What has happened? I opposed the invasion of Iraq back in 2002 and 2003. When I came to Daily Kos in October 2006, the vast majority wanted withdrawal from Iraq ASAP. Yet in some diaries this week, I saw many kossaks defending leaving 50,000 troops in Iraq after 2010.
Well, I never thought I would see it. Pelosi and Reid now are more antiwar than many who like to see themselves as crashing the gates. Yes, Pelosi and Reid now are more antiwar than many on Dkos.
After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) complained that the level of troops -- 50,000 -- who would remain in Iraq is too high, other senior Democrats voiced similar concerns. Not one member of the Democratic leadership, except for Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), defended the new Obama plan, which will take three months longer than he promised and still leave a significant force structure on the ground.
WAPo: Democrats Assail Plan For Pulling Out Troops
More, after the fold.
Looks like the antiwar movement is in Congress and not much in the netroots anymore:
Most lawmakers left the White House quickly after the event. Aides later said that Democrats seemed no more pleased during the meeting than before. But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) issued a positive statement, saying he "supports the plan to leave 50,000 troops in Iraq as briefed by Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates at the White House this afternoon."
On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) registered his complaints about the level of troops that will remain in Iraq even after 2010.
"I'm happy to listen to the secretary of defense and the president, but when they talk about 50,000, that's a little higher number than I had anticipated," Reid said.
Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the pullout "has to be done responsibly, we all agree. But 50,000 is more than I would have thought, and we await the justification."
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) echoed his worries, saying: "I do think we have to look carefully at the numbers that are there and do it as quickly as we can." Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) issued a statement saying he is "concerned" about the level of troops that would remain in Iraq.
WAPo: Democrats Assail Plan For Pulling Out Troops
For a sampling of views by some kossaks, check out this diary from two days ago:
Be patient with Obama on Iraq? While how many more die?
I didn't agree with all of the diary, but I found many of the comments quite interesting.
Here was a comment in which I best expressed my view in response to someone who thought the diarist should be troll rated:
Interesting. (11+ / 0-)
Recommended by:mattman, RaulVB, xofferson, benny05, buhdydharma, Something the Dog Said, 0wn, david mizner, Marcion, BigAlinWashSt, sortalikenathan
So is the war okay if Obama wages it?
This is a good diary. One can disagree, but the comments like yours who seem offended that anyone actually have the courage of convictions to fight against this war should be troll rated tells me that too many don't really care about the war.
I wish there was a draft. If people's asses were on the line, there would be an antiwar movement.
My position, before you freak out, is that Obama's direction is correct, but leaving 30,000 to 50,000 residual troops is too slow.
Fortunatey, the Iraquis have a treaty requiring us to leave by December 2011. So the occupation will continue for three years under Obama.
A strong antiwar movement might help Obama speed it up. But knee jerk support of whatever Obama chooses won't do a damn thing.
"What we've seen the last few days is nothing less than the final verdict on an economic philosophy that has completely failed." -- Barack Obama
by TomP on Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 10:30:30 AM PST
[ Parent | Reply to This ]
(Bold added.)
After reading many of the comments, I was close to giving up here. If all we do is support President Obama's policies, no matter what, than there is little purpose for the progressive blogosphere.
I have been antiwar since I was 12 years old in 1967. I opposed the Vietnam War, the El Salvador and Nicarauga War, and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I'm not going to change now, just because we elected a good President. I will support his policies when correct and oppose when incorrect.
When I see those whom we critcize so easily, like Pelosi and Reid, standing up for getting our soldiers out quicker, for not leaving a 50,000 residual force, and then rea dmany kossaks who seem to place support for Barack Obama over opposition to the Iraq war, I see a netroots that has lost its way.
The antiwar movement has not:
Two days ago:
There’s still the prospect of some more friction from the left, however. Antiwar leaders want to see a clearer sense of how many residual forces will remain — today’s Times suggested the possibility of as many as 55,000 — and what precisely their mission will be.
They also want Obama to reaffirm his commitment to the Iraqi Parlimanent’s Status of Forces Agreement, which would set the end of 2011 as the deadline for all troops to be out.
"It’s important that the administration makes clear that it fully supports these firm deadlines," Andrews continued. "And we need to be much clearer about the role the residual forces are going to have. We hope to see clarification when he makes his announcements."
The Plum Line
To be clear, I am grateful and overjoyed that Presdident Obama is bringing back 100,000 troops in the next 19 months. I wish it were quicker, but the choice to bring them home is the right one. But leaving 50,000 troops there for another year plus is not the right choice.
I like the direction, but the pace must be quicker.
All those who oppose the invasion and occupation should join with Pelosi and Reid and work to convince the Obama administration to cut the number of residual trooops left behind in 2010.
I agree with Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Murray and Feingold.