Senate Rejects Iraq Withdrawal

Senate rejects call for U.S. troop pullout from Iraq by a 93-6 vote.

The six Democratic Senators voting no - a vote for withdrawal:

Barbara Boxer of California
Robert Byrd of West Virginia
Russ Feingold of Wisconsin
Tom Harkin of Iowa
Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts
John Kerry of Massachusetts

Senate Majority Whip, Kentucky's Mitch McConnell, introduced legislation he said was taken from a proposal by Senator John Kerry. It called for Bush to agree with the Iraqi government on a schedule for withdrawal of combat troops by Dec. 31, 2006.

The Senate vote came unexpectedly as the House debated House Resolution 861 - Declaring that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror, the struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.

Speaking in favor of the Global War on Terror Resolution, Speaker Hastert made an impassioned statement:

The clarity with which our men and women in uniform understand the reason they are in Iraq is a stark contrast to some here at home who talk about this war as a "war of choice." The facts are clear. America has been struck repeatedly.

Despite the life-ending attacks on Khobar Towers, our east African embassies, the USS Cole, and the first World Trade Center bombing, US policy tended to confuse these attacks with isolated, law-enforcement events.

We failed to recognize them as the escalating strikes that they were. We failed to identify the networks behind the bombs. We convinced ourselves that these attacks were somehow just random acts of violence.

Yet, the attacks continued. The terrorists did not admire or appreciate our limited response. They did not come to the table to discuss points of political concern. They did not de-escalate, demobilize, or disappear. Our response was inconstant and limited, but their reactions were not. They plotted and practiced, while we hoped for the best. We were wrong as we slumbered in denial.

Then came the day when terrorism slapped us in the face, awakening us to a stark reality. I remember it as a crisp fall day, where the clear blue sky was filled with fluffy white clouds. But that peaceful scene was transformed in an instant, when planes went crashing into buildings and the clear sky turned to choking ash and soot.

I stood in my Capitol office, just a few yards from where I am speaking today, and saw the black smoke rising from the Pentagon. The third plane had hit just across the river from this Capitol Building. On 9/11 the terrorists were not a distant threat, they were in our front yard, and they were very real – and very deadly.

In that moment, we were afraid. None of us had anticipated the lengths to which our common enemy would go to destroy our American way of life, our ideals and our beliefs. Of course we knew that foreign terrorist had caused trouble elsewhere, but we found it hard to imagine that they came to our shores hoping to kill tens of thousands of men, women and children, innocent, unarmed people, peacefully going about their daily lives. It is hard, even now, to comprehend such enormous evil.

As we watched some of our fellow citizens leap from burning buildings to their deaths, our fear turned to anger and then anger to resolute determination.

America’s response started high above a cornfield in rural Pennsylvania. Brave men and women, armed with nothing more than boiling water, dinner forks and broken bottles, stood up – as Americans always do when our freedom is in peril – and they struck back.

The vote on the House's Global War on Terror Resolution will be closer than the Senate's lopsided 93-6 vote. But not that Close. House Democrats realize that voting against such a resolution will expose them to attacks that Democrats who oppose the resolution don't support U.S. troops and advocate a "cut-and-run" strategy.

Comments

[PatD]

The debate over the house Iraq resolution is a total sham, pure political posturing. Rep Walter "freedom fries" Jones R-NC has already declared that he will vote "present" when the roll is called and decries his leaderships avoidance of serious debate on our involvement there. Con-bloggers are all declaring it as some sort of "substantial" victory of the left, go figure. It sure would be nice if some practical, pragmatic legislating were to take place in the US Congress. I wouldn't recommend holding ones' breath for that though.