23 JUL 07 / "More Pre-Petraeus Iraq Debate"

After the United States House of Representatives last week voted to withdraw American troops from Iraq, a similar measure in the Senate received a majority, but failed to get the 60 votes necessary to move to final passage.

Majority Leader Harry Reid reopened debate this week on the war in Iraq to force a vote on troop withdrawal, and it appears they may have corralled a few Republicans filled with trepidation over their 2008 reelection chances. Reid has declared the war in Iraq lost, and he doesn't want to be proved wrong.

Senators ushered in sleeping cots and pizza for the overnight affair with a vote the following day, the outcome of which was already known. The overnight debate was staged by the Democrats to help convince the American people that the Iraq war is lost.

The congressional votes parallel recent polls of the American people on their views on the war in Iraq and do not bode well for the United States having enough time to succeed in Iraq -- success being defined as granting stability for the nascent Iraqi government and to deny al Qaeda a base to train terrorists and from which to launch terrorist attacks. Mistakes are made in war. And war is never popular in democracies.

The votes of both Houses of Congress reflect the continued discontent among the American people because of a perceived lack of progress in Iraq. But the discontent stems from a disbelief that events on the ground there have any relation to the national security of the United States, but they do relate to the future of our national security. And Democrats see their victory in last year's congressional election as a referendum on the war in Iraq.

The problem is the American people are not aware of the implications of a defeat -- militarily and politically. The American people must understand that if we retreat:

Al Qaeda will be emboldened and will be able to operate out of Iraq

Other enemies around the world will be encouraged

Our allies will be disheartened. A premature withdrawal would also send the wrong message to our allies, who will come to believe that our foreign policy lacks resolve / is not steadfast / or resolute. 

Our military will be defeated -- adversely affecting the moral of the troops and the confidence of their leaders. The rhetoric of Democrats must be affecting their performance of duties / undermining.

Al Qaeda in Iraq hopes to establish a base of operations should the Unites States decide to withdraw its troops. The primary mission of our troops is to deny al Qaeda these bases. They would use them to train terrorists as they were doing in Afghanistan before our invasion of that country.

It's easy to see where this is going in the Congress. Unless progress is demonstrated by General David Petraeus in his congressional testimony in September, public pressure will continue to mount and the Senate will reach the 60 votes needed to stop a filibuster. If the withdrawal measure passes both houses of Congress, it will arrive at the president's desk, where it will be vetoed. It will then return to Congress to see if a 2/3 majority can be achieved. This will take time, the precious commodity Petraeus needs more of.

The United States can and must achieve victory in Iraq, even if that victory is deny the country a base for al Qaeda.

The Congress of the United States will always reflect the will of the American people. This is the way the founders intended it. Unfortunately, the American people aren't informed fully on the war in Iraq.

External forces are contributing significantly to the violence in Iraq.

Al Qaeda has said that Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Weapons of mass destruction were not found, but the conflict has morphed into a quasi-regional battle. The vast majority of suicide bomb attacks, for example, are carried out by foreign fighters.

Iraq is a significant battle in the war on terror. It is in a strategic location with the 2nd most amount of oil reserves in the world.