The Iraq / war on terror thread

[Booker Floyd]

by the way, the house voted 403-3 against a pull out in iraq.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10097801/

 

The House didnt vote against anything written by Murtha, they voted against a stunt which really only served to embarass Republicans.? The attacks against Murtha have been absolutely disgraceful...he said it best himself:

"I like guys who've never been (in war) who criticize us who've been there. I like that.  I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and sent people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions about what may need to be done."

Fact is, Republicans are scared.  They know who John Murtha is and they know that his statements could be a genuine turning point for this war. 

But it looks like those of you opposed to withdrawal might have a new individual whose character you can assault:

Defense official: Rumsfeld given Iraq withdrawal plan

Plan calls for troops to begin pulling out after December elections

Friday, November 18, 2005; Posted: 11:34 p.m. EST (04:34 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The top U.S. commander in Iraq has submitted a plan to the Pentagon for withdrawing troops in Iraq, according to a senior defense official.

Gen. George Casey submitted the plan to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It includes numerous options and recommends that brigades -- usually made up of about 2,000 soldiers each -- begin pulling out of Iraq early next year.

The proposal comes as tension grows in both Washington and Baghdad following a call by a senior House Democrat to bring U.S. troops home and the deaths of scores of people by suicide bombers in two Iraqi cities.

House Republicans were looking for a showdown Friday after Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat and well-respected Vietnam veteran, presented a resolution that would force the president to withdraw the nearly 160,000 U.S. troops in Iraq "at the earliest predictable date." (Watch Murtha urge legislators to sign off on pulling out troops -- 1:37)

Murtha on Thursday called the administration's management of the conflict "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion" that is "uniting the enemy against us."

"It's time to bring the troops home," he said.

Republicans were looking to lock horns with Democrats after Murtha's remarks.

Rather than distancing themselves from Friday's resolution, House majority leader Roy Blunt, R-Missouri, welcomed a debate and vote, forcing Democrats to stand alongside Murtha or go on record against the withdrawal. (Read about the House showdown)

Meanwhile, at least 90 people were killed in two suicide bombings in Iraq, according to hospital officials. The U.S. military put the casualties at 150, without giving a breakdown. (Full story)

The deadliest of the attacks took place in Khanaqin, a Shiite-Kurdish town about 60 miles (100 kilometers) northeast of Baquba. Two suicide bombers detonated bombs near or inside Shiite Muslim mosques, destroying both of the structures, Iraqi and U.S. authorities said.

Scores of people were killed.

The attacks came during midday prayer services, when the mosques were full of worshippers, many of them children, the Khanaqin mayor said.

Also Friday, two suicide car bombings in Baghdad killed at least six people near a hotel, police said. (Watch security camera video of suicide car bomb -- :30)

The hotel is near the Iraqi Interior Ministry compound, where about 170 detainees were found last weekend, some with signs of torture, according to Iraqi officials. There were no reports of damage to the compound, and the U.S. military said the hotel was the target of the attack.

Rumsfeld has yet to sign Casey's withdrawal plan but, the senior defense official said, implementation of the plan, if approved, would start after the December 15 Iraqi elections so as not to discourage voters from going to the polls.

The plan, which would withdraw a limited amount of troops during 2006, requires that a host of milestones be reached before troops are withdrawn.

Top Pentagon officials have repeatedly discussed some of those milestones: Iraqi troops must demonstrate that they can handle security without U.S. help; the country's political process must be strong; and reconstruction and economic conditions must show signs of stability.

CNN's Dana Bash, Arwa Damon, Enes Dulami and Mohammed Tawfeeq contributed to this report.

---

Now lets all assail General Caseys patriotism and call him a coward.

[Booker Floyd]

While were discussing patriotism, and supporting our president/military...

"Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."
-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99 

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99

"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"The suspicion some people have about the president's motives in this attack [on Iraq] is itself a powerful argument for impeachment," Armey said in a statement. "After months of lies, the president has given millions of people around the world reason to doubt that he has sent Americans into battle for the right reasons." - Rep. Dick Armey

"I cannot support this military action in the Persian Gulf at this time," Lott said in a statement. "Both the timing and the policy are subject to question." - Senator Trent Lott

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy." - Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area." - Senator Trent Lott

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years" - Joe Scarborough

"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missles." - Senator Inhofe

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today" - Rep. Tom Delay

"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag" - Senator Don Nickles

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - Governor George W. Bush

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." - Senator Richard Lugar

"You can support the troops but not the president" - Rep. Tom Delay 

"My job as majority leader is be supportive of our troops, try to have input as decisions are made and to look at those decisions after they're made ... not to march in lock step with everything the president decides to do." - Senator Trent Lott

For us to call this a victory and to commend the President of the United States as the Commander in Chief showing great leadership in Operation Allied Force is a farce" - Rep. Tom Delay

"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton." - Michael Savage

I dont know about you guys, but some of these statements seem to be a little less than encouraging...

[sandman]

as usual, lots of spin in this thread.

the house shot down a plan for an immediate withdraw.

here's a quote i guess you missed....

At one point in the emotional debate, Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.
 
?He asked me to send Congress a message ? stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message ? that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,? Schmidt said. Murtha is a 37-year Marine veteran and ranking Democrat on the defense appropriations subcommittee.

Democrats booed and shouted her down ? causing the House to come to a standstill.

[Booker Floyd]

the house shot down a plan for an immediate withdraw.

They shot down a bastardized resolution that was not Murthas.? It didnt reflect Murthas ideas and was an artificial, unserious plan of political entrapment that Democrats (save 3) were right to not seriously consider.?

Now what about Caseys proposal to begin withdrawing troops in little more than a month? 

here's a quote i guess you missed....

 

No I didnt -

The attacks against Murtha have been absolutely disgraceful

I watched it as it happened...whats your point?? She made a disgraceful comment and recieved an appropriate response.? She then backtracked and withdrew her comments from the record.  So who was really out of line?? ?? I applaud Democrats for not tolerating that nonsense.

[sandman]

everyone wants the troops to come home. everyone just differs on what needs to happen in iraq before we can withdrawal.

casey is calling for a limited withdrawal throughout 2006, ONLY AFTER certain milestones are reached. not really anything new. this has been the implied plan for quite some time now.

yet you state ....."But it looks like those of you opposed to withdrawal might have a new individual whose character you can assault."

why would we assault his character? he's stating exactly what those of us opposed to withdrawal want!!

that's spin.

[GypsySoul]

Al-Zarqawi May Be Among Dead in Iraq Fight
Sun Nov 20, 4:54 PM

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. forces sealed off a house in the northern city of Mosul where eight suspected al-Qaida members died in a gunfight - some by their own hand to avoid capture. A U.S. official said Sunday that efforts were under way to determine if terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was among the dead.

In Washington, a U.S. official said the identities of the terror suspects killed in the Saturday raid was unknown. Asked if they could include al-Zarqawi, the official replied: "There are efforts under way to determine if he was killed."

On Saturday, police Brig. Gen. Said Ahmed al-Jubouri said the raid was launched after a tip that top al-Qaida operatives, possibly including al-Zarqawi, were in the house in the northeastern part of the city.

During the intense gunbattle that followed, three insurgents detonated explosives and killed themselves to avoid capture, Iraqi officials said. Eleven Americans were wounded, the U.S. military said. Such intense resistance often suggests an attempt to defend a high-value target.

American soldiers controlled the site Sunday, and residents said helicopters flew over the area throughout the day. Some residents said the tight security was reminiscent of the July 2003 operation in which Saddam Hussein's sons, Odai and Qusai, were killed in Mosul.



Gypsy comment:? HOPE IT'S TRUE!!!?
BURN IN HELL MOTHERFUCKER!!!!

[Mal Brossard]

Didn't the military/media say with almost 100% certainty that he was dead in March of 2004 too?

[GypsySoul]

Didn't the military/media say with almost 100% certainty that he was dead in March of 2004 too?

There's no mention of March 2004 in this new article.


It does mention these incidents also:

The elusive al-Zarqawi has narrowly escaped capture in the past. U.S. forces said they nearly caught him in a February 2005 raid that recovered his computer.

In May, the group said he was wounded in fighting and was taken out of the country for treatment. Within days, it reported he had returned - though there was never any independent confirmation that he was wounded.

I forgot to post the writing credits before.?
Associated Press reporters Katherine Shrader in Washington, Sinbad Ahmed in Mosul and Qassim Abdul-Zahra in Baghdad contributed to this report.

[GypsySoul]

White House Doubts al-Zarqawi Among Dead
Sun Nov 20, 7:58 PM

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. forces sealed off a house in the northern city of Mosul where eight suspected al-Qaida members died in a gunfight - some by their own hand to avoid capture. The White House said Sunday that it was "highly unlikely" that the terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was among the dead.

On Saturday, police Brig. Gen. Said Ahmed al-Jubouri said the raid was launched after a tip that top al-Qaida operatives, possibly including al-Zarqawi, were in the house in the northeastern part of the city.

During the intense gunbattle that followed, three insurgents detonated explosives and killed themselves to avoid capture, Iraqi officials said. Eleven Americans were wounded, the U.S. military said. Such intense resistance often suggests an attempt to defend a high-value target.

But Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, said reports of al-Zarqawi's death were "highly unlikely and not credible."

[gilld1]

Dat wascally wabbit!

[fesxine]

i think the worst thing the US can do is increase the military presence and try to wipeout iraqi rebels, this would lead to every muslim loosing any faith they had in america.  US troops need to start withdrawing and a UN peacekeeping force needs to come in - that way the world is responsible for what will happen to iraq.

[D]

booker, what message would it send to the world if we pulled out of Iraq, caused a huge civil war which will claim millions of lives and basically surrendered?

U think our image is bad now we would seize to be a world power if we get defeated in Iraq.

I think that a lot of u need to wake up and realize exactly what is going on and what is trying to be accomplished.

You cant just pull out, that is not an option, we are way too far in to do that and the reprocussions would be insurmountable.

[Axls Locomotive]

He is harder to kill than a Klingon with a hard-on

[Booker Floyd]

why would we assault his character? he's stating exactly what those of us opposed to withdrawal want!!

So by discussing and planning for withdrawal, hes doing exactly what you want? 

booker, what message would it send to the world if we pulled out of Iraq, caused a huge civil war which will claim millions of lives and basically surrendered?

Well first, lets not be disingenuous...If you were really concerned about what message were sending to the world, you wouldnt have supported this invasion to begin with and you wouldnt be so sympathetic to this administration.  So I have a hard time believing that our image is much of a concern to you. 

U think our image is bad now we would seize to be a world power if we get defeated in Iraq.

 

Expound on this prediction. 

"Defeat" is a pretty broad word.  Since you brought up a hypothetical...what if a civil war erupts immediately after we pull out on whatever your/Bushs terms are?  If by the end of 2006 (before elections, perhaps) Bush feels comfortable enough to make significant withdrawals and civil war/escalated attacks occur afterward, whats the plan then?

It seems that Democrats (and a majority of the country) arent alone:

Iraqi Leaders Urge a Timetable for Eventual Troop Withdrawal

Nov. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Iraqi leaders, meeting at a reconciliation conference in Cairo, urged an end to violence in the country and demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of coalition troops from Iraq.

In a final statement, read by Arab League chief Amre Moussa, host of the three-day summit, they called for "the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces.'' No date was specified.

"The Iraqi people look forward to the day when the foreign forces leave Iraq, when it's armed and security forces will be rebuilt and when they can enjoy peace and stability and get rid of terrorism,'' the leaders said in the statement. The session was broadcast live from the Egyptian capital by al-Jazeera.

The summit was held to prepare for a larger conference scheduled to take place in Baghdad in February. The Arab League is playing an increasing role in attempting to bring Iraq's Kurdish, Shiite, and Sunni groups closer together.

