Senate Republicans Block Iraq Withdrawal Bill

Associated Press:

The Senate blocked legislation Friday that would have ordered most U.S. troops home from Iraq in nine months, culminating a losing week for Democrats who failed to push through any anti-war proposal.

The vote, 47-47, fell 13 votes short of the 60 needed to cut off debate.

"We're going to continue to lose lives and squander resources while they (the Iraqis) dawdle," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who sponsored the bill.

Read the whole story: Associated Press

Comments

[luckysun]

06:30 PM on 09/21/2007

I don't like the ideaa of telegraphing when we get out of Iraq, but I also don't think we should be bogged down there either. All we're doing is making sure war contractors make billions in fraud and waste from the American taxpayer (Seriously, who else benefits?). But we need to do our best to not leave a power vacuum or make things any worse than they are, if possible.

[Merrysunshine]

06:22 PM on 09/21/2007

110th Congress / Senate / 1st session / Vote 346

* Question: On the Amendment
* Bill: H R 1585
* Vote description: Levin Amdt. No. 2898; To provide for a reduction and transition of United States forces in Iraq.
* Vote type: 3/5 (Help)

Vote totals

Democratic Voting Yes:

Daniel Akaka, Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Joseph Biden, Jeff Bingaman, Sherrod Brown, Robert Byrd, Maria Cantwell, Ben Cardin, Thomas Carper, Bob Casey, Hillary Clinton, Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan, Russell Feingold, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Harkin, Daniel Inouye, Tim Johnson, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Amy Klobuchar, Herb Kohl, Mary Landrieu, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy, Carl Levin, Blanche Lincoln, Claire McCaskill, Robert Menéndez, Barbara Mikulski, Patty Murray, Bill Nelson, Barack Obama, Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Jay Rockefeller, Kenneth Salazar, Chuck Schumer, Debbie Stabenow, Jon Tester, Jim Webb, Sheldon Whitehouse, Ron Wyden

Democratic Voting No: Christopher Dodd, Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor

Democratic Not Voting:
Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin

Independent Party Voting No: Joseph Lieberman

Independent Party Not Voting: Bernard Sanders

Republican Party Voting Yes:

Chuck Hagel, Gordon Smith, Olympia Snowe

Republican Party Voting No:

Lamar Alexander, Wayne Allard, John Barrasso, Kit Bond, Sam Brownback, Jim Bunning, Richard Burr, Saxby Chambliss, Tom Coburn, Thad Cochran, Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, Bob Corker, John Cornyn, Larry Craig, Michael Crapo, Jim DeMint, Elizabeth Dole, John Ensign, Michael Enzi, Lindsey Graham, Charles Grassley, Judd Gregg, Orrin Hatch, Kay Bailey Hutchison, James Inhofe, Johnny Isakson, Jon Kyl, Richard Lugar, Mel Martinez, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Lisa Murkowski, Pat Roberts, Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, Arlen Specter, Ted Stevens, John Sununu, John Thune, David Vitter, George Voinovich, John Warner

Republican Party Not Voting:

Robert Bennett, Pete Domenici, Trent Lott

I suggest all those who voted "no" or who did not vote sign their children and grandchildren up immediately for deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan.

[ceasenake]

06:32 PM on 09/21/2007

How long do you think the "war" will last after the 2008 election?

Both houses of Congress will be filled with Democtats, along with the White House.

Will all the troops be home before 2011?

[acudoctor]

06:15 PM on 09/21/2007

Sept. 20, 2007 - Imagine a universe where a man can gun down women and children anytime he pleases, knowing he will never be brought to justice. A place where morality is null and void, and arbitrary killing is the rule. A place that has been imagined hitherto only in nightmarish dystopian fiction, like “1984,” or in fevered passages from Dostoevsky—or which existed during the Holocaust and Stalinist purges and the Dark Ages. Well, that universe exists today. It is called Iraq. And the man who made it possible is George W. Bush.

The moral vacuum of Iraq—where Blackwater USA guards can kill 10 or 20 Iraqis on a whim and never be prosecuted for it—did not happen by accident.

Oh that one day this will be visited upon America

[acudoctor]

06:16 PM on 09/21/2007

The link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20892483/site/newsweek/

[acudoctor]

06:35 PM on 09/21/2007

In Iraq, private contractors outnumber U.S. troops
By Richard Lardner
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The United States has assembled an imposing industrial army in Iraq that's larger than its uniformed fighting force and is responsible for such a broad swath of responsibilities that the military might not be able to operate without its private-sector partners.

More than 180,000 Americans, Iraqis and nationals from other countries work under federal contracts to provide security, gather intelligence, build roads, improve infrastructure, forge a financial system and transport needed supplies in a country the size of California.

That figure contrasts with the 163,100 U.S. military personnel, according to U.S. Central Command, responsible for military operations in the Middle East. The Pentagon puts the military figure at 169,000. An additional 12,400 coalition forces are stationed in Iraq.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/iraq/2003893181_iraqoutsource20.html

I wonder if they could be detained indefinetly as 'Enemy Combatants' . Thoughts???

[EtJ]

06:10 PM on 09/21/2007

BOTH parties are at fault. If the Senators with souls, spoke the TRUTH to the American public, this war would be OVER !! Sadly Americans do not hold their politicians accountable. Even worse, they do not take the time to educate themselves. Hence the divide and conquer game is so effective on fool Americans.

[acudoctor]

06:02 PM on 09/21/2007

HEY - Petraeus' death-count methodology is out!!

MNF-I's methodology identifies a number of factors, necessarily subjective, that help analysts determine whether an attack or a death should be considered sectarian. Ethno-sectarian violence is defined as violence "conducted by one ethnic/religious group against another ethnic/religious group, where the primary motivation for the event is based on ethnic or religious reasons." MNF-I analysts consider the location of the attack -- whether it took place in a mixed area or a homogeneous one -- and the type of attack in order to determine ethnic or sectarian violence.

Interestingly, attacks against "same-sect civilians," U.S. forces, the Iraqi government or Iraqi security forces "are excluded and not defined as sectarian attacks." So even though Sunni insurgent groups loathe the Shiite-controlled government, insurgent attacks on it aren't considered sectarian violence.

Additionally, MNF-I calculates that the use of suicide vests, car bombs and IEDs strongly indicate Sunni perpetrators; and reasons that attacks using those methods on "medical centers, market places or religious symbols, mosques, religious gatherings, stores/restaurants, and housing areas" typically indicate sectarian violence, since those entities are primarily used by "one ethnic/sectarian group." MNF-I acknowledges that in these attacks "there may have been Sunnis killed or injured," and though it says it excludes "same-sect civilians" from the tally, these are counted as sectarian attacks.

For executions, murders and kidnappings -- situations in which sectarianism may be difficult to determine -- MNF-I says it uses "host nation" reporting in addition to its own. Many media and non-governmental organizations consider information on casualties released by the Iraqi ministries to be self-serving, misleading or contradictory.

Cherry-picking anyone?

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004266.php

[USMCMUSTANG]

05:55 PM on 09/21/2007

CuriousPerson

This inhuman POS is an example of repuke/nazicon thinking. I take that back--the chickenhawk bastards don't think.

[CuriousPerson]

06:07 PM on 09/21/2007

What inhuman piece of shit?

[lemonv]

05:31 PM on 09/21/2007

The reality of US Senate legislation of bills is there are 49 Democrats and Republicans each with 2 Independents. If you consider Lieberman as an Independent with Republican leanings, that would split the US Senate with 50 Democrats and Republicans. With the Vice President breaking the tie, the Republicans will win all the time.

It would be extremely difficult for the Democrats to pass any bills pertaining Iraq because it would need 66.66 or 67 votes (2/3 of 100) to override the presidential veto. They need 17 more votes from the Republicans.

With the unbending decisions of the President with respect to the Iraq war, coupled by the fact that he is a Republican, it is no wonder why the Republicans are still voting against troop withdrawal, even when the majority of Americans are for it.

Cutting the troop funding will also have to go though the same meatgrinder. See below.

Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides in part that--

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented to the President of the United States.

And that is the reality of how to enact laws with a 50/50 split between Repubs and Dems.

Hope this clears up the confusion on why the Democrats find it extremely hard in passing a Withdrawal of troops from Iraq bill.

[acudoctor]

05:46 PM on 09/21/2007

Congress does not have to pass legislation to bring an end to the war in Iraq -- it simply has to block passage of any bill that would continue to fund the war. This requires not 67 or 60 Senate votes, or even 51, but just 41 -- the number of senators needed to maintain a filibuster and prevent a bill from coming up for a vote. In other words, the Democrats have more than enough votes to end the Iraq War -- if they choose to do so.

[pudn52]

05:15 PM on 09/21/2007

And with that we have started our nationwide emailing campaign to make sure everyone we know and everyone they know and everyone they know and everyone they know...know how their Senator voted.

We're watching and keeping score.

[jmc42]

05:11 PM on 09/21/2007

*

Senate Republicans must believe that a dead or injured American soldier is one less American terrorist to inflict harm on the rest of the world. They have consistently blocked any attempt to reduce troop levels, stop the genocide and stop the fake war on terror.

Their bumper sticker,
Kill and an American Soldier and rid the World of another American Terrorist.

Perhaps they are right.

*

[Blutus]

04:52 PM on 09/21/2007

The issue in 06 was not the border
or Iraq but Republican corruption.

By the 08 elections, there will be enough
corruption to stain both parties.

The fun with Mr. Hsu has just begun.

And if there is another attack on America,
the Dems can kiss the White House goodbye.



Democrats should not be taking the 08 election
for granted.

To expect Americans to "pay attention" for over a year is asking too much.


If the Dems continue to take the American voter
for granted,
they will be stomped in 08.

Stomped.

[LaFeminazi]

04:56 PM on 09/21/2007

Agreed.

It will happen.

They better be prepared. My bet the US embassey will be blown up, since its construction is a total messand all the evidence of corruption with it.

[LaFeminazi]

04:56 PM on 09/21/2007

Baghdad Embassy

[LaFeminazi]

04:44 PM on 09/21/2007

5 wars

War on Drugs

War on Terror

Iraq

Afghanistan

The PR War

[acudoctor]

04:51 PM on 09/21/2007

I stand corrected.

[USMCMUSTANG]

05:56 PM on 09/21/2007

The war on the American people
The war on independent thinking
The war on stem cells (vicious little critters)
and on and on...

[CuriousPerson]

04:01 PM on 09/21/2007

Ok...who broke Huffpo?

[acudoctor]

04:41 PM on 09/21/2007

I see the US is still losing 2 wars.

[CuriousPerson]

03:32 PM on 09/21/2007

I see the Dems are as effective as ever.

Pussies.

[USMCMUSTANG]

05:53 PM on 09/21/2007

Well, Pussy, pay attention and you will see your effing DACS master obstructing progress (when they are molesting children). My brother is a Dem with a Bronze Star hanging on his wall. If you do not have one, STFU.

[LaFeminazi]

03:19 PM on 09/21/2007

Why don't we just call it what it is

A Crusade.

Get it over and done with, WWIII (or IV depending on your viewpoint).

Please give the rest of us fair warning so we can try and get out the way.

[dr4Will]

03:16 PM on 09/21/2007

gopee cowards are going down hard in 2008--there stupid racist party comes before the troops safety--right wing fanatics -every one of them!

[lindamart60]

03:22 PM on 09/21/2007

dr4will,

It's "their", not there.

God bless the troops.

[CuriousPerson]

03:34 PM on 09/21/2007

Which God?

Which troops?

[luckysun]

06:21 PM on 09/21/2007

God Bless them, indeed. They've been duped to fight for the benefit of war contractors, oil companies, and other conglomerates that profit handsomely from a protracted occupation. And then there's people at home like you, who think being bogged down in Iraq somehow benefits the American people in general. So, fine, support the "war", but understand who it's benefitting.

[Bystander]

03:33 PM on 09/21/2007

Excuse me, but it's the libs that want to turn tail and run. Kumbaya.

[CuriousPerson]

03:57 PM on 09/21/2007

You know, your name suits you perfectly.