Surest Way to End War: Support an Iraqi Referendum on Withdrawal

[babylonsister]

Surest Way to End War: Support an Iraqi Referendum on Withdrawal
by: johnraymond
Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 12:02:56 PM EDT

snip//

There are two ways out of Iraq, not just one: Congress can cut the funding, and the Iraqis can ask us to leave. Either one on its own would be enough to end U.S. military involvement in Iraq. This proposal melds both together into a powerful, unified strategy that has the best chance of getting us out of Iraq sooner rather than later, completely not partially, and also has the greatest chance of any single strategy to convince more members of Congress to vote for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. The strategy I will outline has been shown, based on a little-noticed poll, to be the only approach that can move Republicans from two-thirds support for indefinite occupation to two-thirds support for a one-year withdrawal of all U.S. troops. And it will significantly increase the support for withdrawal among independents and Democrats. Specifically, this proposal calls, first, for the Iraqi people to vote, in a national referendum in Iraq, on whether they want U.S. troops to be withdrawn (and for this referendum to be encouraged and supported by Congress); and, second, for initiatives in as many states as possible calling for a one-year, complete U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Although legislation in Congress is essential, it does not appear that Congress by itself has the power to end this war. I'm not in any way suggesting that Congress should not be our clear, determined focus until the supplemental funding is decided one way or another. But the reality is that we simply cannot depend on Congress alone: the American people, and the Iraqi people, need to be heard from directly.

Regarding the pending fight over President Bush's request for $200 billion more for the Iraq War, it's vital for the Democrats to pass funding legislation that includes binding withdrawal timelines. It's vital because the American people elected the Democrats to get us out of Iraq, and that sentiment has only grown stronger since the election. According to a Sept. 7-8 USA Today/Gallup Poll, a record 60 percent of Americans say the United States should set a timetable to withdraw forces "and stick to that timetable regardless of what is going on in Iraq." When withdrawal funding legislation is vetoed, the same bill should be sent back to the president to veto again, making it clear that he opposes the will of the majority of Americans, and that, in addition, the members of Congress who support his policy do not represent public opinion in their own districts (with only a handful of exceptions).

But then what? Even if you believe that there is (or should be) enough support in Congress to stand firm and pass only withdrawal funding until the president has no choice but to give in, a smart strategy would still include a Plan B in case that didn't happen. The Democrats caved on supplemental funding in May because they had no fallback plan. Firmness in advancing a withdrawal timeline in the first place depends on having a strong Plan B, one that moves us decisively toward withdrawal even if it does not include the binding withdrawal timelines most of us support but that most of us believe, realistically, will never get past the president's veto pen.

Without such a Plan B, the Democrats will eventually give the president his money while crafting a compromise with some Republicans that includes vague withdrawal goals, maybe some troop reductions, maybe troop readiness standards. This will be justified as the best that could be achieved. And then the end of U.S. involvement in Iraq will be put off until well after the November 2008 election. The war will continue, at a minimum, for more than two years, and most likely for longer.

more...

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1494

[spanone]

1. bu$hco IS the iraqi gov't.....fat chance ..imho

[daninthemoon]

2. bushler is the Queen of Babylon