Reid vs. Lieberman

Reid vs. Lieberman –updated–

Let\’s get something straight. Escalation is not about whether Congress has
the constitutional authority to keep Bush from escalating the war in Iraq. Turley laid that out last night on Olbermann. It\’s whether Congress has the spine to stop Bush. The Founders made it clear.

What Democrats must be willing to do is block funds for the escalation plans
of the president, but they need Republicans on board to get the job done. Mr.
Bush needs money to escalate and if Congress puts a halt or conditions to those
funds Bush would have to veto the entire appropriations package or whatever else is sent to him to push back.

Democrats have to lead and play hardball to get this done.

I am particularly disappointed that there are no credible benchmarks and no way to measure the military and economic progress of this operation. There is no incentive for the Iraqis to take over. All of us want stability in the Middle East, and Iraq is an important element in achieving that stability. But the military and their families deserve an achievable mission. It is unacceptable to me that we are sending troops back to Iraq who have not completed their training cycle and that we are extending troops who are battle-weary from the intensive combat in Iraq. A year ago, I called for a redeployment of our forces and predicted that this \”stay the course\” policy would adversely affect our military readiness. The Defense Subcommittee will begin holding extensive hearings on January 17th to determine how we can best restore the readiness and strategic reserve of our military. A Surge in American Forces is Unacceptable

But we\’ve got a huge problem brewing in the Senate.

A top GOP senator said that he \”will filibuster\” any Democratic attempt to decrease funding for President Bush\’s new Iraq plan, the Associated Press reports. \”At a news conference, McConnell accused Democrats of secretly favoring a plan to cut off funding for the troops – an allegation that Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. denied,\” AP reports. \”The fundamental decision to stay on offence and to finish the job, I think is correct, and we believe the president is heading in the right direction and tend to support him,\” Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell said before Bush\’s speech last night. McConnell also talked to some right-leaning bloggers earlier this morning to earn their support for his potential filibuster, telling them on a conference call with other journalists that he expects Independent Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman to also join in with the Republicans. … Top GOP senator \’will filibuster any Democratic attempt to decrease funding for Bush\’s new Iraq plan

Obviously, Mitch McConnell is not Bill Frist.

However, Harry Reid didn\’t come up through Nevada politics and succeed spectacularly because he was a pussy. Reid\’s reply to Mr. Bush today: NO ESCALATION. NO WAY.

The battle lines are drawn.

UPDATE (4:10 p.m.): Wanted to read a portion of Juan Cole\’s post today, but ran out of time. Make sure you read it: Bush Sends GIs to his Private Fantasyland.

If part of the strategy is to assault the Mahdi Army frontally, that will cause enormous trouble in the Shiite south. I would suggest that PM Nuri al-Maliki\’s warning to the Mahdi Militia to disarm or face the US military is in fact code. He is telling the Sadrists to lie low while the US mops up the Sunni Arab guerrillas. Sadr\’s militia became relatively quiescent for a whole year after the Marines defeated it at Najaf in August, 2004. But since it is rooted in an enormous social movement, the militia is fairly easy to reconstitute after it goes into hiding.

UPDATE (2:40 p.m.): Senator Feingold is correct.

UPDATE (1:25 p.m. – via email): And then there were ten… Republicans
joining Majority Leader Reid, that is. Talk is cheap and meant for campaigns. Also, news (via CNN) is that Senator Reid will
not go so far as to block funding for Bush\’s escalation. If true, you know what
that means.

Senator Chuck Hagel Calls the President\’s Speech the Most Dangerous Foreign Policy Blunder since Vietnam. \”I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam — if it\’s carried out. I will resist it.\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator Norm Coleman Opposes President Bush\’s Escalation Plan. \”And to put the lives of Americans soldiers — more, in the center of that, without first having something that\’s substantial, something we can point to, other than this sense of trust, other than looking someone in the eye, having a conversation. I\’m not prepared, at this time, to support that. It\’s — the cost is too great.\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator John Sununu Expressed His Concerns about President Bush\’s Escalation Plan. \”There were some areas where I have a little bit more concern, such as whether or not the use of the troops discussed will really be appropriate in dealing with sectarian violence in Baghdad…\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator George Voinovich Is Skeptical of the Plan for Escalation. \”I think you should know that I am skeptical that a surge of troops will bring an end to the escalation of violence and the insurgency in Iraq. Many of the generals that have served there have said they don\’t believe additional troops will be helpful in Baghdad particularly. And, Madam Secretary, my faith in Prime Minister Maliki\’s ability to make the hard choices necessary to bring about political solutions has to be restored. What we need is a political solution between the Sunnis and the Shiite.\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator Lisa Murkowski Not Convinced by the President\’s Plan. \”I would agree with Senator Hagel that, given the American lives that have been lost in Iraq, we want to make sure that we have a policy that is worthy of their sacrifices. And those are his words. And I think they\’re very well spoken. But I\’m not convinced, as I look to the plan that the president presented yesterday, that what we\’re seeing is that much different than what we have been doing in the past.\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator Vitter Is Concerned the President\’s Plan is Too Little Too Late. \”And so that does lead to a concern of mine that we may commit the same mistake I think we clearly have in the past, which is too little, maybe too late.\” [Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony, 1/11/07] Senator Susan Collins Says an Increase in Troop Levels Is a Mistake. \”Based on the trip I took to Iraq last month, I concluded it would be a mistake to increase the overall level of troops in Iraq.\” [Chicago Tribune, 1/11/07] Sen. Gordon Smith Opposes the Escalation. \”We are extending an ineffective tactic to further the status quo. Iraqis must be the ones to settle their own peace.\” [AP, 1/10/07] Senator Olympia Snowe Is Skeptical That an Escalation Will Address the Problem. \”I have deep scepticism about it, about a surge addressing the root causes of the mistrust and hatred that sects have for each other. That\’s what I expressed. The fact of the matter is that the American people don\’t support this war and the way it has evolved because they see the Iraqis fighting among themselves instead of for themselves.\” [Irish Times, 1/10/07] Sen. Sam Brownback – from Baghdad — Says Escalation Is Not the Answer. \”I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer. Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution.\” [AP, 1/10/07]