Murtha plan - 6 months then deployed near Iraq. Kerry plan - 18 months to

[blm]

draw down with significant withdrawals at benchmark events, like Dec. election to SHOW Iraqis we have no intention to stay.

Bush plan - about a decade.

McCain plan - about a decade.

The media had FINALLY scheduled Kerry to talk about his withdrawal plan he submitted 3 weeks ago and then again in a bill last week on the senate floor. And, btw, even Tom Hayden analyzed it to be a DOABLE plan.

Murtha comes out with his plan today and so Wolf and Tweety have another angle to try and pit two Dems against each other, but neither Dem took that bait. After all, their plans are way closer together than the plans of the occupiers.

Too bad some have kneejerk reactions to media games. I'll chalk it up to bad reporting.

Thankfully, while Murtha and Kerry have some significant differences in their approaches, they are both essentially on the same withdrawal page. They are also respectful enough of each other to not be baited into battling each other, as the Wolfshill attempted.

I am surprised at the utter lack of comprehension of those who reported that Kerry came out to undermine Murtha, completely oblivious to the fact that Kerry was showing up to discuss his withdrawal plan from 3 weeks ago, and the media was trying to use Murtha's newly submitted plan to undercut Kerry.

I hope John A. reads a transcript next time or at least waits to watch a whole interview before he reports on what DIDN'T HAPPEN. Poor comprehension skills do not a journalist make.

[FlemingsGhost]

1. Or maybe Iraqis will just toss our bloodied asses out themselves

Their plan is working fine, so far.

Soon, we will have no choice but to respect THEIR wishes ... U.S. politicians plans be damned. "DOABLE" or not.

[blm]

3. So you are on record that we leave tomorrow?

What do you see happening day after tomorrow and the following week?

[FlemingsGhost]

4. Civil War is inevitable, in my opinion. So, we have two choices:

Get out, or order up a shitload of body bags.

[_dynamicdems]

8. The problem is that Bushit and the Chickenhawk are not going to do

a damn thing. They are going to ignore any plans to hand over Iraq to Iraqis and just muddle through as they have been doing.

[FlemingsGhost]

10. Yup ... it will likely be the "hard way" ... feet first.

That's the "plan" that is in effect, right now.

That's the Iraqi plan. And it's looking very "doable."

[_dynamicdems]

12. Anarchy is not a plan, but they certainly have the right to want us out of

their country. If his talk of late is any indication, King George is going to dig in his heels. Both the Congressman and the Senator offered advise today that will be ignored. There will be no troop withdrawals as long as we have King George in the White House. If that is the case, which I hope to God it is not, then you are quite correct about those body bags.

[wisteria]

2. Good post! the goal is to bring our troops home and leave Iraq

as secure as possible allowing them to defend themselves.

[sandnsea]

5. I agree

People should not lose site of the goal, which is an end to the war. All the plans I've seen are centered on the premise of giving Iraq back to the Iraqis and that our presence is impeding that process. That's the message of unity that America can rally behind. A sector by sector turnover is doable and troops can be brought all the way home, not just redeployed to another forward location.

[_dynamicdems]

6. Well, if the Administration ignores these plans and continues to

blunder on full speed ahead, how far will Congress go to stop it?

Democrats are working on plans to get us the hell out of there. All I see from Shrub and Co. is more of the same bushit. Just what was their plan anyhow?

Oh yeah, attack Democrats who come up with plans as unpatriotic and stay the course no matter how many of our sons and daughters die in the process. Nice plan Shrub and Dickhead.

[blm]

13. A few more Repubs on our side and we can make it happen legislatively.

.

[_dynamicdems]

14. That would be something!

Some of the Republicans are starting to get very nervous about 2006. (Notice how they want to keep the talk on 2008?) We have a Senate and a House chock full of quivering chickenhawks. The only thing they fear more than actually having to go to war themselves is that they might be unseated by a....liberal Democrat!

[MH1]

7. My question. (serious question)

How would any withdrawal plan at all be allowed to happen, if * digs in his heels? This is a guy who is pathologically unable to admit to making a mistake, remember.

So the Congress votes on a "plan" to withdraw troops from Iraq. Would * agree to it? I presume it woiuld be in the form of a bill, that * would have to sign? I just can't see him signing it, unless enough republicans have a substantive way to twist his arm...like impeachment...but I don't see enough republicans ever being willing to go there, at least while they are in the majority in both houses.

We could oppose spending bills for the war, but wouldn't that just backfire as "not supporting the troops", and not really do anything to generate orders to military units to leave Iraq?

I'm seriously wondering about this. Even if a majority of both houses could agree that we should get out of Iraq - even by the Kerry plan, I doubt a majority will EVER go for the Murtha plan (because of the "cut and run" meme) - how the hell do we make * actually DO it?

[_dynamicdems]

9. Impeachment. Difficult to run a war from a jail cell. n/t

[MH1]

15. Well, it would have to be BOTH * and Cheney.

Then we get who, Hastert?

Plus, unless Dems retake the House in 2006 (very dim prospect IMHO, despite all the current optimism, due to the gerrymander situation) then there is no way there will be an impeachment anyway. Too many republicans just wouldn't cross that line.

And if we wait for impeachment, that is a very long way away anyway. Even if it could happen.

So I think anyway. Sorry that is so pessimistic. But that is the point of my question - what practical mechanism exists to force * to withdraw troops from Iraq?

[blm]

11. That's what Hayden was factoring in when he made his analysis.

He felt there was enough there for both sides to come to agreement.