"It would jettison the withdrawal timetable and replace it with benchmarks"

[rodeodance]

........ Lawmakers in both parties face political pressures that could hinder efforts to compromise. Anti-war activists want Democrats to stand up to the president and demand troop withdrawal. Republicans are caught between their loyalty to the president and growing dissatisfaction with the war among voters. Some acknowledge that their Republican loyalty could fade in the fall if there's no significant progress in Iraq.

MoveOn.org, an anti-war group, sponsored rallies across the country Wednesday, including a protest outside the White House, to show support for troop withdrawal. "We expect Congress to stand firm," said Nita Chaudhary, a spokeswoman.

Democratic leaders declined to discuss their negotiating strategy, but House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., outlined a possible compromise. It would jettison the withdrawal timetable and replace it with benchmarks for gauging progress in Iraq, with consequences for Iraq's failure to meet the goals. Leading Republicans have said such an approach might be acceptable.

Hoyer didn't offer any details, either for the benchmarks or for the consequences of failure. Many Democrats say they also want any compromise bill to include steps to ease the deployment burden on troops and improve troop readiness. .......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=389

[maine_raptor]

1. Hmmmmm, "Benchmarks", eh?

You know, I've used "Benchmarks" in business before. I'm a retired System Analyst, and when putting a project together, part of that included "Benchmarks" to determine how successful was the project. (Was it on-time and under budget?, Did the final outcome resolve the problem and improved the business/production model? And so on.)

In every case that I can think of over my 30+ year career, each of those "Benchmarks" had some relation to a date, because at some point in time you have to answer those questions.

So it sounds like to me that all they are doing is substituting one name for another.



Edit for early AM typo.

[warrior1]

2. it's not the word

as much of who's idea it is. He doesn't want to be seem as to be listening and going along with the Democratic party.

That is because of course he is a dick. A little child and hateful person.

I would hope that they do not send him any bill. Let him choke on his veto. Bring the troops home.

[Skidmore]

5. I've also seen reporting on "benchmarks" fudged mightily.

There had better be some pretty definitive criteria contained in those benchmarks.

[mikeytherat]

8. No, no, no - they want "benchmarks" WITHOUT "benchmarks."

It's not about benchmarks, it's about benchmarks with no discernible criteria and no timeframes - i.e., benchmarks without benchmarks.

A friend of mine was spouting this BS just yesterday, and I said, "So, no timeframes, just personnel levels. Like, 'We'll leave when the Iraqis have a fighting force of 400,000 troops?'" He said, "Exactly!" I said, "What if that takes 50 years?" His reply - stone silence. I kept prodding, "What if we have to stay in Iraq, with hundreds of thousands of troops, for the next half-century until we feel they can stand on their own?" His reply, again - nothing.

Most "benchmarks" idiots have not really thought this through because timeframes ARE an integral part of benchmarks. At some point in time the money, the resolve, or the patience will end and a tangible product or solution must exist. If not, the project often gets the axe.

mikey_the_rat

[KharmaTrain]

3. Splitting The Baby

What good are "timetables" or "benchmarks" without any teeth or consequences. It doesn't matter to me what you call it, but this regime must be forced to accept some kind of accountability on their war for profit as much as for withdrawing our troops. IMHO, the key to our troops getting out would be passing a new oil bill that would split the revenues and supposedly create the "financial stability" that a "lasting peace" would be based on. Call this a "benchmark", but the screwing around with this "bill" has been used as a pretext by this regime to expand this occpation. So...if the fukstick can't accept "withdrawl"...then how about a 30 or 60 day "benchmark" that requires the Iraqis to pass an oil bill...if that bill isn't done, then we run another bill demanding 10,000 troops to be withdawn within 60 days...and another 10,000 troops each 30 days thereafter until a bill is signed. Let's how how the regime handles these "benchmarks".

[maine_raptor]

4. Yup, gotta have "Teeth".

If Bush doesn't want to go along with withdrawing a certain number of troops for each benchmark not met, then how about we fire one member of the administration for each benchmark not met?

Congress gets to make up the list.

:evilgrin:

[KharmaTrain]

6. Hang Him With His Own Words

Let's play this by "their rules"...if this regime doesn't like the word "timetable"...as some kind of synonym for "surrender" or whatever bullshit name they call it...they can't do that when it's packaged as a "benchmark". It's like you being punished by having your allowance taken away...as opposed to having to earn your allowance. If those benchmarks can't be made, then this regime doesn't get its allowance. And with this regime's history, they'll never come close to any of their own "defined" goals. So let's take them on their word...put up or shut up.

Cheers...

[EnviroBat]

7. Benchmarks? BULLSHIT!

We've given this asshole all the benchmarks we can afford for four fucking years now! This smacks yet another spineless compromise, and we should all be calling bullshit on this one. Remember the old phrase, "When they stand up, we'll stand down..."? Remember that shit? Hasn't happened, and it will NEVER HAPPEN as long as our troops are over there in the line of fire. These "benchmarks" are nothing more than fading lines in the sand and they will change with the wind. Don't back down to this sick bastard calling himself the president. This proposal is unacceptable. Throw the original bill right back at him!

[bdamomma]

13. and the Iraqi government is scheduled to take a vacation

for 2 months in the summer??? benchmarks?????????? making progress?????????????? what BS.

[Blue Meany]

9. I think this bill should include tax hikes for the top 1%

to pay for this war. Each benchmark not met should increase the taxes to support veterans benifits and pay down the national debt.

If they don't have the votes to end the war, they should at least make sure it is "pay as you go."

[bunkerbuster1]

10. Could we simply express the timetable in Friedman Units?

Perhaps that would be the kind of "compromise" Commander Pissypants could accept.

[Arkansas Granny]

11. Benchmarks might be an area that they can use for the "compromise"

Bush says he is looking for, especially if they can get enough Republican support to override a veto. It would look worse for Bush to have a veto overridden than it would for him to make some concessions to Congress in order to get a bill passed. With all his bluster about support the troops, he can't let it appear that he withheld necessary funds due to his stubbornness.

I know a lot of people think that the Democrats caved, but I think they are backing Bush into a corner. They don't have the numbers to push through something that Bush vehemently opposes (i.e. troop withdrawals), so they are using some tactics that will allow them to get some control over the situation while still allowing Bush a way to maneuver that will let him save face.

At this point, it's all politics, but the situation reminds me of trying to discipline a spoiled child while avoiding a major temper tantrum.

[leftchick]

12. yet another wonderful compromise

aka: giving in to the war criminal.