WaPo: House Votes to Revive Iraq Study Group

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/21/AR2007062102188.html?nav=rss_world/mideast/iraq

House Votes to Revive Iraq Study Group

By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 22, 2007; Page A13

The Iraq Study Group, the bipartisan panel that mapped out an alternative U.S. strategy for Iraq last December, may be reconstituted for a sequel.

In a sign of the growing public pressure on Congress, the House voted 355 to 69 yesterday to revive the 10-member panel chaired by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee Hamilton (D-Ind.) to again review U.S. policy and offer new recommendations.

"I'm receptive to reconstituting the group, but I can only speak for myself as I don't know feelings of the group and Baker is traveling," Hamilton said in an interview. "If Congress thinks we can be constructive, then I think we should do it."

The House vote was on an amendment proposed by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) to an appropriations bill providing $34.2 billion for State Department and foreign operations. Now that the House has voted, a bipartisan group within Congress -- including Shays and Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.) -- will seek an alternative source of funding since the bill is not likely to pass quickly enough for the Iraq Study Group to report in the fall.

Shays said the Baker-Hamilton group could play a pivotal role again. "Last fall, the Iraq Study Group provided Congress a thoughtful assessment on one of the most important issues of our time," Shays said in an interview. "As we approach another crossroad in this conflict, having that thoughtful insight again will be invaluable."

The goal is to have the group make its new report within about a month of the assessments scheduled to be outlined to Congress in September by Gen. David H. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan C. Crocker on military and political progress in Iraq, Shays said.

"You'll have two different reports and see where they complement and where they disagree. If they come to the same conclusion, then it gives endorsement to Petraeus or Crocker," Shays said. "If there's disagreement, then that is important as well."

more...

[Gabi Hayes]

1. will they axe St. Rudy to rejoin?

I'll wager he'll jump at the chance this time

[bryant69]

3. I don't know - could go either way

It's not like the original study group got high marks from the Conservative base - Rush still calls it the Iraq Surrender Group. He might stay clear.

On the other hand it could help him in the general.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Gabi Hayes]

4. I was kidding. didn't you see the story about his quitting the first one, then

lying his ass off about why?

[babylonsister]

6. I doubt he'll even be asked to (re)join now. The report is done;

what would be the point? More importantly, even if modifications are made, I can't imagine what doofy rudy would have to offer.

[deminks]

2. Smirky reportedly called their first report a...

"flaming t*rd". I don't have high hopes for this. At all. Unless they tell Smirky to go all out with everything he can muster including nukes, I don't think he will give it a moment's thought - that is if he had one to give.

[leftchick]

5. wtf is left to study?

honest to god they just want this fucking quagmire to last FOREVER!

[UTUSN]

7. More spinning of wheels.

All we get are witnesses copping to what we already knew about Shrub-CHEENEE's criminality. But NOTHING HAPPENS. And this ISG was presented as the end-of-the-world in importance. And it's a-hole members pranced around demanding completion of their goals, some by December of '06, and NOTHING HAPPENED.

So COMEY testified about GONZALES-CARD's criminality, and what happened? Why, CALL ANOTHER WITNESS. Let's make this one ASHCROFT, who merely repeated what COMEY had already testified to. AND NOTHING HAPPENS.

[slipslidingaway]

8. FWIW here is the vote

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll529.xml

[Solly Mack]

9. Snort

[SoonerPride]

10. WHY? WHY? WHY?

They already told us what was prudent policy. Right?

Bring the troops home and engage others in the region to work for peace. That means we sit down and talk to Iran and Syria. As you can see, that isn't happening, so why bother?

We should just leave and be done with it.

No more studies.
No more hearings.
No more votes of protest.
No more angry letters.
No more speeches to an empty house.
No more games.
No more dead soldiers.
No more wasted dollars.
No more of any of it.
NO MORE WAR.

Bring the troops home.
NOW.

[ThomWV]

11. Let's Be Optomistic - The Next President Is Going To Need Up-To-Date Advice

Impeachment!

[KoKo]

12. Yes...two Repugs Shays and Wolf are only ones quoted in this article and

the report isn't due until October. Shays and Wolf two Repugs...and the folks at the Iraq Study Group...

More cover for extending the War.