$94.2 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan without timelines, restrictions, or money to close Gitmo

[bigtree]

from Roll Call: (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_125/news/34595-1.html)


HOUSE Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) on Monday outlined a $94 billion war spending bill — $9 billion more than President Barack Obama has requested — without a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq or binding restrictions on the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Obey also refused to provide $80 million for closing the detainee facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, saying the plans for doing so are not yet ready. And he did not give Obama the authority to invest $100 billion in the International Monetary Fund.

Many left-leaning Members had signed letters in previous years refusing to support any more funding for Iraq unless a timeline for withdrawal was included, and many have expressed concern both at the lack of binding benchmarks for Afghanistan and Pakistan and the emphasis on military spending over economic and humanitarian aid.

Obey said he wanted to give Obama a year to show what he can do on the war front just as he gave President Richard Nixon a year to start getting out of Vietnam.

“If I gave Richard Nixon a year to show what he could do, I certainly don’t see why I wouldn’t give Barack Obama a year,” Obey said.

____________

from WaPo: (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/05/05/at_white_house_and_on_the_hill.html?wprss=44)


TWO weeks ago, David Obey warned that the war in Afghanistan might "devour" President Obama's policy agenda, turning into "a problem that nobody knows how to get out of." Yesterday, the House Appropriations chairman unveiled a $94 billion supplemental bill to pay for the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and funnel economic aid to rapidly deteriorating Pakistan.

The measure has funding for other purposes as well, but the "Af-Pak" region -- where Obey said yesterday he was "very dubious" of U.S. prospects for success -- is the bill's primary focus, and "Mr. Obama's war" may well become the primary focus of the president's first term.

The always-outspoken Obey says he'll give Obama a year to deal with the Af-Pak mess (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/05/04/1921835.aspx), just as he gave Richard Nixon a year to figure out Vietnam when he arrived at the White House. (Yes, Obey has been in Congress a long time, and no, the Obama administration does not want to see more Democrats mention "Afghanistan" and "Vietnam" together.) With many antiwar Democrats all-but-certain to oppose this funding measure because it doesn't include a firm withdrawal timeline for either Iraq or Afghanistan, Obama will be forced to rely on a bipartisan coalition of supporters to get the money he wants. And he can only hope that the situation looks better in a year, when he comes back to the Hill to ask for more.

___________


from The Hill: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obey-warns-afghanistan-funding-may-slow-unless-significant-progress-made-2009-05-04.html


HOUSE Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) signaled he might not be so generous in funding the Afghanistan war next year unless significant progress is made — progress that could be difficult to achieve.

“The president feels obligated to give it a shot . So fine. We’ll help him give it a shot for a year,” Obey said on Monday. “But at the end of the year, I want to have a hardnosed, realistic evaluation based on the performance standards that we’re talking about. … I’m not going to be looking at those standards like I’m the permanent president of an optimists club.”

Asked if he envisioned Congress cutting off funding for the war altogether, Obey said: “If it becomes a fool’s errand, I would hope so.”

__________

excellent summary at Counterpunch: (Obama's War Budget - http://www.counterpunch.org/leys05042009.html)

5/4/09 - 2009 Supplemental for Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Pandemic Flu:

Summary: http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/FY09SuppSummary05-04-09.pdf

Obey Statement: http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/ObeySuppStatement05-04-09.pdf

Pelosi Statement: http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-04-2009/0005018972&EDATE=

[Mari333]

1. the elephant in the room

monolithic war, never ending wars. want the country to go completely bankrupt? unending occupations in foreign countries with no exit will do it.

[Sal Minella]

2. bin Ladin knew that, and Cheney-Bush fell (jumped?) into the trap.

[EnoughOfThis]

3. Surprised......I'm not.

I think that we need to make peace with the fact that O is doing what he wants, no matter what we think he should do. We should enjoy the changes with which we agree, but hold our noses as he does some things that we don't want. I believe that BO might be the most arrogant poliician ever.....and that says a lot. He has HIS plan and we should just enjoy what comes of it, ignoring where we might have a problem with it. We would never have gotten this from GWB (to be sure). I may sound cynical, but tell me I'm wrong in a year. Enjoy what you can.

[bigtree]

4. .

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. The vote on this monstrosity will separate the doves from the hawks.

It will be amusing to watch the newly hatched hawks(D) twist themselves into pretzels trying to defend the indefensible.

But, Obama has a plan. So did Nixon in that other lost war.

[bigtree]

6. their dirty little secret

. . . many Democrats are just fine with the warfare, as long as they don't have to do the fighting and dying. As long as they can look like they're following Obama's lead they can claim clean hands whenever they please. Easy yes vote for legislators who claim they're just supporting the president. Works here at DU.

[mmonk]

7. I'm afraid you are correct.

[leftstreet]

8. “If it becomes a fool’s errand...

Asked if he envisioned Congress cutting off funding for the war altogether, Obey said: “If it becomes a fool’s errand, I would hope so.”

uh...hello...?

K&R

[SammyWinstonJack]

10. That ship has already sailed.

:shrug:

[humbled_opinion]

9. I say...

Give Obama a chance, he understands the stakes. I think Obama is our best shot at a peaceful resolution to all this strife. Remember where this country just came from and be thankful for Obama. I certainly am.

[bigtree]

11. that's certainly not an original position here

The problem with the 'give Obama a chance' argument is that he's already gone astray from what many feel is the line he should have drawn in continuing (and escalating) these occupations. The administration is operating from a wrongheaded set of assumptions about what is in our national interest and has actually borrowed many of the previous administration's justifications for remaining on the offensive in both countries. I am waiting for a reversal of all of that, but, I'm not holding my breath.

Btw, I never believed the nonsense that changing course in Iraq and Afghanistan was such 'hard work' as the previous WH pretended. Obama is in charge of these deployments (given Congress' lack of will to follow their own responsibility through the power of the purse). It's a choice he's made to remain engaged, effectively the same opportunistic calculation the last bunch made. If it's not opportunism, it's just plain ignorance of the tragic lessons already offered over the past seven years. Obama may well be our 'best shot', but he doesn't hold the responsibility for these deployments alone. Congress needs to step up and assert themselves. But, I'm not holding my breath.

[Solly Mack]

12. K&R

[KG]

13. it's a big muddy, and the damn fools are pushing on.

iraq, afghanistan, iran, pakistan - when all you got is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

[bigtree]

14. when will we ever learn?

[KG]

15. dunno. from even the 'revolutionary war', the elites have fooled the poor folks to do their fighting

poor folks still falling for the myth that the fighting is going to somehow benefit them.

[Vidar]

16. Rewards for torture & genocide well done.

[bigtree]

17. the fuel

for their fire

[EFerrari]

18. We still have Iran Contra fixer GATES at the Pentagon and NeoCon HOLBROOKE

as Special Rep to Afghanistan & Pakistan. And Holbrooke's testimony today before the House Foreign Affiars Committee on Strategy was a real peach! He says the military aid we gave to Pakitan went to the wrong items! They need NIGHT GOGGLES and HELICOPTERS! And they need to MAINTAIN THEIR HELICOPTERS BETTER! Now he tells us! :sarcasm:

Meanwhile, 30 civilians were killed in Afghanistan today.