And the Jim Webb Bashing will begin in 5,4,3,2,1...

[TwilightGardener]

I am saying this based on what I heard from Chuck Hagel this morning on "This Week"--apparently they are working on a bipartisan Iraq amendment to be rolled out this week. It's probably going to focus on redeployment, training and other non-combat stuff, but will call for more political involvement and won't spell out a specific withdrawal timeline (I'm guessing). Though I think these two are the best guys to hammer out a bipartisan way to wind this war down, I know that many on DU, who seem to mostly be in the Out-of-Iraq-Now camp, won't be happy with this compromise from Webb. Just giving you all a heads-up, and I'm steeling myself for the disappointment some might express in Webb in this forum.

[HappyWeasel]

1. I mean, it would be great to get out of Iraq...

and if we can win it and take the credit for it... we will come out as the gurus on war and peace...that would really sink the Republican ship. But our main goal should be to have the next presiden not fighting this war...if it continues...we call Iraq a major despite a RELATIVELY low amount of US casualties...the only wars in our time to slip past one president were WWII, Vietnam and Korea.

[Mass]

2. Are you guessing or did Hagel say these things. Because the bill has

an amendment that does all these things, except that it has a goal for withdrawing the troops. I am not very clear why Webb would go something differently?

[TwilightGardener]

4. Hagel said they are working on their own amendment, and that it

would involve redeployment, but refused to answer Steffy's question about whether it had a withdrawal timeline--or even called for withdrawal. Hopefully it calls for some sort of withdrawal, but because it will be designed to appeal to 'Pubs (and will be binding), I'm afraid that many who like Webb (like I do) on DU will be disillusioned with his compromise measure.

[The Magistrate]

3. Sen. Webb, Ma'am

Had better stick pretty close to the formulations of the House bill in negotiating with Hagel, or he will deserve all the condemnation he gets. It does not matter whether someone is on the left or the right of the Party in this situation: everyone must stick together, or they are no use at all.

Hagel, of course, cannot be trusted any more than a weasel can be, on anything he gives his word to in this regard. He will even vote against his own proposals if it serves the administration that he do so.

[TwilightGardener]

6. Not worried about what Hagel will do or what people will think of him--

he's a 'Pug and will always look after 'Pug interests. I don't know if this will be an independent measure or will be attached to the spending bill. But their goal, if I guess correctly, is to redirect the focus of the Iraq war effort in a way that's acceptable to 'Pugs and Chimpy, I think, rather than to simply end the war. And this is where I agree with you that Webb might be in for a shit storm, at least here on DU.

[The Magistrate]

9. And If That Is The Case, Ma'am, He Will Deserve It

The whole point of the exercise is to press proposals on the war that are not acceptable to the Republican administration, but are in broad agreement with what the bulk of the voting desires and will accept as reasonable.

Sen. Webb is a good man, and we are fortunate to have him in our Party now, but this is a time for solidarity, not individual exploit.

[TwilightGardener]

11. So if it's more of a compromise, but can pass thru the Senate, you

would be opposed? I would rather get something passed that at least moves us away from policing a civil war in Iraq and lessens the danger to our troops, then to keep tossing out measure after measure that will definitively end our occupation there but won't pass.

[The Magistrate]

18. Hard Times, Ma'am, Require Hard Measures

The only reason for getting something through through the Senate that does not jibe with the House Bill is to reach the stage of Conference Committee, where the thing can be finally cooked into something suitable, discarding whatever compromise measure Senators insisted on when fillibuster was a potential obstacle.

What emerges, however, must be something that will draw a veto from the administration, and get not more than two or three Republican votes in either Chamber. Undertand that nothing which passes that conditions in any meaningful way the free hand the administration has enjoyed in the past will be signed into law in any case.

This is all political theater, but people are mistaken to say that as if it were a bad thing: the business of government is, and always has been, largely theater, and this is a play that does have a sting in its tail. The administration needs funds for its venture in Iraq; the Democratic majority in the Congress has no venture in Iraq, and no need of funds for one. If the administration vetoes funds offered with conditions people find reasonable, then it may find itself with no funds at all, and the people holding them at fault for what unpleasantness follows. We are just a few miscalculations away from complete de-funding, in short, if this course is held to firmly....

"Victory does not go to the side that makes the most brilliant stroke, but to the side that makes the fewest mistakes."

[TwilightGardener]

19. On one hand I agree with you, that so far Harry Reid's strategy

in the Senate has been effective in showing America who really wants and owns this war. He knows that the resolutions won't pass, but it's the pressure on the GOP's position that is the real weapon. However, there comes a point to where we will need a pragmatic way to stop or slow the wasting of American lives over there, and if there's any legislation that can have a practical effect on this, it's got to be acceptable first to the GOPers. Then maybe the GOPers in the Senate can pressure the Prez.--a domino effect, maybe.

