Reid: The President's Iraq Plan is a Serious Mistake

[bigtree]

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid today delivered the following speech on the Floor of the United
States Senate, expressing his concern about President Bush's plan to
escalate the crisis in Iraq by sending tens of thousands more American men
and women into the middle of a civil war.

The text of Senator Reid's speech, as prepared, is below.

Mr. President, today the Senate will continue our important work on
ethics reform. In the last few days, we've had a good, bipartisan debate in
the Senate, and we've made significant progress towards giving America a
government as good an honest as the people it serves.

This morning, I'd like to talk about another important debate in our
country -- Iraq. Last night, after weeks of anticipation, President Bush
announced his new war plan.

I was encouraged that President Bush used his speech to finally admit
mistakes have been made in waging the war, but by calling for the
escalation of this conflict, he is on the verge of making another.

As I made clear in a letter to the President last week, I oppose his
new plan because it sends the wrong signal to the Iraqis. However,
President Bush is the commander in chief, and his proposal deserves serious
consideration by this Body.

In the days ahead, we will give his proposal and the overall situation
in Iraq a thorough review. We will have hearings on the President's plan.
We will ask experts about his proposal, and when the process is complete,
we will have a vote in the Senate.

This morning I will not prejudge the outcome of the vote on the
President's plan, but I will say this: I believe putting more U.S. combat
forces in the middle of an Iraqi civil war is a serious mistake.

Last November, voters across America spoke loudly for change in Iraq.
In overwhelming numbers, they delivered a vote of no confidence in the
President's open-ended commitment, and demanded we begin to bring the war
to a close.

Last December, the Baker-Hamilton Commission -- a respected panel of
foreign policy experts who studied the war -- echoed the voters' call for
change. The Commission, which included both Democrats and Republicans,
determined the time has come to transition our forces out of Iraq, while
launching a diplomatic and regional strategy to try to hold together this
destabilized region.

But last night, the President-in choosing escalation-ignored the will
of the people, the advice of the Baker-Hamilton Commission, and the
guidance of his top generals.

In choosing to escalate the war, the President stands alone.

Brave soldiers from Nevada and every state in this country have
sacrificed so much for Iraq. They have done their job. It is time for a
policy that honors their service by putting the future of Iraq in the hands
of the Iraqis.


http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=267460&


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[ShortnFiery]

1. In Military Speak ...

Dear Leader's plan is FUBAR right out of the gate! :blush: :P

[blm]

2. Do the RIGHT THING, Sen. Reid and let Kennedy bill get a floor vote.

Hold Bush accountable FOR REAL not for show.

[bigtree]

3. I'll bet he will

the question is whether Democrats will give him the numbers he needs to pass his binding resolution. Even Kennedy said yesterday that it'll take time for his proposal to develop.

[blm]

4. hope so - the nonbinding resolution BS on withdrawal just gave Bush 6 more months

of cover and brought us to last night. Had more Dems shown the guts to support the real withdrawal plan last June, Bush would have been much less likely to attempt hostilities against Iran.

[bigtree]

5. guts won't trump the political obstacles to an overreach without the votes to support it

Is there a veto-proof majority of legislators who would support Kennedy's proposal? I think public pressure and hearings, as well as events on the ground in Iraq can change some votes, but, anything that comes out of Congress with any teeth will have to have the support of a couple republican moderates in the Senate and more than a handful in the House to overcome a certain veto from Bush.

Why assume that some token opposition without a chance in hell of becoming law would make Bush do anything? He doesn't even respect the existing law. He has to be cornered into changing course by cornering the republicans. It doesn't even have to be directly related to the occupation or to the escalation to provide a good wedge between the republican legislators and Bush. That's how this will have to be managed. Deliberately, and politically.

The first resolutions are the bluster. The rest will be more complicated and, perhaps, with a less visible means of confrontation which may not satisfy those of us who want to crucify Bush. Nonetheless, barring some damning revelation, or some scandal (not a far-fetched possibility), the opposition from Congress will take some time to actually move Bush. It will have to emerge as a compromise with defecting republicans.

[blm]

6. Tough stances based in reality are always a good starting point, though.

.

[bigtree]

7. I like tough stances

kicking ass :kick: