President Obama’s Iraq plan, being presented as ending the “combat mission” by August 31, 2010 while keeping as many as 50,000 troops in the nation engaging in combat missions for an unknown period after that, is raising hackles from some Democrats in Congress. On the other hand, his Republican rivals cheered at the prospect of prolonging the war.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D, CA) is “deeply troubled” by the idea of keeping 50,000 troops in Iraq for an unknown amount of time. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D, OH) pointed out that “you cannot leave combat troops in a foreign country to conduct combat operations and call it the end of the war.” The congressman probably meant to say you shouldn’t, because clearly President Obama can, and has.

On the other hand Senator McCain (R, AZ), Obama’s rival in the November elections, cheered the move, which he described as “significantly different” from the plan Obama based his campaign around. Obama originally touted a 16-month timetable, but backed off of it just days after taking office. McCain said during the campaign that he thought troops could stay in Iraq for “maybe 100 years.”

Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz

• Homegrown US 'Terror Plots' Drop, But Nation Still 'On Edge' - February 9th, 2012
• Amputations Soared Among US Troops in 2011 - February 9th, 2012
• US Still Can't Find Missing Libyan Missiles - February 9th, 2012
• Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood: Let Us Form Government - February 9th, 2012
• As Reports of Violence Grow in Syria, So Do Western Calls for Intervention - February 9th, 2012