Wapo says "Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable", their sub header "Compromise Bill in Works After Veto Override Fails".
President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.
Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war."
Now before I go any further into the Wapo story, Horses Mouth claims that Pelosi and Baghdad Reids offices deny the story from Wapo.
I just emailed a Pelosi aide to ask whether the story was true. Here's the reply:Not true. Speaker just told members of the Democratic caucus that the story is totally untrue. We are still deciding what provisions the new bill will include.
Meanwhile, a source in Reid's office tells me the following: "No decisions have been made on this yet. No options have been ruled in or out." It's also worth noting that the New York Times story on this today doesn't say that the Dems have officially offered this concession, either.
So what happened here? I just emailed Post reporter Weisman and requested comment. His answer:That is very interesting, since I was told in no uncertain terms by one of her aides that the withdrawal dates had to go, since they could not stand by language Bush would never sign. That was cofirmed by another senior leadership aide and two members of the leadership.
I can say with no reluctance whatsoever that we stand by the story. By the way, nobody has contacted me about it. That should tell you a lot.
Tells me that once again a newspaper received a "leak" and reported it before Pelosi was ready for it to be known.... leaks aren't so much fun for Pelosi and crew when they aren't endangering our troops lives huh?
Horses Mouth also adds this little tidbit:
I have no problem believing that these aides said this, or that the withdrawal language is likely to be taken out in the end.
Neither do we, but tell me again why Baghdad Reid and Pelosi wasted all the time, withholding funds for our troops when everyone, everyone knew this would be the outcome because they didn't have a chance in hell of overriding the veto?
So, Horses Mouth is more upset that Wapo dared phrase it the way they did instead of angered that the Dems are backtracking so damn fast or that they endangered the troops, withheld their funds, did everything in their power to demoralize our soldiers and everything they could to encourage our enemies.
Nope. That doesn't matter at all.
Which brings me to something one of my readers made a comment about:
Here's the crazy thing about all this, spree...
Now that the veto is done and the Dems are dead meat in Congress for having wasted months playing chicken with funding in a time of war, only NOW do we see the MSM paying attention to the reality of Iraq.
" Pulling U.S. forces from Iraq could trigger catastrophe, CNN analysts and other observers warn, affecting not just Iraq but its neighbors in the Middle East, with far-reaching global implications.
Sectarian violence could erupt on a scale never seen before in Iraq if coalition troops leave before Iraq's security forces are ready. Supporters of al Qaeda could develop an international hub of terror from which to threaten the West. And the likely civil war could draw countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran into a broader conflict."
And this is from CNN(!!!) up mere hours after the veto override vote died Wednesday afternoon. It absolutely destroys the notion that withdrawal is any sort of viable option, the position that Bush has held since day one.
Is CNN the first off the doomed Dhimmicrat/MSM boat that's heading for the rocks? Clearly somebody in charge at CNN could have published this piece at any time in the last four years. Why now? Could it be that even CNN believes the Democrats are finished as a party for a generation after their spring of treason and don't want to go down along with them?
We'll see. How many more liberal news outlets will jump ship and take up the President's position -- the one that has been CORRECT for four years now -- and how quickly will they do it?
Keep an eye out
Update on that. Add the LA Times to the list.
"But despite some signs of progress, both Iraqis and their American advisors at this training range are blunt about how much work remains: If a U.S. pullout comes anytime soon, most say, the Iraqi army will collase.
"Honestly put, I think Iraq would be challenged to remain a unified country," said Marine Lt. Col. William Redman, the senior advisor at the range.
"I've seen anarchy, and we're right on the brink of it right now. If we go in a year or two years, it's going to be a complete mess," said retired Army 1st Sgt. Jerry Massey, a 21-year veteran who trains Iraqis in how to spot and respond to threats. "We can't leave here for another five years, minimum.""
The MSM is bailing hard on the anti-war message. The question is why and why now, after four years of attacking the position?
So, of course, as I always do, I followed the links.
The LA Times pieces headlined "Trainers say Iraqi forces would collapse without U.S. support"
BESMAYA RANGE, IRAQ — Teams of Iraqi soldiers huddled outside the doors of two small homes across a narrow road from each other. Their AK-47s were ready, and so were they.
They kicked in the doors of each house, burst in, and began searching the rooms for insurgents, aiming their weapons as they moved crab-like through the maze-like structures.
"Stop! Stop! Stop!" someone hollered in English from a catwalk above them.
It was U.S. Army 1st Lt. Andrew Fuller, trying to break the soldiers of a potentially lethal habit. Simultaneous, side-by-side searches such as these often can end up with soldiers pointing their guns at each other.
"You always want to have your clearing operations going in the same direction," Fuller explained through a translator as the Iraqi teams regrouped in the dusty alley to try another approach.
For almost three years, training the Iraqi army has been among the top priorities for the U.S. military. And for nearly that long, U.S. officials have considered it among their chief frustrations.
