Harkin calls for troop pullout

[emulatorloo]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2146145

[rurallib]

1. Have you ever considered the logistics of withdrawing?

Our troops are mostly in the middle of an angry sea. There is essentially only on direction they can go and that is south. There is only so much equipment that can be used troops. So if a batallion gets through, how do you get the equipment back to those that are left? And at some point those left behind simply won't have enough firepower to protect themselves.
Then there is the 20,000+ contractors. What happens to them?
I mean when you start thinking about how the troops are going to get out you start to realize what a total fuck-up this whole thing is. Some of the troops will end up being sitting ducks and may end up being sacrificed so others can get out.
I am certainly no military expert. I just got to thinking the other day about moving 150,000 troops plus equipment plus officials plus contractors and it seems so unwieldy.
And to think that the clowns in charge of getting them out are the same ones that put them there in the first place and are also the same folks who saw a huge disaster coming in New Orleans and let people die.
This group can barely find a crapper in time let alone plan something like this.

[tom2]

2. It will take a long time

and it will be a terrible mess. A friend of mine explained how long it took to get the troops out of Vietnam and what a complicated mess it was. But I still do not see them ever abandoning the 14 permanent military bases in Iraq. At least 4 of those are super-sized bases, capable of holding about 100,000 troops and 4 major airfields. They can stay holed-up in those bases forever.

[tom2]

3. Hooray for Harkin!

We are so lucky to have this guy as our senator. He was one of only 10 senators to vote against the Patriot Act this week.

I hope we will all be working for him hard in 2008. And his office likes to hear praise once in a while - give them a call. I think the wingnuts harass his office a lot.

[emulatorloo]

4. Good point -- I'll call his office next week EOM

[Debi]

5. Good for Harkin

I wish he would have been this strong back in October of 2002, but I'll take an 'I made a mistake and now I'm going to make it right' over 'it was still the right vote....:eyes:' any day!!! :bounce:

[tom2]

6. Did he vote for the war authorization?

I thought he voted against the Iraq War Authorization, but maybe I am wrong. I know he has been against the war for a long time.

Can someone confirm his vote one way or another?

[Debi]

7. Here's the link

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

Dissapointment in all Democrats who voted for the war, concerned about how it would look in the upcoming elections - political expediency over common sense.

[tom2]

8. Thanks Debi

I needed a refresher on that vote, as it is even worse than I remembered. For those not wanting to go to Debi's link, the 23 nays were:
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN) Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (D-FL)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)

Of presidential hopefuls, Feingold remains the only viable Senator in my book.

[Debi]

9. Isn't that what was said in 2004? And look who ended up on the ticket

(Sorry to Kerry/Edwards folks, but that vote really pissed me off!)

Feingold would sell well here in Iowa (IMHO), however, being an Iowan I want to see the whole field before I jump on board. (Hey, I didn't go Dean until the JJ 11/03....well, publicly at least ;))