Hagel's (R-Ne) war stance loud, clear

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=54&u_sid=2319094

WASHINGTON - Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel stood out as the most fiery Republican during four hours of impassioned debate Wednesday that ended with a Senate committee adopting a resolution disapproving President Bush's troop buildup in Iraq.

"We better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder," Hagel said.

He was the lone Republican in a 12-9 vote approving the measure that he co-authored.

Hagel said afterward he is pleased that the full Senate now will debate one of the most divisive issues facing the nation since the Vietnam War.

"This is the beginning. We're doing what the American people expect us to do," Hagel said.

Earlier, he told colleagues, "If we don't debate this, we are not worthy of our country. We fail our country."

The nonbinding resolution, an unusual challenge to a president in wartime, declares that it is "not in the national interest" of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq.


Sens. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., left, and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., take part in a debate on a Iraq war resolution this morning in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

The measure now heads to the full Senate, where it will compete with a similar resolution, in some ways tougher, co-sponsored by Nebraska's other senator, Democrat Ben Nelson, and Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and John Warner of Virginia.

"We feel we have put a greater emphasis on urging the president to consider other options," Warner said of their alternative proposal.

Nelson said the Senate should ultimately seek to send a "strong but unified" message to the administration and to Iraq about the new Iraq strategy.

"We disagree with the approach that this (Bush) plan takes by putting more men and women in uniform in harm's way to do battle to overcome sectarian violence," Nelson said.

It was unclear whether the two resolutions might be combined.

Democrats, who control the Senate, are pushing for a vote on a resolution next week. A growing number of Republicans, now eight, say they will back legislative efforts to challenge Bush's troop surge.

The administration worked hard Wednesday against the measure that Hagel proposed with Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Carl Levin, D-Mich.

During the debate, Hagel - who is close to deciding with his family whether to run for president in 2008 - acknowledged that his stance on the war might cost him political support.

"Maybe I'll be wrong, maybe I have no political future. I don't care about that," Hagel said.

His voice booming, he looked around the committee room at his colleagues as he defended his resolution.

"We have a constitutional responsibility and a moral responsibility to those who are fighting and dying," he said. For four years, Congress has "stood in the shadows" on Iraq.

No lawmaker, he said, should run from tough issues like the Iraq conflict.

"If you wanted a safe job, go sell shoes," he said.

Hagel also said he didn't think the Bush administration ever had "a coherent strategy" for the war in Iraq.

"There is no plan. This is a pingpong game with American lives," he said. "These young men and women we put in Anbar province, in Iraq, in Baghdad, are not beans. They are real lives."

Biden said the resolution wasn't an attempt to embarrass the president, but to help him avoid a "significant mistake" in handling Iraq.

A number of Democrats called for stronger action against the troop surge, but several such amendments were defeated. One by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., sought to limit the number of troops in Iraq to those there on Jan. 16, about 137,000.

In his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, Bush urged skeptical members of Congress to give his new plan a chance to work.

Many Democrats already have rejected the strategy and are considering pushing legislation that could try to curb the surge or even force Bush to begin withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.

"We have a responsibility in the Congress of the United States to stop this thing right now," Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said during the Foreign Relations Committee debate.

Other Republicans also raised questions about the president's plans.

"I am not confident that President Bush's plan will succeed," said Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., said he's among senators who oppose boosting troops in Baghdad, but he still thinks success is possible, perhaps by sending more soldiers to Anbar province, where terrorist groups are operating.

"Iraq is a mess," Coleman said. "But I'm not ready to pull the plug."

[Warpy]

1. I saw a snippet this morning of a committee member from

Tennessee, a pubbie, who said he wouldn't support it because it was non binding.

I'm wondering how prevalent that sentiment is among the pubbies who voted against it.

We are about to live in interesting times, in any case.