Four Ways to End the Iraq War | Democrats.com

Submitted by Bob Fertik on February 28, 2007 - 12:58pm.ImpeachForChange OutOfIraq

It's been nearly 4 months since the American people voted Democrats into power for one overriding reason: to get U.S. troops out of Iraq.

And after 4 months of closed-door meetings, Democratic leaders in both the Senate and the House have failed to come up with even the beginnings of a plan to deliver what the overwhelming majority of Americans (everyone except FOX News kool-aid drinkers) want.

Why? Because they have run up against a brick wall: George Bush, Dick Cheney, the Republican Party, and the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (a.k.a. Council on National Policy) have absolutely no interest in "changing course."

The Republican plan is simple: to keep U.S. troops in Iraq forever (as Atrios reminds us daily).

Why? Atrios never explains so I will: so U.S. oil companies can control Iraq's massive oil reserves for as long as the world runs on oil. (Dennis Kucinich was right in when he said this to Tim Russert on 2/23/2003, and he's been right ever since.)

If Democrats in Congress - and progressive bloggers - haven't figured this out by now, then they're just plain stupid. All of the pre-war "intelligence" was bald-faced lies that were manufactured simply to justify Bush's war for oil.

Given this harsh reality, what can Congressional Democrats do to get U.S. troops out of Iraq?

1. Cut the Funds. Every single day, Republicans go on TV to dare Democrats to cut funding for the war. Every poll shows the public supports it. So why won't Democrats do it? I have no idea. All I know is that Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats will never do it - period, end of discussion.

2. Impeach Bush and Cheney. In 1973-74, the threat of impeachment caused Richard Nixon to scale back the Vietnam War. If that failed and Democrats had to actually impeach and remove Bush and Cheney (with the help of Republicans who don't want Bush/Cheney in charge during the 2008 election), Democrats would get to vote for their replacements and they could choose an anti-war Democrat (like Al Gore or Russ Feingold) or an anti-war Republican (like Chuck Hagel). So why won't Democrats do it? I have no idea. All I know is that Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats will never do it - period, end of discussion.

3. Filibuster all war funding bills, starting with the $93 billion Supplemental in early March. Russ Feingold could start this filibuster with the support of the handful of Democratic Senators who truly want to end the war: John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, and Ben Cardin. All we need are 40 of the 50 Democrats for the filibuster to succed. With millions marching in the streets and calling Senators from their homes, this is a winnable battle. Write these Senators (personalize if you can):

russ@progressivepatriotsfund.com, info@tedkennedy.com, support@johnkerry.com, media@barackobama.com, info@bencardin.com

Dear Senators,

The only way to end the Iraq War is to cut the funds, starting with the $93 billion Supplemental in March.

I urge all of you to work together to filibuster the Supplemental. You only need 40 votes to sustain the filibuster and force the Bush Administration to change its disastrous course.

Millions of us will do everything we possibly can to support your efforts, including demanding that all Democratic Senators support you - but it's up to you to take the lead.

Sincerely,
[Your name and postal address]

4. Raise taxes on the rich to pay for the war, starting with an amendment to the $93 billion Supplemental in early March. If Democrats don't want to take the blame for cutting funds for Iraq, they can simply force Republicans to cut the funds, simply by adding a tax on the rich to pay for it. Since Republicans will never vote to tax the rich, adding this as an amendment to the Supplemental would guarantee that Republicans defeat the bill - or Bush vetoes it. I proposed this on 12/7/06 and again on 2/7/07. Call your Representative at 202-224-3121 (the Capitol switchboard - ask for your Congressperson) and urge him or her to add a War Tax to the Supplemental.

Update 1: Chris Bowers is struggling to find a way to force conservative Democrats in Congress to support the Murtha plan in the House (impose training and equipment requirements on troops sent to Iraq) and the Biden plan in the Senate (rewrite the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force). Bowers is wasting his time because both the Murtha plan and the Biden plan are a waste of time since Bush has said repeatedly (and Kagro X has blogged repeatedly) that he will ignore any legislation that limits his dictatorial "Commander-in-Chief" powers.

Update 2: Pelosi says she'll push the Murtha plan, but now it's worse than a joke: "The proposal, however, would allow President Bush to waive the rules if he wanted to deploy troops faster or under different standards than allowed by the measure... Current rules allow the Defense Department to waive those conditions. She wants to raise that waiver to a presidential decision."

Source: Four Ways to End the Iraq War Democrats.com

Technorati tags: Iraq, Iraq war, Out of Iraq, Democrats.com

Murtha Is Democrats' Face in Iraq Debate

By mid-March, Democratic Congressman John Murtha will offer legislation that he says would set such stringent rules on combat deployments that Bush would have no choice but to begin bringing troops home.

Representative Murtha, a decorated Marine, proposing bill to force troops home.

Washington - Rep. John Murtha is quickly emerging as one of President Bush's most formidable foes in the Iraq war debate.

Many Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, match Murtha's fiery opposition to Bush's policies. But the Marine combat veteran's prowess on military matters, strong relationships with Republicans and - most important - control of the Pentagon's spending bills has put him at the forefront of the debate.

The Pennsylvania Democrat is leading the charge among members of his party to end the war by limiting funding. That fight, which will probably be waged next month, is expected to overshadow this week's battle over a nonbinding resolution opposing Bush's troop buildup.

Part kindly Irish Catholic grandfather and part political pit bull with two Purple Hearts in his pocket, Murtha seems the Democrats' best chance of using the budget to curtail the war without appearing to be leaving troops in the lurch.

"Many of the roads (in Congress) lead through Murtha," said Darrell West, a political science professor at Brown University. "So Bush has to deal with him."

Murtha retains clout among his Democratic colleagues, especially on defense issues, despite losing a postelection challenge to Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., to become majority leader. Hoyer and Pelosi, D-Calif., have tapped Murtha to address caucus meetings on the issue of the war and used him to assure the more liberal members of their base that Democrats will do everything they can to bring troops home.

So far, Democrats and Republicans alike are listening closely.

"Do most people have enormous respect for Mr. Murtha? Oh, yes," said Pelosi.

By mid-March, Murtha will offer legislation that he says would set such stringent rules on combat deployments that Bush would have no choice but to begin bringing troops home.

His legislation would dictate how long troops can stay, the equipment they use and whether any money could be spent to expand military operations into Iran. Murtha says few units could meet the high standards he envisions, meaning Bush's plan to keep some 160,000 troops in Iraq for months on end would be thwarted.

Under his plan, he says, Democrats would be helping and not hurting troops by making sure they have what they need before being thrown into combat.

"This vote will be the most important vote in changing the direction of the war," Murtha, D-Pa., told an anti-war group in an interview broadcast on the Internet Thursday.

"The president could veto it, but then he wouldn't have any money," he later said.

(more... )

Source: Murtha Is Democrats' Face in Iraq Debate

Technorati tags: John Murtha, Iraq war, Iraq, Iraq debate, Democrats, The Way Out

The Way Out Petition

To: US and UK Governments

The Way Out

* US forces must negotiate an immediate withdrawal with the Iraqi resistance

* The American people must hold their leaders responsible for the crime of aggressive war

In the November 2006 congressional elections, the American people expressed their clear rejection of the Bush administration's war in Iraq. However, a broad movement of opinion is needed to force U.S. leaders to heed the will of their own people and, still more, the people of Iraq.
U.S. military leaders admit that their invasion and occupation of Iraq have produced "chaos". The logical conclusion is that the U.S. presence itself, based on criminal aggression and multiple crimes against humanity, is responsible for such chaos, and that to bring about stability, the United States should withdraw immediately.
However, U.S. leaders continue to claim that they must remain in Iraq in order to achieve "stability". To this end, they speak of creating an American-trained puppet Iraqi army to fight the resistance, and of enticing foreign powers to aid in ending the resistance.
This implies fostering both civil war and more foreign intervention, attempting to take from the Iraqi people the sovereign right of deciding their own future.
Meanwhile, Iraq is being destroyed. The infrastructure has been ruined. People are dying in the hundreds of thousands or fleeing abroad. It is urgent to end this massive crime and return Iraq to its own people.
To this end, we call on world public opinion to make two demands:
* Negotiate with the Resistance!
The United States invasion was a clear violation of international law. In contrast, international law recognizes the legitimacy of armed resistance to foreign invasion and occupation. These principles cannot be negated by the fact that the United States was able to use its immense influence to persuade the UN Security Council to recognize its presence, as being requested by a government that is nothing but a Washington-installed puppet regime.
Armed resistance expresses the legitimate desire of the vast majority of Iraqi people to free their land from foreign occupation. The national popular resistance in Iraq is the only legitimate and effective force able to defend popular sovereignty and determine the future of liberated Iraq.
Instead of negotiating with neighbouring regional powers in the hope of bringing the resistance under foreign control, the United States should negotiate directly with the resistance itself.
* Punish the crimes!
We support all efforts by the American people to initiate a thorough investigation of all the officials, from the highest level on down, who deliberately spun a web of lies and deceptions in order to create the pretext for the criminal invasion of Iraq. We believe that such an investigation would provide ample grounds for impeachment of both President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Such a repudiation of criminal leadership would be a first step toward full reconciliation with the martyred people of Iraq, setting the stage for a peace agreement including reparations to the war-torn country.
We fully recognize that, despite the recent U.S. election results, these demands require a strong mobilization of world public opinion and reactivation of the peace movement, notably in the United States.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Source: The Way Out Petition

Technorati tags: Iraq, war on terror, war, Iraq war, petition