After Kerry proposed his bill to withdraw the troops out of Iraq, there were no rush by fellow senators to endorse the bill. With the exception of Feingold, in fact, there were none.
However, it is interesting to see that later Thursday and yesterday, some senators went to the floor and started talking about withdrawing troops.
First Kudos to Lautenberg who smacked down Allard.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2006_record&page=S3370&position=al
Yesterday, there was debate between two of our colleagues. One was Senator Kerry, who served in Vietnam, decorated for that service, the other was the Senator from Colorado, who was harsh in his criticism of Senator Kerry's speech on Iraq.
Now, Senator Kerry and I are both veterans. I am a veteran of World War II, and I served in Europe during the war. His, again, distinguished service in Vietnam is well known. So we are both veterans, and we are very interested in the military analysis of the Senator from Colorado.
The speech of the Senator from Colorado sounded much like White House talking points: short on facts, long on innuendo and fantasy.
While politicians in Washington sometimes wear rose-colored glasses and fantasize about the situation in Iraq, American troops are dying, American troops are wounded. One need only visit Walter Reed Hospital to see how serious some of those wounds are. People have lost limbs. People lose their sight. People suffer very severely from post-traumatic stress, invisible wounds that penetrate, nevertheless, very deeply.
I have gone to many memorial services and funerals for young people from New Jersey who died in Iraq. Seventy-three soldiers from my home State of New Jersey have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. As I mentioned, I have visited Walter Reed Army Hospital here in Washington several times, and I have been struck by the incredible resilience and dedication to our country of those young Americans, those who want to be able to pick up arms again so they can do their duty. And while these brave men and women put their lives on the line, the administration is simply ignoring reality.
You got to love Lautenberg. In 2004, he went to the floor and defended Kerry against the SVBT attacks (there were not so many Democrats doing that, remember). Last year, during a Social Security townhall in New York, with Hillary and Reid there, he stood up and acknowledge Kerry and the fact that he would prefer he be president. And now, he goes after Allard. You got to love the guy.
:loveya: :loveya: :applause::applause:
Wyden also came to the floor and deliver a speech asking Bush to present a plan to withdraw the troops from Iraq.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2006_record&page=S3367&position=all
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise to offer a simple proposition: Congress should act like a coequal branch of Government and vote on whether to keep American troops in Iraq for at least 3 more years. Late last month, the President told the American people that it is his intent to keep American soldiers in Iraq through the end of his term in office. He has never before made such a sweeping commitment. When the Senate voted in October of 2002 to send troops to Iraq, few Americans believed then that the U.S. military would be in Iraq in 2006, let alone 2009 or beyond. Based on what the Bush administration said then, Americans would be justified in thinking that by now Iraq would be free and democratic. Based on what the Bush administration said then, Americans would be justified in thinking that by now Iraq would be stable and self-supporting. Based on what the Bush administration said then, Americans would be justified in thinking that by now the vast majority of U.S. forces, if not all of them, would be safely back home.
...
Just as the President made the case to go to war, he owes it to Congress and the American people to come to Congress and lay out his plan and his budget for achieving a lasting peace in Iraq.
Congress owes it to the American people and the institution to vote.
If the President refuses to come to Congress in the coming weeks with his plan and his budget to win the peace in Iraq, Congress owes it to the American people to vote up or down on whether to keep American troops in Iraq for at least 3 more years.
The President's case for winning the peace in Iraq should address these concerns:
First, how the President can help make the Iraqis self-reliant so that they can defeat the deadly insurgency.
Second, how the President intends to help Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish leaders break the political impasse so that they can form a unity government.
Third, how the President intends to pull the Iraqi people back from the brink of all-out civil war and the specter of another Rwanda or Darfur.
Fourth, how the President intends to help rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure and ensure that Iraqis have access to basic services like electricity and clean water.
And fifth, how the President intends to bring the troops home from Iraq.
Not exactly what I would call asking for withdrawal, but at least he is speaking out and it is good.
And yesterday, after Kerry spoke, Durbin came to the floor and highlighted the same issues concerning the war. Good to hear.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2006_record&page=S3186&position=all
The hard questions go to this point: How and when will this war end? When will the Iraqis reach the point where they accept responsibility for their own country? We can no longer afford to be misled about the threat to the United States and what lies ahead in Iraq. The people I spoke to on my recent trip to southern Illinois got it right. One of them said: Why aren't we going to the Iraqi Government and saying that over 3 years ago we sent in our soldiers to depose your dictator, a man whom no one respected; we deposed him so that you could take control of your own country. We put American lives on the line so you could hold free elections. We gave you a chance to start your own government. When are the Iraqis going to stand up for themselves, their own country, and their own defense? How many years have we been promised that we are so close to the day when the Iraqi Army will be able to take the place of the U.S. Army? I will believe it when the first American soldier comes home and is replaced by an Iraqi soldier ready to stand and die for Iraq, as our soldiers do every single day
...
Let me tell you that the families who wait at home anxiously want to know the same answer to the question I pose: When, Mr. President, is this war going to end? When are we going to turn over the responsibility to the Iraqis?
The hard questions go to this point: How and when will this war end? When will the Iraqis reach the point where they accept responsibility for their own country? We can no longer afford to be misled about the threat to the United States and what lies ahead in Iraq. The people I spoke to on my recent trip to southern Illinois got it right. One of them said: Why aren't we going to the Iraqi Government and saying that over 3 years ago we sent in our soldiers to depose your dictator, a man whom no one respected; we deposed him so that you could take control of your own country. We put American lives on the line so you could hold free elections. We gave you a chance to start your own government. When are the Iraqis going to stand up for themselves, their own country, and their own defense? How many years have we been promised that we are so close to the day when the Iraqi Army will be able to take the place of the U.S. Army? I will believe it when the first American soldier comes home and is replaced by an Iraqi soldier ready to stand and die for Iraq, as our soldiers do every single day.
Sadly, we don't know when that day might come. The President comes before the American people several weeks ago and what does he say? ``Be patient.'' Be patient as more American soldiers are endangered and lose their lives. Be patient as we face a situation with no end in sight. It is hard to counsel patience. When asked directly when will the American soldiers be coming home, what did the President say? That will be up to the next President--the next President.
The Iraq war has lasted almost as long as World War II. If we have to wait 2 1/2 more years for American soldiers to come home, it will be one of the longest conflicts in our history. Is this what we bargained for when we invaded Iraq? We know now that the so-called coalition of the willing involved a lot of countries, but primarily it involved American lives. It is American soldiers who are standing and fighting in vastly greater numbers than any other country that is involved.
Let me tell you that the families who wait at home anxiously want to know the same answer to the question I pose: When, Mr. President, is this war going to end? When are we going to turn over the responsibility to the Iraqis?
When will we replace American soldiers with Iraqis who will stand and fight for Iraq? This last week I was in Illinois and visiting with friends of mine who work in railroad unions. I talked about this issue, and a fellow followed me out of the room and said: My son is headed over there next week. He started crying. This strong fellow who worked for the railroad all his life was a father whose heart was broken knowing his son was going into this danger. How many families have had to watch that happen and waited anxiously and expectantly at home for the letters and e-mails and phone calls? How many, sadly, have received the tragic news that they were one of the 2,346 families who lost someone they loved very much in that country?
...
Of course, neither of these three speeches offer a solution or even an attempt to a solution, contrarely to Kerry. But it is good to see some Democrats at least stand up and speak out.
So, for them:
:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:
:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
