Murtha Says He's `Optimistic' About Deal on War Money

By Nicholas Johnston

Nov. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Democratic Representative John Murtha said he is ``optimistic'' that House Democrats and President George W. Bush can agree on Iraq war funding after an earlier $50 billion proposal linked to troop withdrawals was blocked in the Senate.

``Congress wants to come up with an agreement,'' Murtha, chairman of a House subcommittee on military spending, told reporters in a video conference from his office in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. ``Leadership may be willing to compromise'' on the time line for withdrawing troops from Iraq, he said.

Democrats, who have a majority in both houses of Congress, are in a standoff with Bush over $190 billion in war funding requested by the administration. A $50 billion spending bill linked to troop withdrawals was blocked by Senate Republicans earlier this month, and Democrats have said they won't approve any more money this year.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Nov. 20 that the military plans to lay off 200,000 civilian employees and close some Army bases as early as February if more money isn't approved.

Murtha, who returned Nov. 27 from a trip to Iraq, said the military situation there has improved ``substantially'' with the deployment of more troops, yet the Iraqi government has failed to capitalize on the reduced violence in Baghdad.

``The central government is pretty close to dysfunctional,'' Murtha said. ``They need to do something for heaven's sake, and that has not happened.''

Point of Negotiation

Since the March 2003 invasion, 3,877 U.S. troops have died in the Iraq war. About 160,000 U.S. troops are in the country now, and Bush has said that number will drop to about 130,000 by the middle of next year.

Murtha said he was encouraged by a telephone conversation on Tuesday with Bush's Iraq coordinator, Army Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, about reaching a compromise on war funding.

More?

Bloomberg.com: U.S.

Even Murtha now admits we are making progress!

__________________
"Destiny must be shaped and not left to mere chance."..Spencer Collins ..

And that's gonna leave a mark...

Murtha's comments on 'surge' are a problem for House Democrats

Yeah...

Gotta love it when the Speaker of the house is going to be angry at something like...America winning...

Must really suck...:

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I think that the Speaker is angry with the way that things were handled by Murtha. I don't disagree with her. I think that Murtha broke ranks in a manner that was more self serving than not, but that point is really immaterial. The issue is this, when looking at the same information there are two different interpretations. Neither of these views are wrong, they are simply different. Only time will be able to prove one course more correct over the other.

1) Republicans/Dixiecrats - We are winning the war! - This analysis is based upon military progress.

2) Democrats - We are losing the war - This analysis is based upon political progress.

Both are correct. We are winning the war in the sense of military victory yet we have not accomplished the political feats that must be had before we can declare victory. The progress on the political front tends to be slow if any at all, and that of course assumes that there haven't been any set backs. Sadly, I think that the Democrats are correct in so much as if we do not secure a political victory any military victory will be pointless.

__________________

That's empty rhetoric...

A couple of years ago this line of thinking was the exact OPPOSITE of the Democratic line...

Every time a political victory was poited out, such as an election (with a better turnout than Americans get) or the formation of a Constitution...and hell!...a government itself!...The Democrats were quick to jump to the nearest microphone and declare "It doesn't mean anything until the violence goes down."...

Now that the violence is going down, they have to change their rhetoric because the surge confronted that accusation and nullified it...So now they have to come up with a new one...

But that's OK...If/when the political victories start coming as a result of the decrease in violence, the Democrats are sure to come up with a new excuse for declaring the war lost...

Their political lives depend on it, and for them, that's more important than any American victory...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I respectfully disagree. It would be rhetoric if I were simply saying for political gain. I'm not. I think that we have to win both sides of the war to win the war. To say that we have made sufficient political progress in the past few months would be untrue. We simply need to increase the political progress to be on par with the military progress.

I'm all for winning the war, but we need to realize that it's a two front war and I'm afraid that we haven't been spending enough time on the political front.

__________________

What you're SAYING is obvious, but that was NOT what's being transmitted...

A & B are both necessary, but when A was working, Democrats said it doesn't matter because B wasn't...

Now B is working, so the complaint changed 180 to say that A isn't working...

Istead of just coming out and admitting gains are being made in one form or the other, they demand a perfect war and focus on whatever negative suits their political agenda at the moment...

The political front, in 4 four years, is so far ahead of any other country's political revolutions (including our own)...A constitution and multiple free elections within 4 years is meteoric...

And if there was a Democratic president, it would be on the front page of the NYT and CNN's lead story every night of the week...Instead, we continually hear the cry of "Not good enough!"...

Reminds me of people who complain if their drive-thru order isn't ready in 20 seconds and they start whining...Their expectations are simply unrealistic...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

It's unfair to compare Iraq and the US. We had to do it on our own without any real assistance as far as creating the Constitution and the like. Now we have that information to export so that part of the process is much easier.

You are making the assertion that the Democrats are merely trying to be obstructionist when it comes to the war. The reality is quite different. While it is true that some Democrats are being obstructionist the others are making the clear and reasonable assertion that I have made. You have to have both to declare victory. Why should we increase funding for the part that has worked instead of diverting that funding to the section that hasn't worked? We obviously need new political leadership on the Iraq issue. Perhaps we should bring back some of our talented leaders to tackle the issue?

__________________

It's infair to expect that political and military goals would be acheived when terrorist organizations infiltrate the geography, tribal rivalries restart because the threat of the dictator isn't there to wipe out the masses who dissent, the military was forced to fight a war by Queensbury rules while the enemy gets a free pass internationally, and countries who sit in their ivory towers throwing out their elitiest opinions while playing Pontius Pilate...

This war would've been over by now if we let the military do their thing instead of keeping a leash on them and making them second guess themselves everytime an "Abu Gharib" or a "Redacted" makes them out to be thugs...

It's only the tactic of the day because it helps them politically...If the war would help them politically, they'd pretend to care...

Wrong...

Just look at this thread...Murtha CONCEDED that gaoins were being made, and instead of just agreeing the simple truth, it is stated that the speaker of the House is going to be "furious"...

FOR TELLING THE TRUTH!!!!...

That says that she'd rather frame the negatives while omitting the positives...I can imagine her baseball team winning a game 10-0 and hearing her complain about the walk in the third inning...

Agreed...

And who has declared victory?...No one...

BUT who has declared a loss?...

I can give a list if you'd like...

The emergency spending bill has all of the specific funding...and I'm not savvy enough to decide what millions should go to what policy...and neither is 99% of the country, so those that do are blowing hot air...

But I do know this...By refusing to hand it over, you get neither...It's curing dandruff by decapitation...

Partially true...Depending on that leadership...

How will Iraq respond to a new American leader that has spent the last 3 years and a part of their campaign ridiculing the Iraqi government and calling them inept and incompetent?...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Well we really can't honestly say that the years of unquestioned political support spurned any real progress. But a leadership change on the ground level. Get Albright over there with Powell and a few others. Get the ground game for politics running. We are forgetting about the game on the ground for politics when we send the people we have.

__________________

Just because something isn't going as planned now doesn't mean anyone else could be doing better...For all we know, what's happening there is the BEST we could hope for and any change will result in a breakdown...

There is NO ONE who has experience in this...expecting former leaders to do better is not a guarantee...

Joe Gibbs is coaching his 4th season of the Redskins...So far, all he has to show for it is one playoff game; in which they lost...

Bringing in the old guard would probably do even worse, considering they'd be at odds with the current administration...It would be like putting a fox in the henhouse...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd