ThinkProgress Logo

Security

‘Slow Bleed’ Conservatives Voted Against Billions In Equipment For U.S. Troops

The right-wing has begun a coordinated effort to smear Iraq war critics by describing their legislative plan as a “slow-bleed strategy.”

The phrase was first used in an article Wednesday by John Bresnahan of The Politico; within hours, the Republican National Committee issued a release falsely claiming that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) “call their plan the ‘slow-bleed strategy.’” In fact, as Bresnahan clarified in a subsequent article, “slow-bleed” was “not a term used by any Democrats or the anti-war groups supporting their efforts.”

Nevertheless, conservatives continue to use the phrase to attack war critics. During this week’s Iraq debate, at least five members — Deborah Pryce (R-OH), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI), Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), and Adam Putnam (R-FL) — used the phrase on the House floor. Watch a video compilation:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/02/slow.320.240.flv]

If only their rhetoric matched their voting record. In October 2003, as insurgent violence in Iraq was growing and military equipment shortages were becoming increasingly problematic, Rep. David Obey (D-WI) proposed an amendment shifting $3.6 billion to pay for better equipment and other quality-of-life measures for U.S. troops. Not one of the five voted for it.

That’s a real recipe for “slow bleed.”

Yglesias

Revisiting the Table

So . . . Bill Richardson’s presidential campaign is way too not major for him to afford the best speechwriters, but unlike the other candidates he has some practical experience conducting diplpmacy. He’s managed to come up with this petition that doesn’t involve dropping an “all options are on the table” chest-pounding note into the mix:

Read more

Support The Troops, Help Stop The Escalation

Our guest blogger is Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets.org and veteran of the Iraq war.jon.jpg

Tuesday was Valentine’s Day, but today is the real V-Day in the House of Representatives – Vote Day. Finally, after weeks of wrangling and days of debate, Members of the House will lay down a vote declaring whether they are for the escalation in Iraq, or for the Troops. Most likely, the House resolution will pass easily with bipartisan support and attention will turn to the Senate, where Sen. Harry Reid is delaying the President’s Day recess to vote on it.

VoteVets.org’s veterans of Iraq will be spending the weekend in D.C. to help ensure a vote and passage. We’ve had meetings with half of the Senate, and a few dozen House offices. The vast majority of Democrats are eager to cast their vote for the resolution. On the Republican side, while there are many that won’t support it under any circumstances, I do get the sense from many more that they are genuinely struggling with the issue — whether to put country above party.

I can tell you that the only thing that moves members more than hearing from the troops is hearing from constituents. The Senate resolution will pass only if their phones are flooded with demands from their constituents. Please do your part and take a few seconds to make a call (800-614-2803) or write and then report back.

– Jon Soltz

Yglesias

Brutes!

Writing in The Wall Street Journal editorial page, New Republic editor in chief Martin Peretz bashes the “Democrat Party” and also gives us his view of the Iraqi scene:

I think the odds against us are huge. One reason is that Iraq is neither a state that coheres nor a society that coheres. Its civil society, if that is what it is, is not quite a civilized society. The carnage between Shia and Sunni, and the carnage among other religious and ethnic communions, since the end of Ottoman rule have left deep and bloodied breaches in Iraq.

I agree with some of this, in particular that Iraq is neither a state nor a society that coheres. That said, it’s hard not to notice that Peretz keeps claiming in his various writings that Iraqis are uncivilized (recall, e.g., the “rudiments of civilization” incident). Any conclusions to be drawn from this will be left to the reader.

Yglesias

“Inside Iraq”

You’ve probably noticed that McClatchey Newspapers, the artists formerly known as Knight-Ridder, have been doing national security reporting that, despite some very fine efforts by contenders at the prestige papers, tends to make the competition look embarassingly bad by comparison for years now. Well, via Jim Henley here comes an eye-opening blog they’ve set up by the Iraqi journalists working for the McClatchey Baghdad bureau:

I was called from home to be told that a nephew of mine was killed in the explosion in the city center. The explosion went off in a central, much frequented market, so there was no doubt it was targeting civilians. Then they called me to say it may not be him after all because there was no way to identify what was left … only his cell phone in the pants’ pocket.

Now I’m waiting, fearfuly, for confirmation either way.

The problem doesn’t end there.

If it isn’t him, it’s someone’s son anyway. But if it is him … whom are we willing to risk going to the Morgue to receive the remains?? If and when we receive him … where do we burry him?? Almost none who take the path to Abu Ghraib Cemetary return unscathed.

Think about that.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up