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
- US-Led Airstrikes Killed 472 Civilians in Syria in the Past Month - June 23rd, 2017
- US Narrows Counter-Extremism Program to Focus on Islamists - June 23rd, 2017
- Senator: US Strikes on Syrian Forces 'Unlawful' - June 23rd, 2017
- Kurds Warn Turkey's Buildup in North Syria Threatens Raqqa Invasion - June 23rd, 2017
- Senators Seek Clarification on US Role in Yemen Torture - June 23rd, 2017