In the email box this morning, I found the semi-regular Voinovich newsletter. In it was this:Sen. Voinovich Visits Iraq, Proposes a Responsible Way ForwardLet's review General RINOvich's "Plan":
Recently, Sen. Voinovich, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, visited Iraq and met with General Petraeus and other key leaders on the ground. Sen. Voinovich has been working behind the scenes trying to forge a bipartisan compromise for moving forward in Iraq and is working with his colleagues to help America speak with one voice. To get that done, he has drafted legislation on a way forward in Iraq.
Sen. Voinovich’s legislation would: 1) State that a precipitous withdrawal of forces would have dangerous consequences for U.S. national security; 2) Make clear that the U.S. must remain engaged in Iraq for the foreseeable future; 3) Cite the recommendation of General Petraeus that a reduction of forces is imminent; 4) Call for the reduction to commence no later than 120 days after enactment; 5) Call for an increased role for the U.N. and other regional allies; 6) Call for a transition of the mission to focus on specific areas that are critical to U.S. objectives; 7) Not set an arbitrary deadline by Congress for the transition of mission – but require the administration, working in conjunction with the generals on the ground, to report back with a comprehensive plan; 8) Require the Secretary of Defense to report back in 180 days with a proposed date for completing a plan for reducing instability in Iraq and the region as forces are reduced.
1) State that a precipitous withdrawal of forces would have dangerous consequences for U.S. national security;And let's do that be constantly demanding that we surrender as soon as possible...
2) Make clear that the U.S. must remain engaged in Iraq for the foreseeable future;Again, let's do this by insisting that we surrender immediately...
3) Cite the recommendation of General Petraeus that a reduction of forces is imminent;We should be careful with the usage of the word "imminent"... Reduction in US forces ought to be determined by the situation on the ground. Any other criteria or timetable is nothing more than issuing a press release for al Qaeda...
4) Call for the reduction to commence no later than 120 days after enactment;Because nothing says "All you terrorists have to do is wait it out for a few months and all this can be yours!" than a deadline...
5) Call for an increased role for the U.N. and other regional allies;The UN??? For what? Does Iraq really need to have UN toadies roaming around the countryside raping and pillaging? Based on what history does the UN have any credibility in or about Iraq?
6) Call for a transition of the mission to focus on specific areas that are critical to U.S. objectives;Like establishing a stable democracy in Iraq??? I think our guys are already working on that...
7) Not set an arbitrary deadline by Congress for the transition of mission – but require the administration, working in conjunction with the generals on the ground, to report back with a comprehensive plan;This part of the "Plan" is in direct conflict with Item 4 of General RINOvich's "Plan"...
8) Require the Secretary of Defense to report back in 180 days with a proposed date for completing a plan for reducing instability in Iraq and the region as forces are reduced.Let's imagine that hearing, shall we?
GEN. SEN. RINOVICH: "Mr. Secretary, what is your plan for reducing instability in Iraq and the region?"Disaster.
SECY of DEFENSE GATES: "Sir, I propose that we kill the enemy."
RINOVICH: "Asian carp is a serious problem. Invasive species must be stopped."
GATES: "I meant the terrorists, sir."
RINOVICH: "Those pesky zebra mussels are everywhere."
GATES: "I am referring to al Qaeda, sir."
RINOVICH: "I think it will take less troops to do that."
GATES: "Well, sir, I think we ought to let the situation on the ground determine our troop levels."
RINOVICH: "And a deadline. We need a timetable for surrender."
GATES: "Uhh..."
We need a plan for victory, Senator, not surrender...
