Bush cautions Congress about Iraq war funds

Rice makes the rounds
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier Monday staunchly defended going to war but acknowledged the administration should have sent more troops initially to quell the civil strife following the invasion.

On NBC's TODAY, Rice said Saddam Hussein was a "dangerous man in the world's most dangerous region" and that it was worth it to overthrow him.

Asked on CBS’s “The Early Show” to say what the administration could have done better, she said that, early on, officials “might have looked to a more localized, more decentralized approach to reconstruction.

“... And I do believe that the kind of counterinsurgency strategy in which Gen. (David) Petraeus is now pursuing, in which we have enough forces to clear an area and hold it, so that building and governance can emerge, is the best strategy. And that probably was not pursued in the very beginning.”

Bipartisan reaction
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a persistent critic of the war strategy but a supporter of the war itself, has repeatedly complained that not enough U.S. troops were placed on the ground in the weeks and months following the March 2003 invasion.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., also appearing on CBS, maintained that “the only way you end sectarian violence is to occupy a country or have a decentralized government.”

Biden said the Bush administration was pursuing a "failed strategy." Also appearing on CBS, he said the United States should do in Iraq what did in Bosnia, and give the various factions "breathing room."

Biden maintained that “the only way you end sectarian violence is to occupy a country or have a decentralized government.

“You’ve got to give these people (the Sunnis, Shia and Kurds) breathing room like we did in Bosnia,” Biden said. “You’ve got to separate these people. This is a failed strategy.”

On Sunday, President Bush’s national security adviser said that House Democrats will assure failure in Iraq and waste the sacrifice of U.S. soldiers with their legislation to remove troops. The House’s war spending bill includes a troop withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008.

Democrats' plan discounted as ‘charade’
Lawmakers know the president will veto the measure, national security adviser Stephen Hadley said, making the exercise a “charade.”

Democratic lawmakers say the public put them in charge of Congress to demand more progress in Iraq — and to start getting the U.S. troops out.

The timeline for troop withdrawal under the House bill would speed up if the Iraqi government cannot meet its own benchmarks for providing security, allocating oil revenues and other essential steps. The administration opposes setting such timelines.

The House plan appears to have little chance of getting through the Senate, where Democrats have a slimmer majority. Even if it did, Bush has promised to veto it. But the White House is aggressively trying to stop it anyway, fearful of the message the world will hear if the House approves a binding bill to end the war.

MORE FROM INVASION IRAQ: FOUR YEARS LATER

Invasion Iraq: Four Years Later Section Front

Interactive: Fight for Iraq Engel: ‘I’ve seen so many ugly things’ Fundamental failures led to current crisis Video interactive: Do you remember? Media gallery: Iraq’s smallest casualties Audio slide show: Scars from Iraq Day by day, images of a 4-week invasion Chris Matthews: Iraq war was all predictable Bush cautions Congress about Iraq funds Poll: Iraqis pessimistic on war’s outcome Invasion Iraq: Four Years Later Section Front   Add Invasion Iraq: Four Years Later headlines to your news reader: