| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Dems Back Away from O's War Funding |
| 2009-11-26 |
| President Obama will reveal his new Afghanistan war strategy in a speech Tuesday evening to cadets at West Point, but his most skeptical audience is likely to be the powerful Democrats on Capitol Hill who oppose a troop buildup. Top Democrats have made it clear to Obama that he will not receive a friendly reception should he announce what is considered the leading option: sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. The legislators have indicated that a request for more money to finance a beefed-up war effort will be met with frustration and, perhaps, a demand to raise taxes. You mean, more than Obamacare? Only need to raise taxes if we have a military? "Trillions for health care! Not one red cent for self-defense!" On Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) described what she called "serious unrest" in her caucus over the prospect of another vote to finance billions of dollars for an expanded war. It is, she said, the most difficult vote she can ask of the members of her party. "We need to know what the mission is, how this is further protecting the American people and is this the best way to do that, especially at a time when there's such serious economic issues here at home," she told bloggers on a Tuesday conference call. But Obamacare will improve the economy? Cap and trade? In June, Pelosi strong-armed anti-war Democrats into voting for a $100 billion measure to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. During an interview in July, she recounted her appeal to the lawmakers: "Will you change your mind and one more time vote for war funding?" She also promised not to ask again. "This is the very last time," she told them. Now, barely five months later, Pelosi and Obama will soon have to go back to the war well, even as they seek difficult votes from the same Democrats on health-care reform, climate change legislation and regulation of the financial industry. Senior aides said the president's first task will be to seek the understanding of an uneasy nation for his new approach to a war that began eight years ago. Among the reassurances he will offer, they said, is a promise that an end is in sight. "We are in year nine of our efforts in Afghanistan. We're not going to be there another eight or nine years," Gibbs said. Germany and Japan - 64 years; Korea 59 years, but we got out of Vietnam in way less. But members of the party's most liberal wing, such as Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), have expressed serious doubts about the overall direction of the president's strategy. "Devoting billions more dollars and tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan is not likely to significantly improve conditions in that country, and it will not help - and could even hurt - our efforts to dismantle al-Qaeda's global network with safe havens in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, North Africa and elsewhere," Feingold said. Even the Democratic Party's more hawkish lawmakers, such as Sen. Carl M. Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, have said they have deep reservations about the wisdom of a troop buildup. Kerry has said he is "very wary of it because of past experience and because of some of the challenges that I see." Levin has insisted that more be done to train Afghan troops Doing nothing is better than not doing it my way. I think there is more at the link, but I'm tired. So tired. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #4 "Will you change your mind and one more time vote for war funding?" She also promised not to ask again. "This is the very last time," she told them. This is NOT strong-arming the anti-war Ds, it's HIJACKING US foreign policy. Pelosi knew this when she said it. |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2009-11-26 15:05 |
| #3 Ricky - I think that was a typo - should have been "mawkish" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-11-26 14:04 |
| #2 "Devoting billions more dollars ... is not likely to significantly improve conditions in that country, and it will not help - and could even hurt... Are you sure she's not mixing this up with the Stimulus Package(s)? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-11-26 13:58 |
| #1 Even the Democratic Party's more hawkish lawmakers, such as Sen. Carl M. Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Sen. John F. Kerry... Sheesh. As if we needed any more proof that the Quislingcrats and their MSM sock puppets inhabit a parallel universe... |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2009-11-26 13:41 |