Reporter: "Senator, there were reports this morning that President Bush will ask Congress for $50 billion more dollars for the Iraq war. What do you have to say about that?
Dodd: "Well, I'm not surprised and I'd be very resistant to that request. I think we've, as I said we're spending well over now half a trillion dollars in this conflict. And again, it's a civil war in Iraq. This is the middle of a civil war and those who have understood this issue have argued from the very beginning that there was never going to be a military solution to the civil war in Iraq. And so I'd be very resistant and I intend to fight any efforts here, I'll do whatever I can to support whatever our troops need to have a safe and secure withdrawal from Iraq. But I don't intend to continue to fund the war over there that I think has no end. As long as we're there, I think the Iraqis are not going to come together as a people it's about time we wound down our military presence there."
President Bush plans to ask Congress next month for up to $50 billion in additional funding for the war in Iraq, a White House official said yesterday, a move that appears to reflect increasing administration confidence that it can fend off congressional calls for a rapid drawdown of U.S. forces.
The request -- which would come on top of about $460 billion in the fiscal 2008 defense budget and $147 billion in a pending supplemental bill to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- is expected to be announced after congressional hearings scheduled for mid-September featuring the two top U.S. officials in Iraq. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker will assess the state of the war and the effect of the new strategy the U.S. military has pursued this year.
. . . Most of the additional funding in a revised supplemental bill would pay for the current counteroffensive in Iraq. . . . The decision to seek about $50 billion more appears to reflect the view in the administration that the counteroffensive will last into the spring of 2008 and will not be shortened by Congress.
I believe this request provides Congress another chance to set an end date to the Iraq Debacle. The Congress must set a date certain for ending funding for Iraq Debacle operations. If they lack the political courage to say no to this funding request, the Congress must insist that this is the LAST request and that there will be no more funding for Iraq Debacle operations after a date certain. I suggest March 31, 2008. The Reid-Feingold framework:
Remember a while ago when John Edwards had the guts to say what many of us were thinking all along, that this "War on Terror" promoted by Bush was a bumper sticker slogan designed to question the patriotism of those of us who dared question the administration's incompetent and idiotic actions just before and after the 9-11 attacks? Remember the current NIE assessment that totally agreed with Edwards conclusions? Remember Edwards calling for an end to the war in Iraq, and a sane foreign policy to combat global terrorism?
This is a great development for folks like me who believe the only way to end the Iraq Debacle is for the Congress, and in particular, the House, to not fund it after a date certain. Here's the letter:
Dear Mr. President:
We are writing to inform you that we will only support appropriating additional funds for <span class="caps">U.S. </span>military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of all our troops out of Iraq before you leave office. . . .