Just like the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf didn’t seem to change the minds of many Congressmen and Senators, the Huge Wikileak dump of documents about the War in Afghanistan didn’t change the minds of many Congressmen and Senators. All but 12 of the Republicans in the House voted for War Funding and we are waiting to see how many Republicans will vote for the Energy Bill since it has been pushed back till after the Summer Recess of the Senate.
From the NY Times on the House Vote for War Funding:
House Approves Money for Wars, but Rift Deepens
The House of Representatives agreed on Tuesday to provide $59 billion to continue financing America’s two wars, but the vote showed deepening divisions and anxiety among Democrats over the course of the nearly nine-year-old conflict in Afghanistan.
The 308-to-114 vote, with strong Republican support, came after the leak of an archive of classified battlefield reports from Afghanistan that fueled new debate over the course of the war and whether President Obama’s counterinsurgency strategy could work.
But Mr. Obama and top military officials said Tuesday that the disclosure of the documents should not force a rethinking of America’s commitment to the war. As Mr. Obama told reporters in the Rose Garden, “While I’m concerned about the disclosure of sensitive information from the battlefield that could potentially jeopardize individuals or operations, the fact is these documents don’t reveal any issues that haven’t already informed our public debate on Afghanistan.”
On a day of continuing political and military fallout over the leaked reports, Pentagon officials said that Pfc. Bradley Manning, 22, an Army intelligence analyst arrested last month on charges of leaking a video of an American helicopter attack in Iraq and charged this month with downloading more than 150,000 classified diplomatic cables, was a “person of interest” in an Army criminal investigation to find who provided the battlefield reports to the group WikiLeaks.
Administration officials said passage of the spending bill, which now goes to Mr. Obama for his signature, showed that the leak had not jeopardized Congressional support for the war and noted that the Senate passed the measure last week with no objection. Democratic leaders in the House said the Congress needed to act to provide the money troops overseas.
“The president is taking a wise and balanced approach in Afghanistan, and it deserves our support,” said Representative Steny H. Hoyer, the Maryland Democrat and majority leader.
In the House vote, 148 Democrats and 160 Republicans backed the war spending, but 102 Democrats joined 12 Republicans in opposing the measure. Last year, 32 Democrats opposed a similar midyear spending bill. Among those voting against the bill on Tuesday was Representative David R. Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat and the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the panel responsible for the measure.
Some of the Democratic opposition stemmed from the decision by party leaders to strip from the bill money that had been included in the original House version to help address the weak economy at home, including funds to help preserve teachers’ jobs. But some of those voting against it said they were influenced by the leaked documents, which highlight the American military’s struggles in Afghanistan and support claims that elements of Pakistan’s intelligence service were helping the Taliban.
“All of the puzzle has been put together and it is not a pretty picture,” said Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts. “Things are really ugly over there. I think the White House continues to underestimate the depth of antiwar sentiment here.”
More from this article on the confirmation hearing for the replacement of Gen. Patraeus for Central Command, Gen James Mattis and his views on Wikileaks…..
On another part of Capitol Hill, at a confirmation hearing for Gen. James N. Mattis to lead the military’s Central Command and oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee pressed General Mattis about the course of the war.
Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, pointedly asked General Mattis whether he agreed that a July 2011 deadline for the start of American withdrawals from Afghanistan would mean shifting from the current troop-intensive counterinsurgency strategy to an “increasingly important emphasis” on counterterrorism. In other words, should not the United States use the date to begin moving toward a more limited strategy of hunting down insurgents without trying to rebuild Afghanistan? General Mattis quickly agreed.
“I think that is the approach, Senator,” he said.
General Mattis and two Republicans on the panel, Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, used the occasion to denounce the leaks, which Mr. McCain said were “simply an extended footnote to a well-known reading of recent history.”
General Mattis agreed with Mr. McCain. “One of the newspaper headlines was that war is a tense and dangerous thing,” he said. “Well, if that is news, I don’t know who it’s news to that’s on this planet.”
In his opening statement, General Mattis declared, “Despite any recent papers leaked to the media, we are remaining in the region; we are not leaving.”
General Mattis, who is expected to be confirmed by the committee and the full Senate, is to replace Gen. David H. Petraeus, whose tour at Central Command was cut short when Mr. Obama asked him to take command of the allied mission in Afghanistan after Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal was relieved.
Even with 102 of the Democrats and 12 of the Republicans voting against the funding, it looks like, for now, this war will go on. We need an anti war protest the size of the Viet Nam protest to get through to these “leaders”. And here at home, at least two thirds of this nation is suffering from our economy. Doesn’t make sense. But lately not much does!
comes ashore, but those could increase to as much as 110 mph if it strengthened to a Category 2.
Loading ...
