House spokesman declined to comment on the video, which comes four days after US President George Bush vetoed a $US124 billion ($150 billion) congressional war-spending measure that would have required a troop pullout from Iraq to begin by October 1.
“We ask Allah that they only get out after losing 200,000 to 300,000 killed, so that we give the blood spillers in Washington and Europe an unforgettable lesson to motivate them to review their entire doctrinal and moral system,” Zawahiri said on the video, posted on websites used by Islamists.”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/us-is-defeated-in-iraq-zawahiri/2007/05/06/1178390118708.html
Wingnuts: not just stupid and wrong about the situation in Iraq and the Middle East, but aggressively stupid and wrong about that and, well, everything in general.
“who, it turns out, doesn’t like the Democrats’ plan because it would REMOVE American troops from serving as a source of conflict in Iraq.”
As I read it, that is not the reason. He jsut wants to kill more americans and teach us to be more like them.”We ask Allah that they only get out after losing 200,000 to 300,000 killed, so that we give the blood spillers in Washington and Europe an unforgettable lesson to motivate them to review their entire doctrinal and moral system,”
Mark,Doesn’t sound too bad, less the nukes. Kinda went a little crazy there brother.
The Democratic Party – A Terrorist Dream Come True.
Mark-waaay to aggressive. And…it’s still their country. And TBT is right, it would not just be the Iranians we would have to worry about
Republican,
Still as stupid as they come, I see. Or would that be “stuck on stupid?”
SOS – Stuck On Stupid gives SOS a whole new meaning.
Yee Ha!!!
Tom, I said warn the Iranian people before taking aggressive action, and give them the chance to avoid death. Did you miss that point?
I said take over Iraq’s oil in the U.S. interest. But also give Iraqis good money for their oil. Ultimately help them receive the entire proceeds. In the meantime, give them generous foreign aid, and let the Iraqi people decide how to use it. For example, at $2000 for every man, woman and child, going up to $6000+ when the oil is fully flowing, do you think the Iraqis are going to find that the insurgents can give them more? What will happen is the insurgents will try to recruit Iraqi boys and men, who will tell their fathers, whose families are benefitting from the American plan, and the Iraqi fathers together their sons will execute the insurgents, in their own interest.
The insurgents can say, “Once we get rid of the Americans, you can have $70/BL, not $30,” but when the Iraqis say, “Give us the money now, like the American plan is doing,” and the insurgents have no money to give, they’ll be eliminated as empty-promise troublemakers.
This of course is … obsession to perform oral gratification acts on op-ed science pieces so that his own personal climax can explode into a fury of self-righteousness.Posted by: Republican | May 08, 2007 at 04:00 AMhttp://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/the_costs_of_ta.html#comment-68801502************************************************
LOL. wtf? Project much?
************************************************The Democratic Party – A Terrorist Dream Come True.Posted by: Republican | May 08, 2007 at 12:35 PM***********************************************
Please spare us any more news of any of what I’m sure are the myriad recurring dreams you have.
Ewwwwwww.
“”It will be a great day when the military has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.”"
Another show of why you people will not make it into the White House anytime soon. We know you have and will refuse to defend this country.
Mark,
The point I didn’t miss is the one where you think dropping hydrogen bombs on civilian populations over the issue of oil is the right and proper action to take.
Your proposal is thoroughly evil.
Every poll shows any Democrat will beat any Republican currently running Fleetwood.
Why is it that Republicans cannot separate patriotism from invading a war that had nothing to do with 9/11?
Democrats and there must be some Republicans in this majority of 70% that disapprove of George Bush’s handling of the Iraq War. Last time I checked, 30% of the American people who continue to support Bush and the Republican party does not make a majority to win anything – not even if they were running for dog catcher.
“Every poll shows any Democrat will beat any Republican currently running Fleetwood.”
For which election?The one 18 months from now?
“Why is it that Republicans cannot separate patriotism from invading a war that had nothing to do with 9/11?”
Because that is all they have.
Republicans = wrap in the flag and spew lies
Republicans = wrap in the flag and spew lies
Posted by: Ben | May 08, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Democrats = wrap the flag in manure, blame america for all the worlds ills, are surrender monkeys and and spew vile.(please note sarcasm)
Painting with a such a broad brush is ridiculous and counterproductive, but then if it was about being producive, it wouldn;t be a blog, huh?
The Democratic Party – A Terrorist Dream Come True.
Posted by: Republican | May 08, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Painting with a such a broad brush is ridiculous and counterproductive, but then if it was about being producive, it wouldn;t be a blog, huh?
Posted by: littlejohn | May 08, 2007 at 02:59 PM
According to news reports today, REPUBLICANS are letting Bush know that they expect to see results by September in Iraq or they may have to reconsider the “stay the course” mentality.
Gosh, are they being treasonous by letting the “enemy” know that they just have to keep up what they’re doing until then? Oh my gosh…are the REPUBLICANS now saying that they want to “cut and run”!?!
Those that want the war to continue should enlist or move to Iraq…anything else is sheer hypocrisy.
Tom, you DID miss my point, which is that warnings will work, if they are perceived to be credible. Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not stupid. He’s playing games right now, because he thinks he can get away with this. But he doesn’t want to rule a decimated country with an Afghanistan-level economy, and Iranians don’t want that either.
We’re killing, and allowing insurgents to kill, civilian populations. That’s already happening.
I said, warn the Iranians to either move their leaders to stop border-crossing IED and other weapons delivery, or face the destruction of their capital. They’ll either comply or evacuate Tehran, if they believe we will use thermonuclear weapons.
They can be reminded what we did in nighttime firebombing Tokyo (100,000 dead in 24 hours Ap 30-May 1, 1945 and in dropping A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.
These instant mass killings were terrible, but they convinced Japan’s leaders, including the holy emperor, to surrender, which then led to economic reconstruction and a long-term mutually beneficial relationship. Had we mounted a conventional invasion, Japan might have lost as many people, and we certainly would have lost tens of thousands of soldiers and marines. Had we alternatively mounted a blockade, millions of Japanese would have suffered starvation. Hundreds of thousands of Japanese, particularly the elderly and young children, would have died from malnutrition and the diseases of debilitated immune systems.
The goal I have proposed isn’t to nuke Iran. The goal is to get Iraq’s oil flowing, and create decent living conditions for Iraqis using oil revenues.
If Iranians respect this, and if their leaders quash the cross-border flow of weapons and insurgents, then we can complete the task. If they instead support the disruption our mission because they want it to fail, they must be convinced that it is in their own interest to end the incursions.
Mark,
I have not missed your point. You wish to commmit mass murder for the sake of cheap gasoline.
You are evil.
Goodbye.
In his Vietnam War story, Tales of a War Far Away, K. Ramsey tells how, “Every night the enemy placed new mines and every day they claimed more vehicles.”
Recently there was a news story about the new generation of “mine-proof” military vehicles.
Is there a correlation between the fact that those “safe” vehicles haven’t been “extensively implemented,” and the fact that Iraqi insurgents are reaping approx. $100 MILLION annually from oil smuggling (the Guardian–Oil Smuggling).
Tom,
I’m not evil. Unless things change, one of my kids is going to be deployed to Iraq in 6 months.
You apparently don’t understand that the world economy, including the U.S., is dependent on other nations’ fossil fuel resources, and we don’t have the capacity to do a quick conversion to alternative energy. Long term yes, short term no. It is highly unfortunate that alternative energy initiatives begun in the late 1970’s were halted when OPEC dropped oil to $10 / barrel, and we responded by increasing our foreign-oil dependence. But, here we are.
With respect to Iran, I’ll say it one more time: if Iran chooses to not disrupt Iraq’s reconstruction, it should suffer no adverse consequences. If its leaders choose to war-monger, what do YOU think should be done?
The Democratic Party – A Terrorist Dream Come True.
Posted by: Republican | May 08, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Painting with a such a broad brush is ridiculous and counterproductive, but then if it was about being producive, it wouldn;t be a blog, huh?
Posted by: littlejohn | May 08, 2007 at 02:59 PM
Posted by: Ben | May 08, 2007 at 03:57 PM
Ben- I still agree with my statement. The BS is no better coming from Republican
No Benchmarks! No Metrics! Just Drive On!
Democrats are not worried about 2008. We could run OJ Simpson and beat the Republicans in 2008!!
Simpson’s hands are cleaner!
I still agree with my statement.Posted by: littlejohn | May 08, 2007 at 09:14 PM
LOL!! Okay, that’s very, very funny. Littlejohn, I hope you appreciate that I’m not laughing *AT* you, just the way that came out.
I’m missing it, I’m just too tired I guess. But I am glad that I could add a levety :)Night all.