Dick Durbin: Quick End to war "Not Realistic"

[illinoisprogressive]

This is probably going to tick some people off but, Sen. Durbin is right. You cannot just pack up and leave next week. he was right on the war in the beginning when he voted 'no' for the authorization and he is correct now. You have to approach this in a realistic way and not a what is wished for way. Everyone wants an end right now. But, how you do it is something to be approached with great care.



Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin said today that despite growing Republican discontent with the Iraq war, convincing GOP members to support withdrawal legislation remains a daunting challenge that so far has netted few results.

Durbin said recent speeches by senior Senate Republicans signaling a sharp break with Bush's Iraq war strategy might not necessarily translate into votes for Democratic measures setting target dates for withdrawing U.S. troops. Durbin also conceded that the Democrats, with a bare majority in the Senate, won't be able to placate liberal Democratic calls for a specific end date, including a funding cut off.

"Obviously there are folks who want the war to end today, and all the troops to be home tomorrow. And even though I think that is a worthy goal, it is not a realistic goal," said Durbin. A major redeployment of troops will have to be done gradually and in a responsible manner, he noted. "We also understand that just leaving cold turkey, with everything gone, could have the whole region descend into chaos," Durbin said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/10/AR2007071001086.html

[mucifer]

1. My problem with Durbin is that he blames Iraqis more than he blames

bush. Oh and I voted for him before and I'll probably vote for him again. But, at least he is talking about regional diplomacy.

[TwilightGardener]

2. I agree with Durbin. It's common sense.

[ludwigb]

3. Tiresome Argument

No one, and I mean no one, who has any authority on the Left is proposing that we withdraw troops tomorrow. What we want is to start the process of withdrawl immediately. A realistic date for complete withdrawal would be the end of the year.

Key Democrats want to stay in Iraq until Bush's term ends as a matter of political strategy. It's stomach-churning but all too true. They want the public to see Iraq as Bush's war and they want the responsibility for capitulation to stay with the GOP.

I understand where they are coming from but they are wrong. We can still withdraw and claim some honorable deeds were done--God knows what Arab peoples will do if we continue on our present course. And as a matter of strategy, if Dems don't stand up and demand an end to the war, then the American people will fault them for it in 2008--the GOP will say the Dems don't stand for anything but political expediency and they will have a point.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. Exactly. Durbin should have fought against caving in like Kerry and Feingold did nt

[karynnj]

9. Durbin was one of the 13 who voted yes on Kerry/Feingold

Here he is speaking as the Democratic whip, saying that it is unrealistic to think we will have the numbers to be more aggressive. With his own vote, he is fighting as hard as anyone.

Here, he is doing a great job trying to make people see what is feasible.

[defendandprotect]

8. This is immature thinking and nonsense --

The Dems have had control of Congress for 6 months now -
Had they cut funding and deauthorized the war, we'd be on our way out now --
our troops coming home.

NOW . . . means beginning to move troops out -- in a planned and orderly fashion.

[Mass]

18. Who said he stop fighting? However, at the same time, he can count the votes (it is his job), and

knows they are not there.

Why do people think necessary to attack people who tell the truth. I am sure Durbin will vote for the Levin (and may be Feingold)'s bill, but he is telling people the truth: votes are not there.

[ludwigb]

19. It's Not Telling The Truth That's the Problem

It's the idea because of inability to overcome Bush's veto, Dems should support supplemental funding bills without any change in policy.

There is a better option. Force confrontation by continuing to send the same bill until Bush is prepared to make an acceptable compromise or (better yet) accept defeat.

[babylonsister]

5. Feingold and Pelosi are suggesting we start bringing troops home

within 180 days, to be done by April 2008. That sounds OK to me, at least reasonable.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3368608&mesg_id=3368608

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1298837&mesg_id=1298837

[ludwigb]

11. Not to Me......

180 days? Only if they are there for a good reason (like helping the UN set up a peacekeeping presence).

[rodeodance]

13. THAT will be a truth moment-----who are really the AYE folks!

[welshTerrier2]

6. total bullshit ...

"gradually and in a responsible manner" ?????????

that's what Durbin's calling for? well let's talk about responsibility. it seems like he has a responsibility to explain what staying even one more day will accomplish. because, we've stayed for about 6 months now since bush announced his moronic surge strategy. about another 500 Americans have died and the number of violent attacks in Baghdad has risen to about 150 per day.

so, all you really responsible types, please explain to me how tomorrow will be any better. you can't just say leaving too soon is bad. you have to say how staying will make anything any better at all. here's a hint: it won't !!

if Durbin's only argument had been the vote counts in the Congress, we could have had a different discussion. But to raise the issue of responsibility and use bullshit jargon like "cold turkey" is total bullshit.

we need to leave Iraq as rapidly as troop safety permits. period. not by next April. not 60 days after a Democrat takes office in 2009. we need to leave now because staying is FUCKING INSANE. we are making the situation worse by our presence their. what's more, we've setup a US puppet government that has ZERO chance of surviving. we need to get out and we need to let them get rid of Maliki. and we certainly better not try to push through the Oil Law. if we do that, there will NEVER be peace in Iraq or anywhere else in the region.

staying in Iraq because "we want to help" is all very noble; it's also not going to help the Iraqis and more Americans will die. Democrats should demand an immediate end to all offensive operations. We should demand that all Iraqi oil will be under the sole control of the Iraqi people and that we will not allow private companies to come in to rape Iraq. We should call for immediately beginning withdrawal. We should call for ZERO US troops left behind. We should burn down the bloated, ostentatious embassy we're building. We should turn over all of our bases to the Iraqi government.

That, in my view, is the responsible thing to do. What Durbin's calling for is total bullshit.

[mucifer]

7. we all need to PHONE our representatives and senators about

ending the war and impeachment.

[rodeodance]

16. Dubin and Biden say they are not certain they have 60 votes yet:

Still uncertain: whether supporters of a troop withdrawal will have the 60 votes they need for Senate passage.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the assistant Democratic floor leader, said he's not sure of conservative Democrats such as Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. And Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said he doesn't believe there are enough Republicans ready to vote for a deadline.

"So far, most of them are hedging their bets," Biden said of Republicans during a conference call with reporters. "They're just saying … we think the president has to change strategy. But my guess is most of them will hold off until September to actually beginning to vote with us."

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Maybe, but if true they need to keep the pressure on Bush

Why they funded the war for four months is beyond me. At the VERY LEAST they should've only passed a one month supplemental to keep this in the news cycle.

[sutz12]

12. Especially if we never start. nt

[rodeodance]

14. Smith already has made his decision:--co sponser with Levin (180 days to start getting out-out by

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-10-iraq-congress_N.htm?csp=1

"There's tremendous pressure to stay the course," said Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore.

Smith already has made his decision: He's co-sponsoring an amendment with Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., that would require most U.S. troops to be out of Iraq next spring. Collins and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, said they may vote for the withdrawal measure, which will be offered as an amendment to a defense bill.

"I'm looking at it very seriously," Snowe said.

Snowe said she received a phone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urging her to wait for the Petraeus report. National security adviser Stephen Hadley was on Capitol Hill to lobby, and Vice President Cheney, who asked for more time at the Republican senators' Tuesday luncheon.

[rodeodance]

15. looks like Cheney Hadley-Rice to the Hill today --herd in the Repugs!

[Mass]

17. When did it become 180 days?

Last thing I saw was 120, which is already too long to start , IMHO.