Senate opposition to Bush plan grows

WASHINGTON - President Bush’s decision to deploy 21,500 additional troops to Iraq drew fierce opposition Thursday from congressional Democrats and some Republicans — among them Sen. Chuck Hagel, who called it “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.”

The Nebraska Republican vowed to “resist” the plan, but the Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., threatened a filibuster to block any legislation expressing disapproval of Bush's strategy.

Democrats, who number 51 in the Senate, plan to offer a nonbinding resolution that would make clear where each senator stands. “I think that (bipartisan passage) will be the beginning of the end of the war in Iraq,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday.

“We expect to have 60” votes needed to block a filibuster, Reid said, noting that at least a dozen Senate Republicans have come out against the troop increase.

Bush said in a speech while visiting troops at Fort Benning, Ga., on Thursday that “it’s important for our fellow citizens to understand that failure in Iraq would be a disaster for our future.”'

The war has cost more than 3,000 American troops their lives and played a major role in the Democratic takeover of Congress in last fall’s elections.

Democrats who want a phased withdrawal from Iraq to start in four to six months were unswayed, and wasted no time before lambasting Bush’s plan for additional forces.

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described the current situation as “a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq.”

Signaling widening cracks within Bush's own Republican Party over his Iraq policy, not a single committee member spoke out in his support, and a few offered pointed criticism.

Escalation or augmentation?
In a heated exchange with Hagel, a potential presidential candidate in 2008, Rice disputed his characterization of Bush’s buildup as an “escalation.”

“Putting in 22,000 more troops is not an escalation?” Hagel, a Vietnam veteran and longtime critic of Bush’s Iraq policy, asked. “Would you call it a decrease?”

“I would call it, senator, an augmentation that allows the Iraqis to deal with this very serious problem that they have in Baghdad,” she said.

IRAQ STRATEGY Related content Poll: 70 percent oppose more troops Bush tells troops: Plan will take time Some in GOP join Democrats in bashing plan Georgia Democrat likes what he hears Transcript of president’s speech Curry on what Congress could do Army division deploys for third trip

Hagel told Rice, “Madame secretary, Iraqis are killing Iraqis. We are in a civil war. This is sectarian violence out of control.”

She disputed that Iraq was in the throes of a civil war. To that, Hagel said, “To sit there and say that, that’s just not true.”

Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a Democrat who ran as an independent, reiterated his support for Bush’s war strategy, while Florida Democrat Bill Nelson withdrew his backing.

“I have not been told the truth over and over again by administration witnesses, and the American people have not been told the truth,” Nelson said.

Voinovich, McCain reactions
Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio also said Bush could no longer count on his support.

“You’re going to have to do a much better job” explaining the rationale for the war, “and so is the president,” Voinovich told Rice. “I’ve gone along with the president on this and I’ve bought into his dream and at this stage of the game I just don’t think it’s going to happen.”

Meanwhile, after a meeting at the White House, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., expressed both doubts and optimism about the strategy.

“I am concerned about Maliki and his strength. I am concern as to whether these are sufficient number of troops,” he said. “But I do think we can succeed.”

McCain, a 2008 presidential contender, has been among a handful of lawmakers who have called for more — not fewer — U.S. troops in Iraq.

At a news conference, McConnell accused Democrats of secretly favoring a plan to cut off funding for the troops — an allegation that Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. denied.

McConnell conceded that Republicans as well as Democrats are troubled by Bush’s new policy, but said that “Congress is completely incapable of dictating the tactics of the war.”

McConnell’s filibuster threat underscored that at least some GOP leaders are still willing to stand up for the president in the battle over Iraq policy. Even so, Democrats would achieve their goal of forcing senators to show their positions on the war, whether the Senate votes on the resolution itself or a GOP effort to block it.

Bush’s new strategy, announced Wednesday in a prime-time address to the nation, increases U.S. forces in Iraq by 21,500 and demands greater cooperation from the Iraqi government.

Options for critics of the war were limited; Democratic leaders have mulled such a resolution of disapproval and there also has been talk of attaching a host of conditions to approval of a spending bill to cover the costs of the buildup.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Abortion could roil Senate health care debate High court looks at life in prison for juveniles Obama marks win, but challenges mount Advice for Obama: Knock heads on health care Palin says she’s back on Twitter Israeli prime minister calls for peace talks GOP says Dems put agenda ahead of country House Roll Call: Health care 2010 elections: Democratic fears, GOP hopes NYC mayor not humbled by close election Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: