Anti-war Dems make their case: The Swamp

Posted September 5, 2007 3:19 PM

by Gabrielle Russon

A group of anti-war Democrats said Wednesday that U.S. dollars should no longer be used to finance the Iraqi security forces.

At a Washington press conference, the House members said the $19 billion already spent to train the Iraqi security forces has created an even bloodier civil war. American-financed weapons and training has led to sectarian violence, they said, and armed Iraqis could eventually pose a threat to U.S. forces.

Their words come amid jostling and jockeying by the parties in preparation for next week's status report by Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq. Petraeus' report is likely to be followed by a furious congressional debate over whether and when to begin a withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Wednesday's press conference took particular aim at the Iraqi security forces, which some say are more loyal to their particular sects or specific militias than to the government of Iraq.

“Without a unifying central government to which a majority of Iraqis are loyal, we are merely training different factions of a violent power struggle,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). “We risk the danger that weapons provided to them will one day be turned against the United States and allies in the region.”

Waters has already introduced a bill to the House that would eliminate federal funding to train and equip groups such as the Iraqi militia and insurgent forces.

Others, such as Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), who called the conflict an “unjustifiable war,” demanded a set withdrawal date from Iraq.

Comments

Attention Republican Chickenhawks:

Posted by: John E | September 5, 2007 3:38 PM

And since we are funding the training which included weapons, will they be sending the US requests every week to refill their ammo when troops are no longer there, and at what cost?

What are we training them to do that they aren't already trained to do at age 2? I don't get it!!!!

Posted by: Bella | September 5, 2007 4:10 PM

"UNJUSTIFIED, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND JUST STUPID."

IF ANYONE THINKS ANY OTHER WAY, THEN YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE AND ITS YOUR FAULT THAT 60,000 MEN AND WOMEN ARE MAMED. ITS YOUR FAULT THAT 3800 MEN AND WOMEN, YOUR MOM, YOUR DAD, YOUR SON, YOUR DAUGHTER, YOUR NEIGHBOR, YOUR PEER HAS DIED IN THIS BIG LIE!

THEY LIED, THEY LIED, THEY LIED. THEY DIDN'T LIE TO PROTECT YOU. YOU PROTECT YOU, YOUR SON PROTECTS YOU, YOUR DAUGHTER PROTECTS YOU, YOUR MOM PROTECTS YOU, YOUR FATHER PROTECTS, BUT THIS PRESIDENT LIED TO YOU AND THEN LIED TO YOU AGAIN, AND AGAIN.

NOW THAT YOU HAVE BEEN BEATEN TO DEATH WITH A LIE, WHY CONTINUE TO PROTECT THIS ADMINISTRATION IN ANYTHING THEY WANT TO DO ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES.

BUSH COULD CARE LESS ABOUT YOU. DICK CHENEY COULD GIVE A SQUAT ABOUT YOU. ALBERTO GONZALES COULD GIVE A RATS BUTT ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. THIS ADMINISTRATION COULD GIVE A RATS BUTT ABOUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN NO BID FEDERAL CONTRACTS, AND THE CONSOLIDATION OF AMERICA UNDER S BILL 1639. THANK GOD IT DIDN'T PASS OTHERWISE, WE ALL WOULD BE WALKING IN SATANS ALLY VIA THE LAW.

EAVESDROP THAT MR. BUSH. WITH OR WITHOUT A COURT ORDER. MEIN KEMPF BABY!

Posted by: Roger Morris | September 5, 2007 4:16 PM

Maxine Waters...friend and admirer of
Fidel Castro. And she's the spokesperson
the "anti-war" Democrats come out with?
Why don't they also enlist Caesar Chavez
for the cause? If you want to add any believability, get someone with at least a smattering of credibility to address the issue.

Posted by: J. Garfield | September 5, 2007 4:26 PM

Back on May 25th, after the Democratic Congress buckled to Cheney's (I mean Bush's) pressure against defunding the Iraq war, I posted the following on the Swamp:

Sure, Chimpy McFlightsuit can be the tough "Commander Guy" when he wields veto power and doesn't have to worry about re-election.

Such bluster is quite different from his demeanor during Viet Nam, when he was magically selected for domestic Air National Duty, eh? That goes double for Veep "I needed those 5 deferments because I had other priorities" Cheney. Both of these guys lack any scintilla of shame - sending our sons and daughters into the meatgrinder that is Iraq without any hope of success - when they pulled all the strings and jumped through all the loopholes they could to avoid serving the country they now claim to want to defend.

The Dem's deal with the devil to continue Iraq war funding simply guarantees that approximately 250-500 more American servicemen and women will die by the end of September when the "surge strategy" will be re-evaluated.

The American people voted last November to have the Democrats get us out of Iraq - not to have them cave in to the likes of Chimpy.

Posted by: Buster | May 25, 2007 10:16 AM

As of today (9/5/07), there have been an additional 305 U.S. serviceperson deaths in Iraq since I predicted that there would be between 250-500 deaths to Service personnel between then (May 25th) and the date that General Petraeus gives his progress report. It's sad that virtually any jamoke (like me) could have so accurately predicted such a waste of American lives spent in the pursuit of refereeing a sectarian civil war . . . .

Posted by: Buster | September 5, 2007 4:29 PM

Now that we've had the Swamp run an article on "anti-war Democrats making their case", can we expect the Swamp to run an article on anti-defeat Republicans making THEIR case?

Posted by: Bruce | September 5, 2007 6:44 PM

Bruce, you're asking the LIBune to counter its contract with the DNC. The Tribune Co. needs all the money it can get.

Posted by: John D | September 5, 2007 9:05 PM

Bruce-

Bush and Cheney are the only ones (other than you and Johnny Torture) who still really believe in their "stay the course strategy". We've had plenty of articles filled with their lies.

Posted by: Tony | September 5, 2007 9:54 PM

There should be a four year limit on wars.

This especially applies to wars against 2nd and 3rd rate powers.

If you can't kick a 2nd or 3rd rate power's butt in 4 years, then you're never going to win.

You may as well save your military from further embarrassment. We lost. Let's go home and next time let's only go to war if we plan on dropping a few nuclear bombs. Our military has proven time and again that we only fight well in Carribbean and Central American states. Korea, Vietnam, Beruit, Iran and now Afghanistan and Iraq. Let's just dismantle the military and develop our nuclear warheads capability. It can be run out of Microsoft.

Posted by: Bud McFarlin | September 6, 2007 12:01 AM

Our military has proven time and again that we only fight well in Carribbean and Central American states.
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | September 6, 2007 12:01 AM

Dear Bud: You should spend less time in the bar and re-take your 8th grade world history classes, you might run across this conflict called WWII, just ask the Germans the Japanese if we only fight well in the Caribbean and Central America. You seem to have lost some respect and honor for the 330,000 + young men we lost doing such a terrible job fighting that war. Shame on you Bud !

Posted by: Don B. | September 6, 2007 8:02 AM

Bud, I'm going to assume you were being sarcastic. If you (or whoever was posting in your name) weren't, your knowledge of history and of warfare in general is horribly lacking, and you should stop talking about such subjects before you further embarrass yourself.

Posted by: JB | September 6, 2007 11:39 AM