Text of letter Dems wrote to Bush, RE: Iraq:

[babylonsister]

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Reid_Pelosi_call_on_Bush_not_0105.html

President George W. Bush The White House Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The start of the new Congress brings us opportunities to work together on the critical issues confronting our country. No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq. December was the deadliest month of the war in over two years, pushing U.S. fatality figures over the 3,000 mark.

The American people demonstrated in the November elections that they do not believe your current Iraq policy will lead to success and that we need a change in direction for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people. We understand that you are completing your post-election consultations on Iraq and are preparing to make a major address on your Iraq strategy to the American people next week.

Clearly this address presents you with another opportunity to make a long overdue course correction. Despite the fact that our troops have been pushed to the breaking point and, in many cases, have already served multiple tours in Iraq, news reports suggest that you believe the solution to the civil war in Iraq is to require additional sacrifices from our troops and are therefore prepared to proceed with a substantial U.S. troop increase.

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

"I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future. "

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin t he phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement. In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

Sincerely,

­­­­

Harry Reid Nancy Pelosi

Majority Leader Speaker

[patrice]

1. Escalation is Dangerous.

It's not a Uni-Lateral behavior. It IS inherently Dynamic, setting off ALL kinds of Reactions in the Region.

Stupid.

[jsamuel]

2. EXCLUSIVE DEM LETTER TO BUSH: "WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO REJECT... GETTING... DEEPER INTO IRAQ"

EXCLUSIVE DEM LETTER TO BUSH: "WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO REJECT ANY PLANS THAT CALL FOR OUR GETTING OUR TROOPS ANY DEEPER INTO IRAQ"

Dear Mr. President:

The start of the new Congress brings us opportunities to work together on the critical issues confronting our country. No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq. December was the deadliest month of the war in over two years, pushing U.S. fatality figures over the 3,000 mark.

The American people demonstrated in the November elections that they do not believe your current Iraq policy will lead to success and that we need a change in direction for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people. We understand that you are completing your post-election consultations on Iraq and are preparing to make a major address on your Iraq strategy to the American people next week.

Clearly this address presents you with another opportunity to make a long overdue course correction. Despite the fact that our troops have been pushed to the breaking point and, in many cases, have already served multiple tours in Iraq, news reports suggest that you believe the solution to the civil war in Iraq is to require additional sacrifices from our troops and are therefore prepared to proceed with a substantial U.S. troop increase.

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

"I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It's easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future. "

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin t he phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement. In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

Sincerely,

­­­­
Harry Reid Nancy Pelosi

Majority Leader Speaker

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/01/05/exc_n_37915.html

[mike_c]

3. YES!!!!

Now hold his feet to the fire!

[Nimrod2005]

4. The line in the sand has been drawn......Way to go Dems!!!

What took them so long???????????// 24 Hours? :sarcasm:

[San Diego]

5. Why didn't she just say it in terms he could understand?

You got Saddam.

You're better than your daddy.

Now get the funk out of Iraq.

[VegasWolf]

11. Becuase Bush will lose the oil if he leaves. nt

[Richard Steele]

6. That's not a letter to B*sh, it's a letter to America. They know B*sh won't read it.

[babylonsister]

8. But at least they wrote it, finally addressing the mess. nt

[Richard Steele]

16. Yup. And doing so puts their position firmly "on record".

It's a good move, IMHO.

[Jim__]

7. I expect Bush to ignore that letter

I don't appreciate (his) taking these views into consideration. I'd only appreciate his acting on these views.

How should the dems react if bush doesn't acton these views?

[jwirr]

9. Murpha is suggesting refusing to fund any escalation.

[HereSince1628]

13. Isn't that the point? Reid and Pelosi just put themselves on record

as not supporting an escalation. No one, including Reid and Pelosi, expects Bush to do what they ask (phased redeployment).

When things go bad with the surge (and they are almost bound too go bad), this letter will repeatedly be brought to mind.

Every time the Dem leadership does this it will put more doubt in the American people's minds about Bush. Should we really be doing this? To get the troops out, Bush must face utter rejection by the vast majority the American people, including Laura and Bush's chief supporter--his dog Barney.

[qwlauren35]

22. Block every move he makes until he complies.

Block his budget proposals, block his NCLB initiatives, block his cabinet and ambassadorial appointments.

Or better still, until he snaps and ends up in the funny farm. At which point impeachment might no even be necessary. And if it sent Cheney into a coronary, we would have a Democratic president!!!

I like this plan. I like it better than impeachment...

[krispos42]

10. PS If you don't, we're impeaching your ass. Love, NP and HR

[VegasWolf]

12. I hope they used lots of crayon colors so that they will capture Bush's attention. nt

[HereSince1628]

14. Note to dem staff: Bush only sees in Black and White.

The condition is known as Manicheaism.

[mzmolly]

15. Also note that Jack Murtha is in charge of the purse strings.

I smell a refusal to fund a surge in the air. *snif snif*

[Radio_Lady]

23. Just found out about this. Let's hope Murtha make this happen.

Thanks for the post.

[VegasWolf]

17. Military: at most there are 9,000 troops that can be deployed. More like a pimple than a surge! nt

[babylonsister]

18. Unless you're one of the pimples. nt

[VegasWolf]

19. Yep! Bring them all back now! nt

[MagickMuffin]

20. Great letter that I included in my blog from yesterday

Here's the link to the new Speaker Pelosi's website which has this letter posted. I just had to do that:evilgrin:

http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=0021

Let it be known that the Democratic Party has spoken. Of course Mad king Boy George doesn't hear what other people tell him. Even though he tells us he is "listening" to his advisor's. However, is he hearing what they are saying, of course not. If he gets any opposition to his views he just fires them to make them go away (What Leadership! :puke:)

The 110th Congress will show what leadership looks like.

[qwlauren35]

21. This letter makes me very, very happy.

For all of the anger at Cindy Sheehan, I think the American people have been heard, and our new Democratic legislative leadership has put a stake in the ground.

- No more extra troops in Iraq.

- Begin bringing troops home from Iraq within 6 months.

Now, my only question is whether anyone will still sign the bill for more defense money. Seeing that bill die would make me jump for joy.

[OneBlueSky]

24. "No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq" . . . there's the rub . . .

the Democrats, and a significant majority of the American people, want the war in Iraq to end . . .

BushCo, on the other hand, wants the U.S. occupation of Iraq -- and therefore the war -- to continue indefinitely . . .

seems to be a rather crucial difference of intentions here . . .

[yurbud]

25. a dramatic improvement, but why "phased redeployment"? doesn't that just mean re-arranging?

[leesa]

26. Unless they are ready to arrest Bush, to physically put handcuffs on him and haul him

away, they will not be able to stop this madman. They unleashed him and a letter won't end this madness.

[GeorgeGist]

27. NIce carrot...

no stick.

[twilliams82]

28. Will we stop funding if things go wrong?

If the troops are in fierce battles and need emergency funds is it going to be denied??

I would like to see the troops home, but I don't want to see them come home like they did during the vietnam conflict(running away).

There has to be a way to get the Iraqis to take care of their affairs, and bring our troops home in the hero fashion everyone of them deserve.

TW

[superconnected]

29. Well, this is what I wanted to see when I voted. I wanted the dems to

take over congress and at the very least stand up to the thugs and put their foot down.

I missed that from Dems. I'm glad they wrote the letter. They are showing the GOP where they stand.