Yet another Republican, Sen. Pete Domenici, breaks ranks.
What's more, he doesn't want to wait until the progress report on the "surge" comes due this fall. He wants to pass legislation now setting a timetable for a gradual withdrawal, to be completed by March 2008 -- essentially, the Senate version of timetables that were stripped out of the most recent war-funding bill.
Sure, he's up for re-election. But that's just a sign of how opposed the public is to the war, when senators need to worry about losing their jobs because of their support for it. Assuming all the Republican defectors back up their statements with votes, Senate Democrats are getting achingly close to having the two-thirds majority they need to ram antiwar measures through.
I've said it before, but it's worth saying again. Because of the way our government is structured, any effort to rein in the president requires large majorities in Congress, particularly the Senate. That's why, if America decides to end the war in Iraq, it will not be a Democratic responsibility: it will be a bipartisan effort that reflects the will of the American people.
Domenici, Iraq, politics, midtopia
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Domenici defects on Iraq
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I wouldn't exactly call it parting ways considering Domenici said........"I do not support an immediate withdrawal from Iraq or a reduction in funding for our troops. But I do support a new strategy that will move our troops out of combat operations and on the path to coming home."
JP5
He supports a measure that would have the bulk of our combat troops home by March 2008, regardless of what's going on in Iraq. It's the same timetable that Bush flatly rejected a month or so ago.
Did you hear al Qaeda's #2...al Zawahiri's latest statements on Iraq?
He urged greater support for the Islamic State of Iraq, an al-Qaeda group in that country.
He also denounced Egypt and Saudi Arabia for supporting the US in the Middle East.
It would be a huge mistake to just give it away to them. And it would have repercussions for many, many administrations to come.
JP5
Did you hear al Qaeda's #2...al Zawahiri's latest statements on Iraq? He urged greater support for the Islamic State of Iraq, an al-Qaeda group in that country.
The biggest falsehood in his entire screed was the conceit that there is even the nascent beginning of an Islamic State of Iraq.
It would be a huge mistake to just give it away to them.
Except that our departure would not "hand" Iraq to Al-Qaeda. The Shiite majority can't stand them. The Kurds can't stand them. Most of the Sunnis can't stand them.
The two biggest lies being perpetrated about Iraq today are AQ's claims that they're establishing an Islamic state, and the administration's deliberate tendency to tag all insurgents with the "Al-Qaeda" label.
Senator Domenici’s voting record on military issues can be found at: Senator Domenici’s Voting Record
Senator Domenici’s history of speeches on the Iraq war can be found at: Senator Domenici’s Record of Speeches
Senator Domenici’s ratings from special interest groups on military issues can be found at: Senator Domenici’s Interest Group Ratings
For more information on Senator Domenici’s position on military issues please visit Project Vote Smart or call our hotline at 1-888-VOTE-SMART.
Seans says...."The two biggest lies being perpetrated about Iraq today are AQ's claims that they're establishing an Islamic state, and the administration's deliberate tendency to tag all insurgents with the "Al-Qaeda" label."
That didn't come from the Bush administration. It comes from al Qaeda's #2 himself; al-Zawahiri. Are you denying that al Qaeda is inside Iraq and working towards making sure any form of democracy is NOT established there?
JP5
Are you denying that al Qaeda is inside Iraq and working towards making sure any form of democracy is NOT established there?
Nope, I'm disputing the context.
AQ in Iraq is not the same thing as AQ. It is a separate group that has affiliated itself with AQ, but it did not exist before we invaded Iraq and it is not controlled by the AQ honchos in Pakistan. Remember, these days AQ is more of a brand name than an actual organization.
Second, AQ in Iraq is nowhere near establishing an Islamic state, and they won't get any closer if we leave. That's pure propaganda on their part.
Third, AQ in Iraq represents just a small sliver of the combatants the U.S. military faces in Iraq.
So talking about "fighting AQ" when we're mostly fighting native insurgents -- as well as trying to quell the participants in a homegrown sectarian war -- is a lie. It's valid when we are actually going after members of AQ in Iraq. But that's not what we're doing for the most part.
Post a Comment