Shouldn't these people know their place by now? Kennedy has been there forever, don't you think he should know that Congress declares war and the President implements it and decides what the troop levels will be? They can cut all funds but they can't mandate how many troops he sends to war, it's his call alone. Maybe Binden can explain that to Kennedy.
U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., laid down the gauntlet today, making the first formal effort to block President Bush's expected plan for a surge of American troops in Iraq with a bill that would block funding for the additional soldiers and offering clear comparisons to Vietnam.
Speaking a day before President Bush is expected to unveil a new strategy for Iraq, Kennedy, a senior member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, said he would offer a new bill that would bar additional troops and additional money for new operations in Iraq without congressional approval.
The bill targets a key portion of the president's plan, which is expected to include some 20,000 new troops to quell violence in the capital of Baghdad for an indefinite period, despite polls that show that a clear majority of Americans are opposed to a new commitment of American troops. Even if Democrats can muster enough votes to pass Kennedy's legislation, it is unlikely they would be able to override a veto by President Bush.
Man! It's a sad day when Biden is the smart one.
Here's the video if you are interested:
And then there's this:
"In Vietnam, the White House grew increasingly obsessed with victory, and increasingly divorced from the will of the people and any rational policy [what? Those who wanted defeat? Isn't it rational to want victory in a war? I would think it would be irrational to want defeat in a war]. The Department of Defense kept assuring us that each new escalation in Vietnam would be the last. Instead, each one led only to the next. There was no military solution to that war," Kennedy said. "Echoes of that disaster are all around us today. Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam."Let's all just sit in stunned silence and soak up the stupidity of this comment for a moment before commenting....(I hope we don't lose IQ points doing this)....OK, I'm more than a little surprised that Kennedy would have a problem with a president wanting victory in a war. Um, doesn't he realize that you have to win a war or your enemy will be the victor?
In Vietnam when we left millions of people were killed but our enemy did not follow us. That will not be the case this time. There's a huge difference between then and now, we can't just leave with our tail between are legs. Defeat will mean that our enemy takes over Iraq and empowers both Iran and Syria. Not only does it mean the end to Israel but they will follow us home and fight us here. Then where do we run to?
And Kennedy and Pelosi aren't the only ones who need to a refresher course on the power held by each branch of the government:
In the House, Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., introduced a resolution urging the president not to send additional troops. The resolution also asks that the president seek Congress's permission if he wants to raise levels beyond 132,000.But it doesn't matter what they say it looks like it's already going to happen:
Up to 20,000 troops will be put on alert and be prepared to deploy under the president's plan, but the increase in forces on the ground will be gradual, said the official, who requested anonymity because the plans have not yet been announced.And as all this mishegas is going on, the troops, both Iraqi and US, are doing their job and killing the militants:
Details were emerging a day before Bush was to address the nation on his broad initiative to shore up the fragile country after nearly four years of bloodshed. Bush is expected to link the troop increase to moves by the Iraqi government to ease the country's murderous sectarian tensions, and to increased U.S. economic aid.
Moving first into Iraq would be the 2nd Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, which is in Kuwait and poised to move quickly into the country, the defense official said.
The U.S. military said about 1,000 Iraqi and U.S. soldiers carried out "targeted raids to capture multiple targets, disrupt insurgent activity and restore Iraqi Security Forces control of North Haifa Street."
"This area has been subject to insurgent activity which has repeatedly disrupted Iraqi Security Force operations in central Baghdad," said a statement quoting Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, spokesman for Multi-National Division Baghdad.
He said the U.S. jets buzzing the city did not conduct any airstrikes, but "attack helicopters were used to engage targets in support of the ground forces."
Bleichwehl said no American or Iraqi soldiers were killed. He did not address the number of militants killed, while the Iraqi Defense Ministry reported 50 deaths among insurgents.
