Iraq war debate gets bitter, personal

WASHINGTON — Rep. John Murtha, a hawkish former Marine and one of the Democratic Party's most respected military experts, called Thursday for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, pushing the debate over President Bush's war policies to new heights of intensity and vitriol.

"This is a policy wrapped in an illusion ... our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency," Murtha said at a Capitol news conference that left him in tears. "It's time to bring them home."

In Busan, South Korea, where he is traveling with Bush, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Murtha's call for troops to start pulling out immediately after the Dec. 15 Iraqi elections is "baffling," and compared his position to that of liberal filmmaker Michael Moore and the "extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party."

"The eve of an historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists," McClellan said. "After seeing his statement, we remain baffled — nowhere does he explain how retreating from Iraq makes America safer."

On Capitol Hill, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., accused Murtha and other House Democrats of adopting a "cut and run" policy and said Murtha had delivered "the highest insult" to the men and women serving overseas.

Murtha and others "would prefer that the United States surrender to the terrorists who would harm innocent Americans," Hastert said. "To add insult to injury, this is done while the president is on foreign soil."

Murtha, D-Pa., a decorated Vietnam War veteran and the top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, joins a growing number of military veterans in Congress who are putting the administration on the defensive about the war and related policies.

"The main reason for going to war has been discredited," said Murtha, meaning that Saddam Hussein apparently had no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, which had been the administration's original argument for war. The administration's handling of the intelligence about weapons of mass destruction has been a key element of the growing bitterness of the war debate.

Vice President Dick Cheney said in a speech Wednesday night: "The suggestion that's been made by some U.S. senators that the president of the United States or any member of this administration purposely misled the American people on prewar intelligence is one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges ever aired in this city."

Underscoring the rising emotions of the war debate, Murtha rebuked Bush and Cheney for their aggressive new campaign to denounce war critics. Murtha compared his own combat experience with Bush's stateside service in the Texas Air National Guard and Cheney's draft avoidance during the Vietnam War.

"I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there," Murtha said. "I like that. I like guys who got five deferments [Cheney] and [have] never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done. I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he [Bush] criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

Murtha, who has represented the southwestern Pennsylvania steel-making region since 1974, voted for the original resolution to go to war with Iraq. But his worries began early in the effort, and last year he said the Pentagon had to provide more troops and more resources for the war or it would be "unwinnable."

"Immediately redeploy"

Murtha on Thursday put himself firmly out in front of his colleagues by calling for the withdrawal to start now — a process he estimated could be completed in six months.

"I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid-December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice: The United States will immediately redeploy — immediately redeploy," Murtha said.

A handful of Democrats who opposed the war from the start have called for a quick withdrawal or a set timetable. Most want the administration to provide a withdrawal plan based on conditions on the ground.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California, a war opponent, called Murtha's statement a thought-provoking "watershed event," but stopped short of endorsing it.

Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, top Armed Services Committee Democrat, said U.S. troop reductions should be linked to increases in Iraqi military readiness.

But Murtha said, "The American public is way ahead of the members of Congress."

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll this week said 63 percent of Americans oppose Bush's handling of the Iraq war, and 52 percent say troops should be pulled out now or within 12 months.

But a pullout "would be an absolute mistake and a real insult to the lives that have been lost," said Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif.

"I expect there to be criticism," Bush said. "But when Democrats say that I deliberately misled the Congress and the people, that's irresponsible. They looked at the same intelligence I did, and they voted — many of them voted — to support the decision I made. ... So I agree with the vice president" about the "dishonest" critics who charged that the administration had misused the intelligence.

Several Democrats disputed Bush's remarks, saying Congress was not shown all the prewar intelligence the White House had collected regarding Iraq's potential weapons of mass destruction, and that administration officials gave greater weight to hints that Saddam Hussein had such weapons than to signals that he did not.

On the Senate floor Thursday, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called on Bush and the White House to stop what he called an orchestrated attack campaign.

"It's a weak, spineless display of politics at a time of war," Reid said.

2006 to be crucial year

With Bush's public-approval rating at a new low amid mounting public opposition to the war, the administration's Iraq policies have come under increasing scrutiny in Congress. Lawmakers from both parties not only are criticizing the conduct of the war, they also have tried to restrain administration policy on the treatment of detainees.

On Tuesday, the Senate voted to press the administration for concrete steps toward troop withdrawals, designating 2006 as "a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty." But the Senate rejected a Democratic proposal to require the administration to project dates for a phased withdrawal of troops if conditions permitted.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a former Navy pilot who was imprisoned and tortured in North Vietnam, pushed the Senate into a 90-9 vote banning inhumane and degrading treatment of detainees, over Cheney's strong objections.

The stands for and against the war still fall generally along Republican and Democratic lines. But Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, the lone Republican in the House of Representatives to call for immediate withdrawal from Iraq, said the role played by former military men put the war "in a different environment for debate."

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., a decorated Vietnam veteran, scolded Bush this week for suggesting that his critics are unpatriotic.

But Rep. Geoff Davis, a Kentucky Republican and West Point graduate, said liberals "have put politics ahead of sound fiscal and national-security policy. And what they have done is cooperated with our enemies and are emboldening our enemies."

Emotional statement

As he spoke to reporters, Murtha frequently choked back tears, describing his weekly visits to Walter Reed Army Medical Center as a big part of why he was taking such a controversial stand.

Murtha, who won a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts in Vietnam, said he visited one young man who had lost both hands and was left blind by "friendly fire."

"I was praising him, saying how proud we were of him and how much we appreciate his service to the country. 'Anything I can do for you?' His mother said, 'Get him a Purple Heart.' "

Because he had not been injured by the enemy, the military had said he did not qualify for the honor.

"I met with the commandant. I said, 'If you don't give him a Purple Heart, I'll give him one of mine,' " Murtha said. "And they gave him a Purple Heart."

Murtha is known as a friend and champion of officers at the Pentagon and in the war zone. It is widely believed in Congress that he often speaks for those in uniform and could be echoing what U.S. commanders in the field and in the Pentagon are saying privately about the conflict.

Little choice but to stay?

Bush has said the United States must stay the course because leaving Iraq before a stable government is in place and Iraqi security forces are capable of fighting insurgents on their own would leave that country in the hands of terrorists.

Some experts agree, saying the United States has little choice but to stay in Iraq until the president's conditions are met, because leaving too soon would lead to a civil war or even a regional conflict. Others argue that Iraq will become stable only when American forces leave.

"What began as a war of choice has now become a war of necessity. But I don't think that's been clearly communicated by the administration or understood very well by the American people," said Andrew F. Krepinevich, the executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a nonpartisan policy-research institute.

The only "backup plan" left is for the administration to "pick a despot [to run Iraq] and support him" and hope he respects U.S. interests, he said.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Odom, a former National Security Agency director, has argued that Iraq already is a disaster. The only way to ensure that Iraq ever will achieve any semblance of stability is for U.S. forces to leave, he said.

The primary beneficiaries of the American-led invasion have been Iran and al-Qaida, "and that continues to be true every day U.S. forces remain there," he said.

But House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said that if the United States does not stand and prevail in Iraq, it will invite terrorist attacks akin to those of Sept. 11, 2001. "Four years have expired without a second attack on our homeland because we've aggressively projected America's fighting forces in the theaters in Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.

Also

Korean troop withdrawal: South Korea plans to bring home about one-third of its troops from Iraq next year, the Defense Ministry said today, a day after South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun met President Bush in the South Korean city of Gyeongju. About 3,200 South Korean troops are stationed in northern Iraq, making South Korea the second-largest U.S.-coalition partner contributing forces after Britain.

Iraqi murder trial: Pvt. Michael Williams, who was convicted of murdering unarmed Iraqis, testified Thursday that he falsely implicated platoon leader 2nd Lt. Erick J. Anderson in one of the slayings so that he could get a lighter prison sentence. Williams said the Iraqi victim was already dead when Anderson arrived at the scene.

Call-up suspended: The Army has suspended plans to expand an unwieldy, 16-month-old program to call up inactive soldiers for military duty, after thousands in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) requested delays or exemptions or failed to show up. The IRR is a pool of about 115,000 trained soldiers who have left active-duty or reserve units for civilian life but remain subject to call-up for a set period.

Feith's role probed: The Pentagon's inspector general has agreed to review the prewar intelligence activities of former U.S. defense undersecretary Douglas Feith, whom Democrats have accused of manipulating information from sources including discredited Iraqi politician Ahmad Chalabi to suggest links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network, which masterminded the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Bush and other top administration officials cited alleged ties between Iraq and al-Qaida as a justification for military action. But the Sept. 11 commission later reported that no collaborative relationship existed between the two.

Compiled from Knight Ridder Newspapers, The Washington Post, The Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, Reuters and Chicago Tribune