Now, with President Bush under steady pressure to begin pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, the administration once again is emphasizing the need to train Iraqi forces to take over the country's security.
But despite some signs of progress, both Iraqis and their American advisors at this training range are blunt about how much work remains: If a U.S. pullout comes anytime soon, most say, the Iraqi army will collapse.
The CNN piece headlined " No safe way for U.S. to leave Iraq, experts warn"
(CNN) -- Pulling U.S. forces from Iraq could trigger catastrophe, CNN analysts and other observers warn, affecting not just Iraq but its neighbors in the Middle East, with far-reaching global implications.
Sectarian violence could erupt on a scale never seen before in Iraq if coalition troops leave before Iraq's security forces are ready. Supporters of al Qaeda could develop an international hub of terror from which to threaten the West. And the likely civil war could draw countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran into a broader conflict.
President Bush vetoed a war spending bill Tuesday precisely because the Democrat-led Congress required the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by October 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later.
Bush said such a deadline would be irresponsible and both sides are now working on new proposals -- which may have no pullout dates.
A rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops would hurt America's image and hand al Qaeda and other terror groups a propaganda victory that the United States is only a "paper tiger," CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen said.
"It would also play into their strategy, which is to create a mini-state somewhere in the Middle East where they can reorganize along the lines of what they did in Afghanistan in the late '90s," Bergen told CNN.com.
It was in Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda allied with the Taliban, and were allowed to run terror bases and plan the September 11, 2001 attacks against the United States.
Bergen says it is imperative that the United States not let that happen in Iraq.
"What we must prevent is central/western Iraq [from] becoming a Sunni militant state that threatens our interests directly as an international terror hub," he said.
Don Shepperd, a retired Air Force major-general and military analyst for CNN, agreed that Sunni Muslim fighters who support al Qaeda would seek an enclave inside a lawless Iraq likely riven along sectarian lines into Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish regions.
There would be "increasing attempts by terrorists to establish a training sanctuary in Iraq," Shepperd said.
That's one of the reasons why a fast withdrawal will not happen, whatever the politicians say, the analysts predict.
ummmm, after reading these two pieces I can think of only one question.... isn't this what we and our President have been saying the whole time????!!!!????
The headlines don't surprise me near as much as the sources, CNN and LA Times, two of the biggest cheerleaders for the anti-war crowd, which brings up the question that my reader brought up.... is the MSM finally prepared to tell the truth, the whole truth about Iraq, bad and good, including the full consequences of a premature withdrawal?
OR are they simply hedging their bets, they keep criticizing Bush and Iraq, but making sure to have a story or two so that if the Democrats do manage, somehow, to shove defeat down our throats, and all hell breaks loose in Iraq and we get attacked again on American soil, they can ALSO say, HEY we told you what could happen!!!
Is the MSM turning against the Democrats or, more likely, in my opinion, are they simply covering their asses?
It is something to keep our eyes out for.
In the meantime, I find complete Irony in another Wapo piece, especially when the you look at the first two sentences, then look to the next NYT piece I found.
Wapo says:
President Bush is at odds with the American public and a restive congressional majority over the Iraq war, and even some Republicans talk about imposing new requirements that could trigger a troop withdrawal.
It's time to play the Qaeda card.
NYT says:
The U.S. military said on Thursday it had killed a senior al Qaeda official in Iraq who it accused of involvement in the kidnapping of Americans Jill Carroll and Tom Fox and other foreigners.
Seems Dana Milbank from Wapo hasn't been reading the news!!!! Especially from his own newspaper!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wapo "U.S. says leading al Qaeda figure killed in Iraq"
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Thursday it had killed a top al Qaeda operative in Iraq whom it accused of involvement in the kidnapping of American journalist Jill Carroll, peace activist Tom Fox and other foreigners.
U.S. military spokesman Major-General William Caldwell said Muharib Abdul Latif al-Jubouri was the "senior minister of information" for al Qaeda in Iraq.
Interior Ministry spokesman Brigadier-General Abdul-Kareem Khalaf said Jubouri was also Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, the leader of the self-styled Islamic State in Iraq, a Qaeda-led group which has claimed many major attacks in the country.
Maybe the writers from Wapo should actually talk to each other before making the paper into a yoyo of opinion rather than using facts.
Perhaps he should read NYT or CNN or LA Times more often to keep up with world events or to at least learn how to hedge your bets and cover your ass at the same time.
More about the death of the al-Qaeda operative over at Pajamas Media.
Debbie over at Right Truth has some questions about our OWN National Reconciliation.
All in all, the surrender bill vetoed, the Dems failing in their pathetic attempt to override the veto, Dems backing down on time tables, news of al-Qaeda's operatives being captured and killed, the MSM finally letting America know what the true consequences of premature withdrawal are, this has been good news from America AND Iraq today.
More to come...
Others discussing one or more of these issues:
Captain's Quarters, Riehl World View, Sister Toldjah, The Jawa Report, Red State, Don Surber, Outside The Beltway, Gateway Pundit, Iraq The Model.
.
