[Peace-discuss] One party government

[C. G. Estabrook]

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat ... voted against [a timetable 
for pulling U.S. forces out of Afghanistan. 'I've felt no impatience about 
Afghanistan in my caucus,' he said [and] Republicans 'never raised a fuss about 
paying for the war under President Bush.'"

	US Senate rejects exit timetable for Afghanistan
	27 May 2010 16:55:01 GMT
	By Susan Cornwell

WASHINGTON, May 27 (Reuters) - The Senate rejected a proposal on Thursday to 
require President Barack Obama to submit a timetable for pulling U.S. forces out 
of Afghanistan, despite unease among some members of his party over the 
nine-year-old war.

The 80-18 vote nixed a bid by liberal Democrat Russ Feingold for a detailed 
troop timetable, which he argued would avoid future "emergency" war spending 
bills such as the $33 billion one now before the Senate.

But most members of the Democratic-majority Senate proved unwilling to dictate 
to the president, with a buildup of 30,000 additional troops still underway that 
Obama ordered to Afghanistan and a new military push in the Kandahar area.

Adopting Feingold's plan would "reinforce the fear ... that the United States 
will abandon the region," Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a 
Democrat, said.

Levin said this was unwise as the Taliban is "doing everything it can" to 
convince Afghans that U.S., NATO and Afghan forces cannot protect them.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, also voted against Feingold's 
proposal. "I've felt no impatience about Afghanistan in my caucus," he said on 
Wednesday.

But several Democratic senators are increasingly anxious now that U.S. combat 
deaths have passed the 1,000 mark in Afghanistan and the cost of the war topped 
$300 billion.

The war in Iraq has cost over $700 billion, with 4,400 U.S. military dead since 
2003.

"I'm impatient. Time to start thinking about a different approach, I think," 
Senator Tom Harkin said earlier this week.

Senator Jeff Bingaman, another Democrat, said: "I think there's a high level of 
impatience, but exactly what should be done legislatively about that issue, I 
don't know." He voted against Feingold's proposal; Harkin voted for it.

END DATE SOUGHT

Feingold acknowledged Obama had set July 2011 as a starting date for removing 
U.S. troops, but said there should also be an end date. "The president should 
convey to the American and Afghan people how long he anticipates it will take to 
complete his military objectives," he said.

There were no Republican votes for his plan.

"Thanks to the McChrystal strategy, American forces have already brought 
pressure on the Taliban in Afghanistan. We need to keep that pressure up if this 
counterinsurgency strategy is to succeed, and it must," Republican leader Mitch 
McConnell said. General Stanley McChrystal is in charge of U.S. and NATO forces 
in Afghanistan.

The Senate also shelved a Republican proposal to find ways to pay for the new 
war spending with cuts to other programs. Reid scoffed at this idea, saying 
Republicans "never raised a fuss about paying for the war under President Bush."

Reid wants the Senate to finish the war spending bill this week. The money must 
also be approved by the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls it a "heavy 
lift" among Democrats wary of spending more on the battlefield.

The House Appropriations Committee was expected to vote on its version later on 
Thursday.

Obama requested $33 billion in February to pay for his Afghan surge, but 
Congress has been busy with domestic priorities and worried about scarce budget 
resources. The money comes on top of about $130 billion that Congress already 
approved for Afghanistan and Iraq through Sept. 30.

The Senate version includes around $4 billion for a "civilian surge" of economic 
aid for Afghanistan and Pakistan. (Editing by Sue Pleming and Philip Barbara)

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N27100144.htm

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.