NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










Democrats pledge to curtail the Iraq war« Thread Started on

Daily newsbrief journal for February 2007, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


Democrats pledge to curtail the Iraq war« Thread Started on

Postby admin » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:30 am

Democrats pledge to curtail the Iraq war« Thread Started on Feb 18, 2007, 11:12pm » --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Democrats pledge to curtail the Iraq war19th February 2007, 7:52 WST Senate Democrats in the US pledged renewed efforts to curtail the Iraq war, suggesting they will seek to limit a 2002 measure authorising President George W Bush's use of force against Saddam Hussein.The top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said the proposal had little chance of succeeding. "I think the president would veto it and the veto would be upheld," said Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana.A day after Republicans foiled a Democratic bid to repudiate Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops to Iraq, Senate Democrats declined to embrace measures - being advanced in the House - that would attach conditions to additional funding for troops.Senator Carl Levin, who chairs the Armed Services Committee, said Democratic senators would probably seek to capitalise on wavering Republicans to limit the "wide-open authorisation" Congress gave Bush in 2002."We will be looking at a modification of that authorisation in order to limit the mission of American troops to a support mission instead of a combat mission, and that is very different from cutting off funds," said Levin, a Michigan Democrat.Senator Joe Biden, a 2008 presidential candidate who leads the foreign relations panel, said the 2002 authorisation should be repealed to restate the president's authority and clarify the mission of US troops in Iraq.The Democratic-controlled Senate failed to force debate on a non-binding resolution opposing the troop buildup.The 56-34 vote fell four short of the 60 needed, but Democrats quickly claimed victory, noting that a majority of senators - seven of them Republicans - effectively voted against the escalation.After a week of contentious debate in Congress, the White House scoffed at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the US-led invasion in March 2003 has become "the worst foreign policy mistake" in US history."The war is tough, but the solution is not to get out," White House press secretary Tony Snow said."It is to provide the kinds of resources and reinforcements our forces need to get the job done, and at the same time say to the Iraqis 'You guys got to step up."'Snow said it was important to remove Saddam from power and noted that a majority of senators voted in 2002 to authorise force in Iraq.He said Bush should not see votes in Congress in opposition of his new Iraqi strategy as a rebuke."The strategy has barely had a chance to begin working," Snow said.The House passed a non-binding resolution Friday that rejected the president's 21,500-troop buildup in Iraq. The vote put Bush on the defensive going into a far more consequential confrontation over paying for the plan.House Democrats have said they will attempt to place restrictions on Bush's request for an additional $US93 billion ($A118 billion) for the military in an effort to make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops.Levin said limiting the 2002 war authorisation would sidestep constitutional questions.Some legal experts have said that restricting money or attaching conditions could arguably encroach on Bush's powers as commander in chief to control tactics and operations."One thought is that we should limit the mission to a support mission - in other words, an anti-terrorist mission to go after al-Qaeda in Iraq, to support and train the Iraqi army, to protect our own diplomatic personnel and other personnel in Iraq," Levin said.Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat of Rhode Island, agreed.read at source> http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx ... ame=357328
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to February 2007

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests