Originally Posted at The Left Shue
OK, so I have read the story from the Washington Post (Hill Democrats Unite to Urge Bush to Begin Iraq Pullout By Charles Babington and Jim VandeHei) about how the Democrats are finally uniting behind an Iraq policy but as much as I try I just can't find anything to hang on to here.
"The 12 Democrats, led by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), include liberals and centrists who have differed over Iraq in the past. The signers included the top Democrats on the House and Senate committees dealing with armed services, foreign relations, intelligence and military spending. Their action puts party leaders on the same page, and it helps clarify the Nov. 7 election as a choice between a party seeking a timeline for withdrawing troops from an unpopular war and a party resisting any such timetable."
Oh, I see - twelve Democrats agree on a policy. But wait! " For all its passion, the letter has more significance as a political statement than as a policy alternative. Most Democrats previously have embraced the general idea of beginning a troop drawdown this year, and the letter adds no specifics about how many troops should be withdrawn or how rapidly." So, just what is in this unifying letter?
Dear Mr. President: "...Rather, we continue to believe that it is time for Iraqis to step forward and take the lead for securing and governing their own country. This is the principle enshrined in the "United States Policy in Iraq Act" enacted last year. This law declares 2006 to be a year of "significant transition* to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq." Regrettably, your policy seems to be moving in the opposite direction." (Emphasis TLS)" ...We believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006. U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to a more limited mission focused on counterterrorism, training and logistical support of Iraqi security forces, and force protection of U.S. personnel."(Emphasis TLS)
Oh I get it. If we haven't said "Year of Transition" often or loud enough, this is to make up for it. Hell, have any of you read Senator Levin's amendment that you just voted on? Now I don't mean to be critical here but either the authors of the Post article totally blew this or they were just trying to get something in before deadline. I mean, "...and it helps clarify the Nov. 7 election as a choice between a party seeking a timeline for withdrawing troops from an unpopular war and a party resisting any such timetable."??? Where is the timetable??? Some troops before the end of the year??? I am assuming that the rest would follow sometime??? Come on! These are supposed to be Democratic leaders!!
You want to send a letter? Try this:
Dear George,
Either commit to a phased deployment of combat troops from Iraq that will see us completely out of that role within six months or you will need to go ask your friends at Halliburton to continue financing your occupation of that country. When the Democrats control the purse strings beginning in January, 2007, we will withhold any and all funding except for the safety and logistical support of our troops to deploy out of Iraq. Sincerely, the Democrats.
Works for me....
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue