AP: Feinstein to introduce resolution seeking phased Iraq withdrawal

[flpoljunkie]

Feinstein's co-sponsor for this resolution will be Harry Reid. Is this an end run around John Kerry's proposed amendment and will this resolution allow Hillary Clinton to finesse the very thorny problem of a timeline for withdrawal in Iraq--or put her on the spot? Things may get very interesting tomorrow in the Senate.

Senate Democrats want vote on Iraq withdrawal

By Jeremy Pelofsky

Reuters
Sunday, June 18, 2006; 5:18 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats plan to offer a resolution in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday seeking a timetable for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said on Sunday.

<>"Three years and three months and a bogging down, I think, suggests that the time has come for some discussion on where we go from here," Feinstein said, also interviewed on CNN.

"I don't know why we are so afraid to stand up and say, 'look, we want to see an end to this thing'," she said.

Feinstein argued an open-ended deployment was unsustainable for the U.S. military, which needed to be free to deal with growing problems in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800460_pf.html

Feinstein wrote this in an op-ed with Christopher Dodd yesterday in the San Francisco Chronicle:

Late last year, Congress approved, and President Bush signed into law, a Defense Department authorization bill for fiscal year 2006 that read: "Calendar year 2006 should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

We have now been in Iraq for more than three years -- and we believe the time has come for that phased redeployment to begin. It is also time for the Bush administration to provide a schedule and timetable for the structured downsizing and redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/18/EDGS0INK9U1.DTL&hw=Dianne+Feinstein+Christopher+Dodd&sn=001&sc=1000

[Greeby]

1. I'm guessing

That the ongoing progressive takeover of the California Democratic Party is getting to her.

Is that mean-spirited? Probably, but I can't ascribe altruistic motives to someone so throughly in the pocket of the Military Industrial COmplex

[still_one]

2. I tend to agree with you

If they don't start forcing this issue we will lose in 2008. The only reason we MAY win in 2006 is because of the mess the republicans have created, not because of any actions of the democrats

[Minnesota Libra]

5. This is what I'm afraid of..............

......".....we MAY win in 2006 is because of the mess the republicans have created, not because of any actions of the democrats"

I don't necessarily think the Democrats are doing absolutely nothing, some are at least trying. Viewing CSPAN and CSPAN II when Congress is in session will reveal the Democrats are trying to do plenty but the neocons/fundies won't allow very much up for debate - what isn't debated can't be voted on.

Maybe if we do win in November because of the neocons mess then the Democrats can go on to prove themselves.

[still_one]

11. I agree some are, but looking at the voting on Supreme Court judges

and the lack of critism on the Iraq war until they are forced to, leaves me somewhat disillusioned

[Minnesota Libra]

3. I want to see who votes for "phased withdrawal" and who doesn't...........

....because I'll bet that will narrow down the field of candidates a whole lot. It will for me.

I think there will be more and more of these issues brought forward from here on until the Democratic National Convention in the hopes of voters narrowing down their choices.

[flpoljunkie]

4. Resolution is also a way for Dems to unite on Iraq--even tho the media

will probably continue to say the Dems are split on Iraq and the Rethugs are united.

[Nimrod2005]

6. How is this different than what John Kerry is offering?

Which is scheduled for debate this week I think?

Why not support JFK?

[Mass]

7. No deadline in the Feinstein... amendment. Just a call for a timeline.

[Nimrod2005]

8. No end time EVER? Doesn't a time table have start time, key times, then

an end time? Time table with an infinity as an end time/point?

[flpoljunkie]

9. Actually it will not be an amendment. It will be in form of a resolution-

non-binding, of course.

[Mass]

10. you're right but, it will be an amendment to the defense bill.

[proud patriot]

12. okay well I'll put another mark in the positive column

x(

[flaminbats]

13. wow..phased redeployment?

and never forget what a huge threat Iran is to the world!!!!!! :crazy:

[flpoljunkie]

14. Levin is discussing this amendment on C-Span 2 at this moment.

Co-sponsors ae Reed, Feinstein and Salazar.

One component is for the United States to begin phased redeployment by the end of this year in consultation with the Iraqi government.

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060619-025021-7881r


WASHINGTON, June 19 (UPI) -- Two Senate Democrats said Monday they will offer legislation to begin the deliberate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq by the end of 2006.

Senators Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Jack Reed, D-R.I., say their amendment to the FY-2007 defense authorization bill differs from other proposals because it provides a start date for withdrawal rather than an end date by which it would be complete.

"Three-and-a-half years into the conflict, we should tell the Iraqis that the American security blanket is not permanent. Beginning a phased redeployment this year will add incentives for the Iraqis to make the hard compromises necessary to bring their country together and secure it. They need to do that job themselves and our amendment is one way to prod them to make that commitment and stick to it," Levin said in a press release issued Monday.

Levin has been arguing for at least a year that the open-ended commitment to Iraq gives politicians there a disincentive to compromise. As long as U.S. troops are in the country to manage the violence, they can jockey for position, influence and political power with minimal risk.

"This amendment sends the Iraqi government a clear message: you need to get to work and achieve a meaningful political solution," Reed said Monday.

[flpoljunkie]

15. CNN reports Kerry will change his deadline from the end of this year to

July 1st, 2007, to redeploy our troops out of Iraq. Co-sponsors are Feingold and Boxer.

[Mass]

16. Let's hope that more Dems will vote for that.

[flpoljunkie]

17. Don't count on it. Levin's amendment was proposed to "ease divisions

in the party" according to CNN with phased reployment to begin by the end of 2006 and to continue next year-- with no deadline suggested. Perhaps this a way to finesse the issue for those who do not have the guts to vote for John Kerry's amendment for whatever reasons.

Dean is up now on THE SITUATION ROOM talking about this.

[Mass]

18. In this case, I dont see the point of changing the deadline.\nt

[flpoljunkie]

19. CNN just announced Boxer and Feingold will co-sponsor Kerry's amendment

to redeploy our troops out of Iraq by July 1st, 2007. CNN suggested Kerry changed the deadline in an attempt to garner more votes.

[Mass]

20. Thanks. Here is the bill.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2686657

[flpoljunkie]

21. Yes, I read it. Thanks for posting the link here.