As I mentioned yesterday, in the United States House of Representative, Democratic hawk John Murtha offered a resolution that had 3 components:
1. Withdraw the troops as soon as is practicle;
2. Keep a reserve force that is out of Iraq but is nearby that can get to Iraq quickly if need be.
3. Continue seeking to stabilize Iraq through diplomacy and other non-military means.

The Republicans responded by forcing an amendment to the resolution that turned it into a cartoonish caricature of itself: requiring the immediate withdrawal of troops, whether it’s safe or practical or not; and stripping the part about reserve forces or further diplomacy. With that alteration made, any serious discussion of what to do in Iraq in the House was effectively terminated.

The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has an article entitled Iraq withdrawal demands just politics, Souder says.

Souder, who overcame reluctance in 2002 to vote for the war resolution, said it is not true that Congress was misled about whether Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction.

“Nobody told us . . . there was a 100 percent chance. The ranges were 30 percent to 70 (percent),” he said. “The data wasn’t manipulated.”

Pence agreed that the prewar information “was always qualified. It was never a pronouncement that any of the facts were categorically established.”

Souder said much of what was suspected to be in Iraq – parts, scientists and buildings – was, in fact, found. “What we didn’t find was weapons prepared to launch. The final form, I believe, was 30 percent that we were going to find that. We all full well knew it, and I’m tired of people lying about it,” he said. “The criticism of this intelligence on war is all politics. It has nothing to do with facts. It is all politics, and I am sick of it.”

O.k., there are at least two aspects to this: 1) Criticism of how the pre-war intelligence was presented to the public; and 2) what do we do with Iraq now that we’re there. Souder seems to be wrong about how the pre-war intelligence was presented and simply ignoring the question of what to do with Iraq now.

Representative Murtha presented a plan: Get the troops out as quickly as can be done safely; keep a reserve out of Iraq, but available to respond quickly if need be; and pursue stability through non-military means. Maybe that’s not the best plan — it sounds like a decent one to me, but as a matter of policy, I’m happy to say I’m not positive that’s the best way to go. Souder and the Republicans didn’t respond by offering a good faith alternative; offering some way of dealing with the mess. Souder just waves his hands and dismisses it as “just politics.” As I said before, our soldiers are dying, our treasury is looted, and we aren’t any better off than we were before the invasion. Murtha offers a plan, and the Republicans turn it into a strawman they can vote against. And Souder says Murtha is just playing politics.

As for the pre-war intelligence — I’m stunned to hear this 30% language. As readers may suspect, I keep reasonably up to date on current affairs, and this is the first time I’ve ever heard 30%.

Let’s take a look at part of that Pence quote again. Mike Pence:

the prewar information “was always qualified. It was never a pronouncement that any of the facts were categorically established.”

Now, let’s take a look at Colin Powell’s statement to the United Nations alleging that Iraq had a nuclear program and Weapons of Mass Destruction:

My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.

Possibly even more troubling is that Representative Souder just seems to be in a serious state of denial:

Souder said he doesn’t agree that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. “All I accept is we haven’t found them,” he said.

Souder said he and other Republicans are disappointed at the post-invasion decisions but that much of the public disapproval of the way Bush is handling things in Iraq is because of media coverage. He said part is anti-Bush bias and part is the nature of modern media coverage.

So Souder believes that Iraq had a WMD program so significant it justified immediate invasion without delay for further inspection by the UN inspectors. And yet, despite the size of this formidable arsenal, we haven’t been able to find a trace of it, despite having control of the country for 2.5 years.

Oh, and it’s TV’s fault.

Democratic Representative Murtha put the Republicans on their heels, seeking to introduce the following resolution:

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That:

Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.

Section 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S Marines shall be deployed in the region.

Section 3 The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

The Republicans were scared to debate and vote the resolution. Instead, all they could do was turn the resolution into a strawman. They forced amendments to the resolution so that it called for:

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

They removed the provision of practicality and pursuing the goal through other means, instead they had courage enough only to face a cartoonish version of the original resolution.

In short, the House Republicans were unwilling and afraid to discuss the War in Iraq seriously. Instead, you had character slurs from the likes of Republican Representative Jean Schmidt:

[A marine] asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.

Representative Schmidt is not fit to polish Representative Murtha’s combat boot, and she has the nerve to call him a coward. But not, apparently, the nerve to stand by her words. When a Congressman from Arkansas demanded that her words be taken down, she put her tail between her legs:

Mr. Speaker, my remarks were not directed at any member of the House and I did not intend to suggest that they applied to any member. Most especially the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania. I therefore ask for unanimous consent that my words be withdrawn.

Inexcusable. This isn’t some damned game. Our soldiers are dying. Our treasury is looted. We are no safer. Whatever this has or hasn’t done for Iraqis, it hasn’t done a single thing to improve the lives of Americans who are sacrificing their blood and treasure. And the House Republicans, except apparently for 6 of them who refused to play along with their colleagues, just want to play word games with the issue.