Russ Feingold's latest move to keep all that cash coming in is an amendment about troop redeployment.
Tending to the needs of the far Left, Feingold intends to introduce "an amendment to the emergency supplemental appropriations bill that requires the redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq by December 31st, 2006... The emergency supplemental, which is currently being considered in the Senate, includes funding for ongoing military operations in Iraq."
Read Feingold's press release.
(Excerpts)
“Our country desperately needs a new vision for strengthening our national security, and it starts by redeploying U.S. forces from Iraq,” Feingold said. “Our military has performed valiantly in Iraq, but the indefinite presence of large numbers of U.S. forces there tends to weaken our ability to fight the global terrorist networks that threaten us today.”
In June 2005, Feingold became the first U.S. Senator to offer a resolution calling on the President to offer a flexible timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. When the President failed to provide any suggestion of when U.S. forces would redeploy, Feingold jumpstarted the issue by suggesting the end of 2006 as a target date. In November 2005, 40 Senators voted in support of an amendment including language crafted by Feingold that called for a flexible timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
“Our current path is unsustainable,” Feingold said. “While this amendment recognizes the need for certain U.S. forces to be engaged in counter-terrorism activities, the training of Iraqi security services, and the protection of essential U.S. infrastructure, it also recognizes that the President’s current strategy in Iraq is undermining our nation’s national security.”
Gee, will a cut and run, retreat and defeat strategy in Iraq bolster our nation's national security?
Setting an arbitrary timetable for troop withdrawal was idiotic when Feingold suggested the December 31, 2006 date last August.
It's still idiotic.
Yesterday, "Gen. George Casey, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, called the recent selection of new Iraqi leaders, including incoming Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a major step toward a partial withdrawal of U.S. troops."
As the top U.S. commander in Iraq suggested today (April 26) that the United States would soon reduce the number of troops in Iraq, Pentagon planners said to ABC News that they hoped to pull more than 30,000 troops out by the end of the year, and possibly by as early as November.
The reductions depend on political and security progress in Iraq.
In a surprise visit to Baghdad, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld hailed progress toward the formation of a new Iraqi government as a "turning point" that would enable the United States to turn over more responsibility to the Iraqis.
While the Pentagon plans to reduce troop levels, those reductions will not be based on political expediency, grandstanding, and high profile gestures to bring in campaign contributions, like Feingold's amendment.
No firm troop withdrawal date is possible. It's irresponsible. It's typical Feingold.
It's also disgusting that he's tying his amendment to an emergency supplemental appropriations bill to supply funds for our troops.
Does Feingold really want to undermine the funding?
I guess he does.
He seems to care more about collecting his own campaign funds than supporting our military men and women.
The bottom line: Feingold should not be exploiting the funding for our troops to benefit his personal political future.
Typical Feingold.
What does Herb Kohl think about this?
According to his office, Kohl doesn't support Feingold's measure, but he thinks the Bush Administration should present a plan to bring the troops home.
Typical Kohl.
No comments:
Post a Comment