OT: United Democratic front against the troops surge (excellent)

[beachmom]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/5/13349/34041

Joint letter from Reid and Pelosi to the president:

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.

[beachmom]

1. On DU now, too:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3042898&mesg_id=3042898


I'm proud to be a Democrat today. We're united while the Republicans are beginning to fracture.

[wisteria]

2. Good letter. Our leaders stand united, It is for the records.

Where does this leave Levin and Webb though, they have suggested they might support a surge.
It would of been nice if a majority of Senators and Congress people co-signed onto the letter also.

[TayTay]

3. I don't think he said that exactly

Here is the CNN interview with Webb yesterday:

BLITZER: Welcome back.

For a second straight day, the anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan tried to get out her message by upstaging Democrats on Capitol Hill. She showed up at a House office building earlier today and unfurled a banner. She was given a choice to leave the premises or be arrested. She opted to leave and was escorted away.

Iraq was the signature issue in Senator Jim Webb's campaign. The newly sworn in Democrat from Virginia sealed his party's control of the Senate when he defeated Republican incumbent Senator George Allen in November.

Senator Jim Webb is joining us now live from Capitol Hill.

Senator, thanks very much for coming in.

SEN. JIM WEBB (D), VIRGINIA: Well, thank you for having me, Wolf.

BLITZER: Is it fair to say Iraq was the major issue that divided you from George Allen?

WEBB: No, not really. The issues of national security, including Iraq, were one. But I think an equally important issue for us were the issues of economic fairness, with what has happened in the -- the great migration of wealth toward the top 1 percent in this country and outsourcing and all of those issues. I think we had an enormous amount of support from people who are concerned about that, as well.

BLITZER: You're referring to tax cuts, among other issues.

Let me go to Iraq, because I really want to get your sense on this debate that's unfolding right now on this so-called surge, an escalation, more U.S. troops being sent to the region.

You're going to be on both the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Senate Armed Services Committee now that you're a member of the Senate.

The chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin, is quoted in the New York Times today as saying this about this military increase: If it's truly conditional upon the Iraqis actually meeting milestones and if it's part of an overall program of troop reduction that would begin in the next four to six months, it's something that would be worth considering.

Contrast that to the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden, who says simply about a surge: I just think a troop surge is the absolute wrong strategy.

Where do you stand in this debate?

WEBB: Well, actually, I -- what I see, as much as anything, is that this is a tactical issue, a political issue, rather than a strategic issue. I was saying all the way from early 2002 that one of my great concerns was that this administration had not articulated a clear strategy with respect to what we should be doing in Iraq and when we would know that we were done.

And that's one of the focuses that I would like to have on this.

In terms of the troop surge itself, if that's what is going to occur, as you know, over the past several years, the numbers have oscillated. They've gone up and down depending on holding units in place and bringing units in a little early and those sorts of things.

And it's a commander-in-chief prerogative given the authority that was given to the administration through the legislative act of 2002.

So I would like to hear from the administration what the strategy is for what they call success in Iraq.

BLITZER: So it sounds to me like you're closer to Carl Levin and, at least right now, you have an open mind. You want to hear what the president has to say and if it makes sense, you'll go along with it?

WEBB: Well, what I really would like to -- to focus on in the part that I am able to play in these hearings is the articulation of a clear set of goals with an end point. I mean u don't h a strategy if you cannot clearly articulate the end point of your strategy. That's been the frustration all along.

And so we find ourselves in these arrangements about whether putting 20,000 or 30,000 more troops in and holding them longer is going to affect the overall solution in Iraq.

We do know one thing, and that is that they're going to -- if this is what occurs -- they're going to affect the strain on the ground forces in the Army and the Marine Corps, and possibly some of the troop rotations. We know that.

But what I want to be able to focus on is trying to get a clear statement of what we're going to do and how we're going to end it. And in that respect, I'm probably closer to what Senator Levin was quoted as saying than Senator Biden, but we want to really have a good discussion. And we're getting a little ahead of ourselves, I think.

