The "Lose the War on Terror" crowd continues to misinform the public and play politics with the most serious issue of our time. These men and women, who are largely the sons and daughters of America's Greatest Generation, are bringing disgrace on themselves and their country. See the stories here, here, and here.
Here is quote in the Fox News story in which Senator Carl Levin (D - Michigan) repeats the BIG LIE
"Just about everybody agrees there's no military solution to Iraq," Levin said. If Republicans get their way and block this change in mission, "We will be denied the opportunity to vote on an issue that just about every American has strong feelings on."
What Senator Levin didn't tell you is that the vote was on an amendment he sponsored which would schedule our retreat in Iraq. An amendment which is being filibustered by the Republican minority in the Senate. And appropriately so.
What the Democrats also aren't telling you is that they are trying to have it both ways. For example, Senator Barack Obama (D - Illinois) proposes to impose such a retreat, BUT end the retreat if the Iraqi government passes the legislation that the Junior Senator from Illinois believes to be appropriate.
Here is the full text of the Levin, Reed, at al Amendment:
SA 2087. Mr. LEVIN (for himself, Mr. Reed, Mr. Smith,Mr. Hagel, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Biden, Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Durbin) proposed an amendment to amendment SA 2011 proposed by Mr. Nelson of Nebraska (for Mr. Levin) to the bill H.R. 1585, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; as follows:
At the end of subtitle C of title XV, add the following:
SEC. 1535. REDUCTION AND TRANSITION OF UNITED STATES FORCES IN IRAQ.
(a) Deadline for Commencement of Reduction.--The Secretary of Defense shall commence the reduction of the number of United States forces in Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Implementation of Reduction as Part of Comprehensive Strategy.--The reduction of forces required by this section shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community for the purpose of working collectively to bring stability to Iraq. As part of this effort, the President shall direct the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations to use the voice, vote, and influence of the United States at the United Nations to seek the appointment of an international mediator in Iraq, under the auspices of the United Nations Security Council, who has the authority of the international community to engage political, religious, ethnic, and tribal leaders in Iraq in an inclusive political process.
(c) Limited Presence After Reduction and Transition.--After the conclusion of the reduction and transition of United States forces to a limited presence as required by this section, the Secretary of Defense may deploy or maintain members of the Armed Forces in Iraq only for the following missions:
(1) Protecting United States and Coalition personnel and infrastructure.
(2) Training, equipping, and providing logistic support to the Iraqi Security Forces.
(3) Engaging in targeted counterterrorism operations against al Qaeda, al Qaeda affiliated groups, and other international terrorist organizations.
(d) Completion of Transition.--The Secretary of Defense shall complete the transition of United States forces to a limited presence and missions as described in subsection (c) by April 30, 2008.
SA 2088. Mr. REED proposed an amendment to amendment SA 2087 proposed by Mr. Levin (for himself, Mr. Reed, Mr. Smith, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Biden, Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Durbin) to the amendment SA 2011 proposed by Mr. Nelson of Nebraska (for Mr. Levin) to the bill H.R. 1585, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military actvities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes, as follows:
At the end of the amendment add the following:
This section shall take effect one day after the date of this bill's enactment.
Thus, the withdrawal is hinged to a diplomatic effort under the UN but allows U.S. forces to continue to operate in Iraq with substantially the same mission they have today -- only at substantially reduced numbers. The most objectional part of this amendment is that it is the Congress directing the Secretary of Defense on the subject of troop disposition and tasking during a properly declared war. Thus, this amendment seeks to tie the hands of the Commander-in-Chief, nay to cut him out of the chain of command, during the execution of his constitutional mandated role of executing a war that congress authorized. Godspeed the minority who oppose this unconstitutional piece of usurpation.
Time Magazine got it right...
After all, picture this: More and more Republicans peel away from President Bush's strategy in Iraq until the day comes, maybe this September, maybe next year, when Democrats find themselves with a veto-proof majority to force Bush to commit to a timeline for withdrawing the troops in Iraq. Democrats celebrate, the troops are starting to come home, and then ... what exactly? ... So, while Democrats make a show tonight of unfolding cots to nap and debate through the night, it is important to remember that they are doing this more to convince their Republican colleagues to sway Bush, rather than out of any real desire to inherit the war themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment