Home > Orwellian House Votes: Call for End to War = Emboldening Terrorists

Orwellian House Votes: Call for End to War = Emboldening Terrorists

by Open-Publishing - Thursday 21 July 2005
2 comments

Wars and conflicts International Prison Attack-Terrorism USA

WASHINGTON - Calls for an early withdrawal from Iraq are a mistake that will only embolden terrorists, the House resolved Wednesday. The resolution drew opposition from Democrats, who said it implied that questioning President Bush’s Iraq policies is unpatriotic.

The measure, approved 291-137, says the United States should leave Iraq only when national security and foreign policy goals related to a free and stable Iraq have been achieved.

"Calls for an early withdrawal embolden the terrorists and undermine the morale" of U.S. and allied forces and put their security at risk, the amendment to a State Department bill reads.

The GOP-controlled House also voted 304-124 to accept another contentious amendment stating that the detention and lawful interrogation of detainees at Guantanamo is essential to the war on terrorism. Some critics of reported prisoner abuse and lack of legal recourse for detainees have called for Guantanamo to be closed.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., author of the Iraq provision, stressed that calls for an early withdrawal were counterproductive to security aims in Iraq.

"Words matter," she said. "Incessant calls for an established date for withdrawal from Iraq have a negative effect. ... Do we want to send a message to the terrorists that their war of attrition is succeeding?"

"To establish such a deadline," added House Majority Leader
Tom DeLay, R-Texas, "all but ensuring disaster, would be morally and strategically indefensible."

But Democrats said the proposal was aimed mainly at putting critics of the war, and those seeking an exit strategy, in a bad light. To suggest that "those of us who oppose this war are somehow ’emboldening terrorists’ is, to say the least, grotesque," said Rep. James McGovern (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass.

Rep. Barbara Lee (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., said the GOP leadership prevented Democrats from offering their amendments concerning the Iraq war as part of "an effort to marginalize and silence any critics of this administration’s policies in Iraq."

Democrats sought to revise the bill to include a request that Bush provide a benchmark for success in Iraq, but it was rejected, 227-203

.....

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...

Roll Call
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll397.xml

71 ’Democrats’ vote with the Repubs that calling to bring the troops home will only embolden the terrorists. The war was started intentionally! on lies! and these members of Congress are okay with sending more of the poor youth of America to die for Bush’s Lies? Bush is not the only Criminal still in power.

Forum posts

  • "The measure says the United States should leave Iraq only when national security and foreign policy goals related to a free and stable Iraq have been achieved....Democrats sought to revise the bill to include a request that Bush provide a benchmark for success in Iraq, but it was rejected, 227-203"

    The absurdity! We can’t leave until we achieve success, but no need to define that success or anything.
    We are supposed to trust Bush, the man who lied to congress to start a war for profit, to tell us when we should leave, no benchmarks or timetable needed. The thing is, everyday that we stay in Iraq, Halliburton, Custer-Battles and Bush’s other buddies make millions. This being the first step in a plan to dominate the area(see PNAC) Bush has no intention on leaving ever.

    When they say that planning to withdraw would ’embolden the terrorists’ does this mean they will start attacking the troops more frequently? Or does that mean that they would stop killing US soldiers for the time being until we leave? Because it seems to me that if they stopped killing US soldiers that would be a good thing. So then we are saying that we can’t leave, because the insurgents would stop killing us and then wait and kill their fellow Iraqis when we leave, and we are just too nice to leave the Iraqis to defend themselves from themselves? Does anyone understand their logic?

    The US congress is in a very sad state. It seems to me that our representatives should have some level of understanding about the reality of the situation in Iraq. They should feel guilty for allowing the most corrupt administration in US history get away with murder in such an overt manner that they have exposed themselves and embarrassed congress for going along with it. They should be holding the Bush Administration accountable for lying to them. Instead they repeat the most inane talking points and present them as fact.

    I think that congress needs a teach-in, perhaps as frequently as once a week. Someone should educate these people and they should be forced to discuss the issues based on facts. As it happens out in the real world, congress should have a mediator for the discussions, facts are presented and charted. Pros and cons are written on a chart so that no time is wasted repeating the same things over and over. Then everyone together takes a look at the big picture and makes an educated decision. This congress is completely dysfunctional as is, it is extremely disconcerting to realize that this is how our laws are made. We have to demand more from our government, they are not going to do it on their own.

    • The problem is, most of the members of Congress seem to be feeding at the same trough as BushCo. It’s simply not in their interests to investigate what’s *really* going on and doing something about it; they might suddenly lose all that lovely money and all those perks they get from the lobbyists. They might even have to work for a living! That would be terrible, because then they would be face to face with reality, which few of seem to have had any contact with for years. It’s easier to sit back and let someone else take responsibility, even if you have a sneeking feeling that he may be a few cards short of a full deck.