[The Magistrate]

20. Pigs Will Do Formation Aerobatics Over The Treetops, Ma'am

Before Republicans in the Senate break ranks with the administration. The enemy maintains discipline and functions reliably as a bloc; it is their leading strength on the right. We Democrats and leftists are used to irregular operations without discipline or solidarity, and thus on occassion hold out hopes the enemy will act as we often do, and fragment. But they will not. The right knows better than that, and it is one thing, put bluntly, we need to learn from them.

[Jax]

7. Oh my stars and garters!!!!

I agree with Magistrate.

Alyce the lefty amateur.

[The Magistrate]

10. We Are Probably In Agreement More Often Than You Suppose, Ma'am

While my distaste for small dogs and children is accurately reported, there is a good deal of tosh in circulation concerning my views on other matters....

A pleasure to make your acquaintance, Ma'am!

[papau]

17. LOL - I suspect you might be a fan of W.C. Fields? I do enjoy your posts! :-) n/t

n/t

[Clarkie1]

5. I am very proud to have been a supporter of Senator Webb's campaign.

He's doing us proud.

[Monkeyman]

8. Yep standing tall for Veterans and the Troops

[Clarkie1]

12. Fact is, a bill with a timeline probably can't get through the senate.

I am sure Webb will do everything in his power to help change the policy, end this war sooner, and do what is best for the country and the troops.

[TwilightGardener]

14. I agree with you about the timeline--the GOPers won't go for it--

they won't be accused of "tying the generals' hands", etc. But I think Webb could come up with an acceptable plan that at least moves us in the right direction over there.

[Clarkie1]

16. Agreed. nt

[skipos]

13. Webb is great. I don't expect representatives of red states

to spearheard the most progressive agenda. I'll wait to see what he has to say.

Regardless, he is 1000 times better than Allen.

[Clarkie1]

15. It's because of Webb that we have the majority. nt

[randycrow]

21. Webster defines redeploy

to move troops from one front to another. November 6 voters said withdraw on terms favorable to USA interests, not redeploy. Our elected are playing word games. We have got to come up with a Plan B to impeach the entire bunch from comrade Little George to comrade Reid to comrade Hagel. These guys are making war on us financially because their wars are sending oil prices through the roof and the American people are being hurt very badly financially, not to mention the consolidation, communi$m, going on with companies.

[Hippo_Tron]

22. If redeployment means getting the troops out of harm's way, I'll take it

But I don't trust Hagel.

[TwilightGardener]

23. But the question is, do you trust Webb, if they're co-sponsoring

the amendment--plus the fact that he and Hagel are old friends?

[Hippo_Tron]

25. Well Webb's son is over there fighting

So I trust his intentions. I just don't know if Webb should be trusting Hagel.

[mvd]

24. That would be good news

I don't know if enough Repukes listened to the message of the election last year for this to become veto-proof, but we need steps.

[mmonk]

26. Is disagreeing bashing?

[TwilightGardener]

28. No, disagreeing isn't what I call bashing--I just wonder what the

reaction will be to a compromise bill that doesn't necessarily get us out of Iraq as quick as many folks here would like. I see plenty of posts knocking "Blue Dog" Dems and calling the House bill watered down and weak--can't help but think that some folks will not take kindly to Webb's approach if it's even less assertive than what Pelosi's sending up. A compromise bill would have MY support, but I'm more conservative than most on here.

[mmonk]

29. Well we'll have to wait and see.

I certainly can't judge anything I haven't seen yet but in reality, if I don't agree with it, I applaud effort in any case.

[Clark2008]

27. I'm fine with it.

One of the reasons I'm a Clark supporter is because he's been advocating a very realistic approach that would get out troops out in the best way possible and, from what you posted, Clark's approach has always sounded pretty much like what Webb and Hagel are trying to do here.

I'm sorry we're there. I wish we never had gone in and I wasn't for it. But, I also know that you can't just pick up and leave, either. Not logistically and not politically.

[TwilightGardener]

30. You and I have the same analysis about not being able to just

pick up and leave. We do have quite a mess to clean up over there, unfortunately. I also like Clark and his foreign policy views--he was my choice in '04.

[Pushed To The Left]

31. Webb and Kucinich have the same goal (stopping the war) but just have different methods

I have nothing bad to say about either of these good men!

[mvd]

32. Webb wants to end the war soon, too

He's just trying to get something started that MAY have a chance of passing both Houses. Then, the ball will be in Dimson's court. I think we can start withdrawal now, but it will likely have to be phased. I think we can have everyone out by the end of this year. Redeployment is an issue I'd consider.