I flicked on NPR this morning and was just unbelievably elated to hear the passage of the Iraq bill which included a non-binding resolution with a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq in the Senate (Thank you Chuck Hagel and Gordon Smith for crossing party lines for this). Yes, it was non-binding and called a "goal", but this is simply remarkable that less than a year since the Kerry/Feingold amendment garnered 13 votes, we got 50 votes yesterday stating a very similar principle -- that redeploying our troops in the near future by a specific date is what this country wants. This alternative view has now gotten us on the score board and is similar to the House bill. Will this bring our troops home in 2008? No. Does this mean the beginning of the end to our involvement in Iraq? Yes. 2006 meant something, and what the Democrats have done is honor what the people voted for.
John Kerry had to have known that such a victory would not be possible if he ran for president. This was what he was talking about on that sad day in January when he said he didn't want to leave the next president with an even bigger mess in '09. The American people need to be shown direction as to how we get out of Iraq, and he put that blueprint together in '06, and now the Congress has passed it in both chambers. It is a hollow victory of sorts in that we have lost so many soldiers already, and we will lose more in the future. But having a plan to get out was always the vital task needing completion, and we have now passed the first major hurdle.
More here about the bill:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2783597
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