"I consider it a real success,'' Moussa said at a news conference after the closing session. "I would say we have succeeded in bringing opinions closer by about 70 percent but I will continue to warn against exaggerated expectations.''

"It's a first step, many difficulties and differences remain,'' Moussa said. At one point Shiite and Kurdish delegates stormed out of a closed session when one of the speakers said they had sold out to the U.S., the Associated Press reported.

Legitimate Right

The final statement also stated that ``resistance is a legitimate right for all people.'' The conference almost collapsed earlier today when Sunni leaders objected to the definition of ``resistance,'' al-Jazeera said.

"Terrorism is not legitimate resistance and thus we condemn terrorism and the acts of violence, killings and kidnappings that target Iraqi citizens; civil, governmental and humanitarian organizations; national wealth and houses of worships,'' the leaders said in the statement.

Shiite civilians have been frequently targeted by Sunni-led insurgents who seek to foment sectarian tensions in the country, and destabilize Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's government.

[D]

Booker u obviously only read the headline and not the entire article.

Cause had u read the article u wouldve noticed this:


The Iraqi people look forward to the day when the foreign forces leave Iraq, when it's armed and security forces will be rebuilt and when they can enjoy peace and stability and get rid of terrorism,'' the leaders said in the statement. The session was broadcast live from the Egyptian capital by al-Jazeera.


Come on Booker, u are usually one of the best posters on this board, but u severely fell for a headline without reading the text. You make it sound like they want us to leave immediately and like they dont want us there, that simply isnt true.


I thought the exit strategy of the USA all along was to babysit Iraq until their military and govt was strong enough to stand on their own and then we slowly pull out.

I dont know why this is consistently overlooked by the left wing.

I dont support George Bush but like I said, we are in war now, Why we are here is no longer relevant, we are here and we have a job to do and until the job is finished we cant pull out.


If we pull out the 2,100 soldiers who have lost their lives will have done so for nothing, I think you would be surprised at the progresses that have been made in that country that somehow dont get reported on mainstream news.

[Booker Floyd]

Booker u obviously only read the headline and not the entire article.

If that were the case, I wouldve only posted the headline.

The Iraqi people look forward to the day when the foreign forces leave Iraq, when it's armed and security forces will be rebuilt and when they can enjoy peace and stability and get rid of terrorism,'' the leaders said in the statement. The session was broadcast live from the Egyptian capital by al-Jazeera.

Yes, I read that.

Come on Booker, u are usually one of the best posters on this board, but u severely fell for a headline without reading the text. You make it sound like they want us to leave immediately and like they dont want us there, that simply isnt true.

I dont need any compliments, thanks.

I didnt "fall for" anything.  The only thing Im guilty of is not clarifying my comment right before the article, but I thought it was self-explanatory: Iraqi leaders, like Democrats and unlike Republicans, favor a time table for withdrawal.  This can be inferred from the following quote: "In a final statement, read by Arab League chief Amre Moussa, host of the three-day summit, they called for "the withdrawal of foreign troops according to a timetable, through putting in place an immediate national program to rebuild the armed forces.''

I dont support George Bush but like I said, we are in war now, Why we are here is no longer relevant, we are here and we have a job to do and until the job is finished we cant pull out.

 

Of course our reasons for being there are relevant.  That logic implies that we should shirk holding the government accountable, and I disagree completely.  We should continue, and strengthen, investigations on how we got here.

[Booker Floyd]

Hate to backtrack...

You really are clueless aren't you Booker?? It's a hand grenade used to burn through machinery.? It's isn't a "chemical weapon" like VX Gas.? I mean, I'm more than glad to give some leaway, but this is really stretching it.? I think you guys have enough conspiracy theories on your hands, you don't need to create more.

White phosphorus:

White phosphorus is a poison which can be absorbed through skin contact, ingestion, or breathing. If its combustion occurs in a confined space, white phosphorus will remove the oxygen from the air and render the air unfit to support life. Long-term absorption, particularly through the lungs and the gastrointestinal tract, can cause chronic poisoning, which leads to weakness, anemia, loss of appetite, gastrointestinal weakness, and pallor.

Eating or drinking less than one teaspoon of white phosphorus can cause vomiting; stomach cramps; liver, heart or kidney damage; drowsiness; and even death. Being burned with white phosphorus can cause heart, liver, and kidney damage. Breathing white phosphorus may damage lungs and throat.

White phosphorus can cause changes in the long bones; seriously affected bones may become brittle, leading to spontaneous fractures. White phosphorus is especially hazardous to the eyes and can severely damage them.

High concentrations of the vapors evolved by burning white phosphorus are irritating to the nose, throat, lungs, skin, eyes, and mucus membranes.
Breathing white phosphorus can cause coughing and the development of a condition known as phossy jaw -- poor wound healing in the mouth and a breakdown of the jaw bone. The most common symptom of exposure to white phosphorus is necrosis of the jaw.

Exposure to white phosphorus can also cause nausea, jaundice, anemia, cachexia, dental pain, and excess saliva.

So do you think arguing over the chemical label might be a bit technical?? If not...

From a 1995 declassified Pentagon document:

A.? ? ? ? ? ? IRAQ'S POSSIBLE EMPLOYMENT OF PHOSPHOROUS CHEMICAL
WEAPONS -- IN LATE FEBRUARY 1991, FOLLOWING THE COALITION FORCES'
OVERWHELMING VICTORY OVER IRAQ, KURDISH REBELS STEPPED UP THEIR
STRUGGLE AGAINST IRAQI FORCES IN NORTHERN IRAQ. DURING THE BRUTAL
CRACKDOWN THAT FOLLOWED THE KURDISH UPRISING, IRAQI FORCES LOYAL
TO
PRESIDENT SADDAM ((HUSSEIN)) MAY HAVE POSSIBLY USED WHITE
PHOSPHOROUS (WP) CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST KURDISH REBELS AND THE
POPULACE IN ERBIL (GEOCOORD:3412N/04401E) (VICINITY OF IRANIAN
BORDER) AND DOHUK (GEOCOORD:3652N/04301E) (VICINITY OF IRAQI
BORDER) PROVINCES, IRAQ. THE WP CHEMICAL WAS DELIVERED BY
ARTILLERY ROUNDS AND HELICOPTER GUNSHIPS (NO FURTHER INFORMATION
AT

But its the Pentagon, give them some leeway.  Theyre clueless. 

[D]

U are very very close to spinning here Booker.

I always thought the republican time table was after the Iraqi elections and constitution, then after Iraq was capable fully of governing abd defending themselves.


That headline made it sound like Iraq wanted us gone now or before they are ready to stand on their own.



We are training their army, they are getting everything in place and in a few years they will be strong enough to stand on their own but right now we have no choice but to keep them on life support till they can breathe on their own.

To pull out would be pulling the plug on that life support system thus killing any chance of an Iraqi Democracy.

They want and need us there now because essentially their lives depend on it. ?Iraq have a great chance to be a very prosperous nation, they have so much untapped oil supply.

once they start exporting they will leap to the top and they will be like Japan in another half century.

This thread is "The right way in Iraq"

So I wanna hear a left winger give me the right way.

I dont wanna hear how we shouldnt be there in the first place cause HELLO we are there.

To say its irrelevant is true because u cant turn back the hands of time.

So everyone get out of the hindsight mode and get into reality and the present day and time.

We are in Iraq, so goin by that, what is the best course of action to maintain a free Iraq and withdrawal our troops?

[Booker Floyd]

I always thought the republican time table was after the Iraqi elections and constitution, then after Iraq was capable fully of governing abd defending themselves.

 

Thats some timetable. 

That headline made it sound like Iraq wanted us GONE now.

Yeah, the word "eventual" really drove that point home.

not true, said they look forward to the day where they dont need us there. Thats a huge difference.

Did they say they want a timetable?

Do many Democrats want a timetable?

Have Republicans discouraged a timetable?

If the Republicans had a timetable as you think they do (despite the fact that they voted against timetables last week), it would be a bit redundant for Iraqi leaders to urge for a timetable, wouldnt it?

To say its irrelevant is true because u cant turn back the hands of time.

Ill once again draw attention to your implication that accountability is unnecessary.  That logic dictates that anyone can do anything and not be held accountable because what they did was "in the past" and you "cant turn back the hands of time."  Thats absurdity.

[Guns N RockMusic]

New Idea for the Antiwar Party: Aid the Enemy
By Ann Coulter
FrontPageMagazine.com | November 24, 2005


In the Iraq war so far, the U.S. military has deposed a dictator who had already used weapons of mass destruction and would have used them again. As we now know, Saddam Hussein was working with al-Qaeda and was trying to acquire long-range missiles from North Korea and enriched uranium from Niger.

Saddam is on trial. His psychopath sons are dead. We've captured or killed scores of foreign terrorists in Baghdad. Rape rooms and torture chambers are back in R. Kelly's Miami Beach mansion where they belong.

The Iraqi people have voted in two free, democratic elections this year. In a rash and unconsidered move, they even gave women the right to vote.

Iraqis have ratified a constitution and will vote for a National Assembly next month. The long-suffering Kurds are free and no longer require 24x7 protection by U.S. fighter jets.

Libya's Moammar Gadhafi has voluntarily dismantled his Weapons of Mass Destruction, Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon, and the Palestinians are holding elections.

(Last but certainly not least, the Marsh Arabs' wetlands ecosystem in central Iraq that Saddam drained is being restored, so even the Democrats' war goals in Iraq are being met.)

The American military has accomplished all this with just over 2,000 deaths. These deaths are especially painful because they fall on our greatest Americans. Still, look at what the military has done and compare the cost to 600,000 deaths in the Civil War, 400,000 deaths in World War II and 60,000 deaths in Vietnam (before Walter Cronkite finally threw in the towel and declared victory for North Vietnam).

What is known as a "hawk" in today's Democratic Party looks at what our military has accomplished and ? during the war, while our troops are in harm's way ? demands that we withdraw our troops.

In an upbeat speech now being aired repeatedly on al-Jazeera, last week Rep. John Murtha said U.S. troops "cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home." Claiming the war is "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion," Murtha said the "American public is way ahead of us."

Fed up with being endlessly told "the American people" have turned against the war in Iraq, Republicans asked the Democrats to show what they had in their hand and vote on a resolution to withdraw the troops.

By a vote of 403-3, the House of Representatives wasn't willing to bet that "the American people" want to pull out of Iraq. (This vote also marked the first time in recent history that the Democrats did not respond to getting their butts kicked by demanding a recount.)

The vote is all the more shocking because of what it says about the Democrats' motives in attacking the war ? as well as alerting us to three members of Congress we really need to keep an eye on.

It is simply a fact that Democrats like Murtha are encouraging the Iraqi insurgents when they say the war is going badly and it's time to bring the troops home. Whether or not there is any merit to the idea, calling for a troop withdrawal ? or "redeployment," as liberals pointlessly distinguish ? will delay our inevitable victory and cost more American lives.

Antiwar protests in the United States during the Vietnam War were a major source of moral support to the enemy. We know that not only from plain common sense, but from the statements of former North Vietnamese military leaders who evidently didn't get the memo telling them not to say so. In an Aug. 3, 1995, interview in the Wall Street Journal, Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, called the American peace movement "essential" to the North Vietnamese victory.

"Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement," he said. "Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."

What are we to make of the fact that ? as we now know ? the Democrats don't even want to withdraw troops from Iraq? By their own account, there is no merit to their demands. Before the vote, Democrats could at least defend themselves from sedition by pleading stupidity. Now we know they don't believe what they are saying about the war. (Thanks to that vote, the Islamo-fascists know it, too.)

The Democrats are giving aid and comfort to the enemy for no purpose other than giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There is no plausible explanation for the Democrats' behavior other than that they long to see U.S. troops shot, humiliated, and driven from the field of battle.

They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.