BLITZER: If the president disappoints you, could you envisioning yourself moving closer to someone like Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, who says it's time to use the power of the purse and stop the funding for the war, if necessary, to bring the troops home?

WEBB: I -- you know, I lived through Vietnam. I lived through it as a Marine and I know that those sorts of approaches, while they seem attractive on one level are really not that realistic.

What we want to do -- and I was talking with a number of senators today -- is to try to get some of these so-called emergency legislation packages back into the committee process so that the committees can actually play.

BLITZER: Well, what about the execution of Saddam Hussein?

We all saw that cell phone video. It was not the way these executions are supposed to unfold.

What does this say about the situation in Iraq, from your perspective?

WEBB: Well, I -- I'm a little disappointed that we did not exert more influence on the Iraqi government with respect to the execution of Saddam Hussein. We've got a lot of people at risk inside Iraq and in terms of accentuating the emotions that are in play there.

But in a larger sense, what we really need to do is to get into the arena where we can talk about a strategy, talk about the pluses and the minuses of the Baker-Hamilton Commission and work toward a solution that, on the one hand, will allow us to remove our combat troops, but on the other, will increase the stability of the region, allow us to continue to fight against international terrorism and allow us, as a nation, to address our strategic interests around the world.

And this is -- this is one of the drawbacks that we've had with so many troops having been put into this constant rotational basis inside one country when we have a war against international terrorism that's global.

BLITZER: Jim Webb, the new senator from Virginia, the Democratic Senator from Virginia.

Congratulations, Senator.

WEBB: Thank you very much.

BLITZER: Thanks very much for coming in.

[beachmom]

4. Thank you for posting that, Tay. I don't think Levin OR Webb

support the troops surge as it stands. The only way they would, would be in terms of an EXIT STRATEGY. I have read that sometimes you need more troops to withdraw troops so that the soldiers don't get needlessly killed by an emboldened enemy sensing weakness from the withdrawal. If there were a timetable for withdrawal like Kerry has proposed, then people would feel less anxious about a temporary troops surge as part of a larger plan to get the troops out. But since Bush has no plan or strategy and refuses to set a target date, he should not be trusted with sending more troops to Iraq.

Webb and Levin can wiggle their way into going along with the letter; I am sure of that.

[TayTay]

5. You're welcome!

I saw this as the crucial statement in that:

What we want to do -- and I was talking with a number of senators today -- is to try to get some of these so-called emergency legislation packages back into the committee process so that the committees can actually play.

That would be all the wiggle room he needs. This war has been decpetive on many fronts, not the least of which is how it was funded. The costs were never put in in the regular budget but was always done 'off the books' as emergency funding. There is a lot in that and I would love to hear Sen. Webb talk about that and it's implications.

Those are going to be interesting hearings next week, that's for sure.

I think some of the discussions about this are a little premature. I certainly don't think Jim Webb is a pro-Iraq war. I think he is trying to figure out the best way to get out. There is a lot of room for discussion on that. (I dearly hope this doesn't turn into some kind of DU thing of 'Webb betrayed us.' That would be wrong and dumb, IMHO, of course. Then again, there have been DU fights over less than that, sigh!)

[wisteria]

6. Thanks for posting, but it still seems to me Webb would be open too

the possibility of a surge if it were accompanied by a clear goal and an ending strategy. That comes down to trusting Bush to do what he says he will do.
With anyone other then Bush in power I might also trust that a surge/ with a goal could possibly be supported, but this is Bush we are talking about here.
Webb certainly is entitled to his opinion and to keep an open mind and wait to hear what the President says. This seems to be the mindset right now. Senator Casey has also said something similar.

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/07004/751162-84.stm

One main discussion topic will be a possible "surge" of tens of thousands of new troops in Iraq as a way of stemming the bloody sectarian violence in Baghdad.

"It's going to take a mighty effort to convince me that that's the right strategy," Mr. Casey said. "I'm trying very hard to keep an open mind."



I am sorry, I do not trust the President to tell us the truth and to get it right. So, I am persimistic right now.