Senate threat to revisit authority for war in Iraq
Senate threat to revisit authority for war in Iraq
By Demetri Sevastopuloin Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: August 4 2006 03:00 | Last updated: August 4 2006 03:00
The US Congress may have to re-examine President George W. Bush's authority to wage war in Iraq if the country descends into full-blown civil war, an influential Republican senator said yesterday.
John Warner, chairman of the Senate armed services committee, raised the possibility that Congress might have to revisit the authorisation it gave Mr Bush to wage war in Iraq after two senior US generals conceded that Iraq could slide into civil war.
General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the committee civil war was possible but said later he did not believe it was probable.
Carl Levin, the top Democrat on the committee, asked General John Abizaid, commander of US Central Command, which oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, whether he agreed with a leaked assessment by the British ambassador to Iraq that the country was sliding towards civil war.
He said the sectarian violence was probably as bad as he had seen it in Baghdad in particular and civil war was possible.
Some Republican senators joined Democrats in questioning whether the US military had expected a year ago that violence in Iraq would have increased to the current levels, with 100 deaths a day in Baghdad. Both generals said they had not expected this.
The generals were speaking as the US military decided to delay the departure of some troops to bolster counter-insurgency efforts in Baghdad. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has long criticised Mr Rumsfeld for not sending more troops to Iraq, said the military was employing a strategy of "whack-a-mole" by redeploying troops from areas that were not under control to other violent areas.
"It's very disturbing," said Mr McCain. "If it's all up to the Iraqi military, General Abizaid … then I wonder why we have to move troops into Baghdad to intervene in what is clearly sectarian violence."
Hillary Clinton, the New York Democrat, lambasted Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, for his 'mishandling' of the war. She said the Pentagon sent too few troops, mistakenly disbanded the Iraqi army, failed to anticipate the insurgency, and did not plan sufficiently for the post-war situation.
"My goodness," Mr Rumsfeld shot back. "There is no rule book … your assertion is at least debatable."
Despite growing public dissatisfaction with the war, Democrats have struggled to put forward an alternative policy. But this week, top Democrats in Congress wrote to Mr Bush, calling on him to begin a phased redeployment of US troops in Iraq by the end of theyear.
Additional reporting by Holly Yeager in Washington
By Demetri Sevastopuloin Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: August 4 2006 03:00 | Last updated: August 4 2006 03:00
The US Congress may have to re-examine President George W. Bush's authority to wage war in Iraq if the country descends into full-blown civil war, an influential Republican senator said yesterday.
John Warner, chairman of the Senate armed services committee, raised the possibility that Congress might have to revisit the authorisation it gave Mr Bush to wage war in Iraq after two senior US generals conceded that Iraq could slide into civil war.
General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the committee civil war was possible but said later he did not believe it was probable.
Carl Levin, the top Democrat on the committee, asked General John Abizaid, commander of US Central Command, which oversees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, whether he agreed with a leaked assessment by the British ambassador to Iraq that the country was sliding towards civil war.
He said the sectarian violence was probably as bad as he had seen it in Baghdad in particular and civil war was possible.
Some Republican senators joined Democrats in questioning whether the US military had expected a year ago that violence in Iraq would have increased to the current levels, with 100 deaths a day in Baghdad. Both generals said they had not expected this.
The generals were speaking as the US military decided to delay the departure of some troops to bolster counter-insurgency efforts in Baghdad. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has long criticised Mr Rumsfeld for not sending more troops to Iraq, said the military was employing a strategy of "whack-a-mole" by redeploying troops from areas that were not under control to other violent areas.
"It's very disturbing," said Mr McCain. "If it's all up to the Iraqi military, General Abizaid … then I wonder why we have to move troops into Baghdad to intervene in what is clearly sectarian violence."
Hillary Clinton, the New York Democrat, lambasted Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, for his 'mishandling' of the war. She said the Pentagon sent too few troops, mistakenly disbanded the Iraqi army, failed to anticipate the insurgency, and did not plan sufficiently for the post-war situation.
"My goodness," Mr Rumsfeld shot back. "There is no rule book … your assertion is at least debatable."
Despite growing public dissatisfaction with the war, Democrats have struggled to put forward an alternative policy. But this week, top Democrats in Congress wrote to Mr Bush, calling on him to begin a phased redeployment of US troops in Iraq by the end of theyear.
Additional reporting by Holly Yeager in Washington
posted by Carlos T Mock at 11:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home