GOP set to abandon ship on Iraq come September
posted at 12:28 pm on May 8, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Not everyone, of course, and probably not enough (in the Senate, at least) to form a veto-proof majority, but enough to give the left an irresistible talking point about “bipartisan consensus” and leverage to force the next major spending-bill compromise to be forged on its own terms. McCain likes to say that the road to victory’s going to be long and hard and tough, but that’s only two-thirds right: it’s not going to be long, for the simple reason that not everyone, including and especially the party leadership, is willing to stake their political future on our fortunes in Iraq the way McCain has. Petraeus has about 20 weeks to turn it around, otherwise a whole bunch of people — led by Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, John Sununu and various other blue-state conservatives — are going to head for the lifeboats to put as much distance between them and the war as they can before next year’s election.
Congressional leaders from both political parties are giving President Bush a matter of months to prove that the Iraq war effort has turned a corner, with September looking increasingly like a decisive deadline.
In that month, political pressures in Washington will dovetail with the military timeline in Baghdad. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commanding general in Iraq, has said that by then he will have a handle on whether the current troop increase is having any impact on political reconciliation between Iraq’s warring factions. And fiscal 2008, which begins Oct. 1, will almost certainly begin with Congress placing tough new strings on war funding…
The new House proposal would immediately provide about $43 billion of the $95.5 billion the administration says it needs to keep the war going through Sept. 30… The remaining $52.5 billion in the bill would be contingent on a second vote in late July…
“There is a sense that by September, you’ve got to see real action on the part of Iraqis,” said Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.). “I think everybody knows that, I really do.”
“I think a lot of us feel that way,” agreed Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).
I don’t see the point of July two-step, unless it’s a token gesture of resistance to please the nutroots and the anti-war stalwarts. If they show good faith and give Bush the money he needs through September, they have a stronger case to make to wavering Republicans in October that they gave him every opportunity to make the surge work and he blew it. If they make a stink in July, though, it’ll alienate and further entrench the right’s moulting hawks. Centrist Dem Ben Nelson’s already talking about extending the funding straightaway through September 30, probably for that very reason.
Poor Petraeus. What a task.
Update: Electoral realities do make the bickering over a timetable for withdrawal somewhat absurd. If AQ’s paying close enough attention to Harry Reid’s declarations of defeat to cite them in their communiques, they’re paying close enough attention to know that things are coming to a head here in the fall. So never mind withdrawal: if they want to capitalize, it’s not troop movements but political maneuvering that they’ll time their attacks to exploit. Expect a go-for-broke uptick in attacks in August, in other words.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Boy I certainly hope that when we decide to stop fighting the Jihadis agree to stop as well.
Zetterson on May 8, 2007 at 12:34 PM
So you set a date and all the enemy has to do is keep the pressure on ’til then and they have won. Who knows that if the dims hadn’t started this ‘by a certain date’ crap the enemy would have folded up and gone home. There is no incentive for them to quit now.
What a sorry mess!
OBX Pete on May 8, 2007 at 12:39 PM
It certainly does suck for Petraeus, but really, we knew this was coming.
Dash on May 8, 2007 at 12:45 PM
It’s weird how often conservative web sites will cite unreliable liberal news organizations such as MSNBC, NY Times, Washington Post, Time, etc., despite regularly confirming that they are biased and largely worthless.
Allah, do you really care what an organization that pays Keith Olbermann to comment on politics has to say about anything?
Jaibones on May 8, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Although Olympia Snowe isn’t up for re-election anytime soon, she is already edging toward the lifeboats.
Honestly, though, I’m just as worried about the sectarian stalemate as she is, although without her defeatism.
Slublog on May 8, 2007 at 12:46 PM
You know. We funded the war before we defunded it.
BacaDog on May 8, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Norm Coleman and Susan Collins are charting the course of our great nation. What a wonderful and calming feeling.
Dean Barnett on May 8, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Well, that’s a Washington Post article, even though it’s hosted at MSNBC. But … yeah, I trust them in this case. What makes you think they’re lying?
Allahpundit on May 8, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Yes and no. They report honestly when it boosts their cause, so this could well be true, and given what a supreme bunch of f*ckups we have on the Hill, I wouldn’t be too surprised if it were true.
Bad Candy on May 8, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Haha.
Sorry, folks.
I don’t see her losing next year, though. Maine has a way of keeping its senators around, and the state-wide Democratic bench is pretty weak up here.
Slublog on May 8, 2007 at 12:52 PM
I’m so glad we put him in a power position, again.
amerpundit on May 8, 2007 at 12:53 PM
I think that the Senate Republicans except for John McCain should be told: (i) that they are an embarrassing bunch of worthless wusses; and (ii) that they will only play into Democrat hands if they bail out on Iraq. Principle is the right course of action always, but here, there is really nothing to be gained and everything to lose by trying to play the expediency game. If Senate Republicans bail on the President and General Petraeus, the reaction of the voters will be to vote Democrat for seeming to be right on Iraq, even though the Democrats are in fact totally wrong.
How many times have Democrats like Reid, Biden, Schumer, H. Clinton and Feingold gone around aggressively and make all sorts of statements undercutting the troops and damaging to the country??? And how many times did the Republican Senators sit back and not be heard???? I am fed up with seeing this garbage from the Senate Republicans. General Petraeus is a good man and deserves unconditional support. Screw Lott, Collins, Coleman, Sununu and company.
Phil Byler on May 8, 2007 at 12:54 PM
This does raise an interesting question for the next election - what do you do when everyone deserves to lose?
Slublog on May 8, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Heh. True. I wonder if any of these people actually remember who the President is. We should remind that that it’s not Pelosi.
amerpundit on May 8, 2007 at 12:54 PM
We have become a loser nation and lack the courage and will to stay in a fight for more than 20 minutes. These bums (and I mean all politicos) had better think twice before they again send our youth to die.
rplat on May 8, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Cowards all.
Political expediency (read: “ass covering”) over principle.
The message W. should take from this is: gloves off, NOW. Both domestically and in Iraq.
If it’s worth fighting for, then it’s worth pulling out all the stops, going to the mattresses, or (insert your own metaphor here).
thirteen28 on May 8, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Ballots need a No Confidence box…
Bad Candy on May 8, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Hey Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Poland, Denmark, Israel….y’all listening to this? Sorta thought so. Don’t worry, we got your back, really, don’t give this a second thought. You know we are stand-up allies. You can count on us.
Limerick on May 8, 2007 at 1:05 PM
Exactly how many is
Rock on……………..
doriangrey on May 8, 2007 at 1:11 PM
How many in the GOP are French?
BobK on May 8, 2007 at 1:12 PM
In the middle east, perception is reality. If we leave on a predetermined date, a.q. will set off major attack close to that date to make it appear that they’ve chased us out, then claim victory. That will be the ultimate recruiting tool for jihadis all over the world. It won’t matter that we actually won, just like in Vietnam, perception trumps reality and we “lose”.
Tony737 on May 8, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki were hideous necessities to obtain unconditional surrender.
There was never a pursuit of unconditional surrender in Iraq.
We got caught up in nation-building before complete victory.
Ulysses S. Grant to General S.B. Buckner, Fort Donelson (16 February 1862)
A Union General who would fight eventually ended our Civil War. George McClellan Bush never had the fight in him to stand up to the political opposition if he truly believed in war with islamists in Iraq.
Valiant on May 8, 2007 at 1:22 PM
They vote to send them to war, then force them leave before victory is accomplished. What the hell was the point?
What a waste. We don’t go to war to win anymore, it’s all politics and pandering.
Verbal Abuse on May 8, 2007 at 1:26 PM
A nation of geldings for leaders.
Wade on May 8, 2007 at 1:31 PM
America once had the strength to overcome the setbacks we suffered at Pearl Harbor, Corregidor, Tarawa and Kasserine Pass in order to fight on to victory. Truly, they were the Greatest Generation, all of them.
BohicaTwentyTwo on May 8, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Are we allowed to question their patriotism? Because I sure as hell have some doubts.
Rick on May 8, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Same as the 58195
pointsnames on The WallWade on May 8, 2007 at 1:34 PM
Look at it this way: the Saudis will finally have to do something about Iran by themselves. The ‘Protocols of the Elders of the Shia’ is the newest hot tract for sale in the Egyptian book market, I’ve heard. We should at least try to help the Kurds. As a Berber leader just said, “There’s no worse colonialists than the pan-Arabist clan.”
PRCalDude on May 8, 2007 at 1:34 PM
The Marines went to war
America went to the mall
Firetuck everyone of those who put political ambition ahead of defeating this enemy.
LakeRuins on May 8, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Famous last words, Slu. I could’ve swore former Wisconsin Treasury Secretary Jack Voight (R) and the “Republican” Party of Wisconsin uttered something like them just before the 2006 elections. After all, his major job was to publicize the “unclaimed property” list, which he did very well, and his Dem opponent was a part-time clerk at a local department store whose only effort of campaigning was to have a homemade sign outside her mother’s house. Heck, even the DPW didn’t give her a chance to win.
There is a reason why I say “former”; Voight lost the election.
steveegg on May 8, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Good point, but Collins is pretty popular with the left up here - she got 58% of the vote in a blue state. The Democratic candidate has already announced - Tom Allen, the district one congressman.
These debates are going to be scintillating.
But I do see what you’re saying. I hold my nose when I vote for Collins, but can see a lot of Republicans refusing to do that when she runs next year.
Slublog on May 8, 2007 at 1:47 PM
I will never support another deployment of American troops in anything more than meals on wheels for tsunami victims if this nation allows its elected leadership to sh!t on the sacrifice of our armed forces.
We, apparently, don’t have the stones for the sort of fight the enemy is willing to wage and so, we should hunker down and fully fund “first responder” projects here at home. Because we’re going to need them.
Fred on May 8, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Why wait till september. On what planet of stupidity does that make a difference.
tomas on May 8, 2007 at 2:08 PM
This is interesting, however.
The Democrats are proposing a new bill that would fund the troops through July, then allow them to decide at that time, if they’d continue to. Seems like it may not even get to the President’s desk, though. Several Senate Democrats question why their colleagues aren’t giving the troops all the funding needed.
amerpundit on May 8, 2007 at 2:09 PM
ATTENTION TERRORISTS IN IRAQ: Lay low and gather your strength. We increase our attacks in September - God willing!
CliffHanger on May 8, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Jeez, its the weak sister crap the Republicans keep tossing up that turns off voters.
Iblis on May 8, 2007 at 2:37 PM
“GOP set to abandon ship…”
Pathetic…
NRA4Freedom on May 8, 2007 at 2:38 PM
“Expect a go-for-broke uptick in attacks in August, in other words.”
The Treason Party (the Democrats) have, indeed, undermined the entire war effort. They started sabotaging the war in late 2003. It was been willful, with malice aforethought, for purely partisan political advantage.
The treason rot has, according to this article, affected some Republican RINOs in the Senate, more concerned with their own political fortunes than with the security of the nation as a whole.
Well, I’m sorry. These Republicans, like their fellow traitor-Democrats, took an OATH to uphold and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies, domestic and foreign. It means that sometimes you have to look beyond the next election when the safety of the nation is at stake. And it means elected officials are expected to carry out their oath even if it costs them their jobs — that’s what being ELECTED means in a Republic.
Yes, Al Qaeda will step up their attacks in August, September and October. They watch CNN and C-Span.
Yes, sooner or later the traitors of the Donkey Party and their leftwing, America-hating, Bush-hating, master (George Soros) and his minions at Moveon, and the MSM will get their way. And America will surrender in Iraq.
I just hope that when we lose an American city to an AQ nuke, we can hang these traitors before they can escape to Canada….
georgej on May 8, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Now that’s courage.
I heard somebody recently say, “why is that as our problems have grown bigger our politicians have grown smaller?”
TheBigOldDog on May 8, 2007 at 3:08 PM
Balless wonders…and the blind masses listen to the drivel poured out of the television and believe that all is lost.
Goebels was right…
Pulchritudinous Patriot on May 8, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Heh. Good question Slub. If the 06′ election is any indicator, Republicans stay home.
Here’s a novel idea. Instead of Congress voting on a timetable, let’s let the troops on the ground vote on what they want to do. As long as we can keep Gore away from the military ballots, they’ll all be counted.
BacaDog on May 8, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Overcoming his veto would be the best thing politically for Bush but bad for the nation.
Those over-riding him would take ownership of the war but it would be an economic disaster worldwide.
Having said that, I don’t believe that they actually would pull all the troops from Iraq.
In fact, I bet things would remain pretty much the same.
drjohn on May 8, 2007 at 3:29 PM
If by ownership you mean funding or defunding the war effort, then fine. That’s what Congress has the authority to do.
If it means Congress overstepping their authority by subverting the Presidents Constitutionally granted command of the armed forces, then that is a disaster.
Can you imagine Pelosi and Reid drafting a battle plan?
BacaDog on May 8, 2007 at 3:36 PM
A timetable for withdrawl, in my opinion, means a serious downturn in attacks. They never had to win, they just had to not lose.
The only front they have any serious success on is the media front. Propaganda victories are what they are all about, and will work to whatever ends that may gaurantee a US withdrawl. If they can not expend any blood or treasure to do so, then that’s what they’ll do.
It’s partially the reason there have been no coordinated major attacks on the continent.
Krydor on May 8, 2007 at 3:42 PM
The bi-monthly “we only have so much time left” story is already here? How time flies. If you’ve been paying attention, these stories have been around since we went into Iraq. Let me know when it actually happens, until then, i don’t really care. Speaking of MSNBC, i checked them out before work this morning to see what the early morning propaganda was and this morning it was a story about armored humvee doors occasionaly getting stuck shut after being hit by an ied. Whose fault was it that these doors sometimes got stuck after being hit by explosives? You know the answer…..Booosh! Yes, it’s Bush’s fault. They never really explained exactly how it was Bush’s fault,but they did have a 10 second clip from a democrat house member from Pennsylvania saying basically Bush got us into Iraq so it’s his fault. Which is probably good enough for regular MSNBC viewers, but won’t be very convincing to normal, rational people.
forged rite on May 8, 2007 at 4:15 PM
Somebody already has …
thirteen28 on May 8, 2007 at 4:42 PM
That is not their job. They are to support the mission and leave the details to the armed forces with oversight.
Problem is they would never support a mission in America’s best interest.
Valiant on May 8, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Yeah, their plan is to draft @l-queda and mookie’s JAM into the US army, guaranteeing they’ll get their orders from the horses mouth and not the other end.
tormod on May 8, 2007 at 5:47 PM
Precisely. What’s amazing is that the defeatists, with their wet dreams of “George Bush’s Vietnam” are, wittingly or unwittingly, making that into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The August “go for broke” terrorist wave will be just like Tet in ‘68: it won’t accomplish anything militarily, but it’ll surely give the defeatists cause for ostentatious breast-beating and squeals for retreat.
What’s disgusting is that there are enough gutless-wonder Republicans who think that by acting like donks and peeing their pants when it comes to doing what’s necessary to win a war, they can save themselves in 2008. Wrong-O … take Oregon Senator Gordon Smith, for example. A RINO in the true sense of the term; I suspect that I won’t be the only Republican to (1) vote against him in the party primary, and (2) in the unfortunate event he should win the primary, won’t vote for him in the general.
And if Smith and his fellow “cut-n-run” RINOs think that in 2008 donk and leaning-donk voters will go for a “fake” donk when they can vote for the real thing … well, reality is going to come as a rude shock, I’m afraid.
There’s two-for-the-price-of-one irony for you: by acting like
cowardsdonks in a craven attempt to save themselves, weak-kneed RINOs will only assure their own and their country’s humiliating defeat.Spurius Ligustinus on May 8, 2007 at 6:58 PM
I don’t like congress trying to manage a war they initially supported but let’s be honest, Bush deserves to be pressured because he is at fault for one of the worst public relations efforts in history. Blame the MSM or whatever but using the “bully pulpit” is something he has hardly ever done. And the “Mission Accomplished” photo op bit him badly — he needed to follow up with a rational and realistic explanation of what winning the peace would entail in terms of casualties and time needed.
IMHO, the closer Nov 08 gets here, the more politicians on both sides want it over one way or the other. If we begin to prevail, the democrats can claim it was their pressure that made the difference. If it is the same as it is now, they will waltz into the white house.
Republicans are terrified of criticizing Bush for fear of the base calling them RINOs, spineless, etc. hence hurting their chances of winning the primaries. If things improve dramatically they will jump on the “we supported it all along and see how wrong the democrats were” and if things degrade, they can only fall back on “well uh, if I were president I would finish it up”.
Before the expected onslaught of “traitor” “defeatist” labels start getting thrown I will note that I disagree with the tactics congress is using but believe that something needed to be done to increase the pressure. If I knew the easy answer for what that “something” might be I’d be the 11th pasty faced white guy on the podium at the recent debates.
Bradky on May 8, 2007 at 8:24 PM
I stayed up all night to see Norm Coleman win, and I live in California. It was important to me at the time because of the puerile tantrum the lefties threw at the Wellstone funeral. Some things are just wrong.
I predict Mr. Coleman will lose the next election, to a complete moron; the moron will not win - Mr. Coleman will lose.
Entelechy on May 9, 2007 at 12:47 AM
Well, if this is “Bush’s Vietnam”, then it’s time to launch Bush’s Operation Linebacker 2 … Google it, Rosie.
Tony737 on May 9, 2007 at 3:14 AM
Little matter, with the voting rights of (pro-Democrat) felons being restored in Florida.
SpartRan on May 9, 2007 at 7:55 AM
Damnit. THIS is why broadcasting ANY kind of date just plays directly into the hands of the jihadists. Of course there’s going to be carnage like we’ve never seen before in late August and September. The jihadists now know the date certain and will be planning for it.
The people making these decisions and advocating these dates are directly responsible for the deaths of the civilians, our Troops, and our Iraqi Allies that are definitely going to happen. Our enemies listen to what our idiots say and watch what they do.
History will remember this period for the U.S. leadership as one of the weakest ever.
This is foolishness writ large. This is madness.
techno_barbarian on May 9, 2007 at 11:02 AM
(addition to post above)
This is definitely NOT Sparta.
More’s the pity.
techno_barbarian on May 9, 2007 at 11:04 AM