Reid: "But, we said it first!"
Mr. President, this afternoon, I would like the Senate to note how similar General Casey’s apparent plan to withdraw U.S. forces is to the plan put forward by Senate Democrats last week.
Our plan—designed by Senators Levin and Reed—said much the same thing as our military leaders said in the New York Times. Specifically, that it is time for Iraqis to take responsibility for their own security and government, so that the phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq can begin by year’s end.
As we all know, the Republican Majority rejected the Levin/Reed proposal, even though it represents our best chance at making sure our troops in Iraq succeed and Iraq as a country succeeds. And even though it is entirely consistent with the plan of our top military commander in Iraq.
By rejecting our amendment, Republicans made clear they were intent to “stay the course” and stay forever in Iraq.
But Mr. President, I wonder how the Majority feels today, now that that General Casey’s plan is in the open?
Reid misses (ignores??) the point. The Levin/Reed proposal was rejected because the majority believes troop withdrawals should be based on success on the ground, not the arbitrary timetables that the Democrats propose every six months. Stay the course, indeed. Forever? That is Reid's word, not the Republicans. That the majority has, and is, deferring to the commanding General; that the commanding General is indicating that time may be approaching, does not vindicate the catcalls from the left.
Stand up every hour of the day and declare the sun is about to rise doesn't make you a prophet when it finally happens.
To answer Reid's not-so-rhetorical question, how does the Majority feel about withdrawal in the wake of the General's plans, well, I leave that to your imagination.
The words "Ok" and "Cool" come to mind.