“All of us have a personal responsibility if we believe that it is morally wrong to escalate this war,” said former Senator John Edwards, who is also running for President. “It is not enough to give speeches, talk to political pundits, or pass non-binding resolutions. We have to step up to the plate, show some courage and do what’s right.” Edwards made these statements on “Meet the Press” last weekend, as he criticized front-runner Hillary Clinton for her refusing to apologize for supporting the War in 2002. Ironically, these words can be used to justify Obama’s presidential candidacy.

Here’s what Obama’s Iraq War De-Escalation Act would do. Unlike the symbolic measures to oppose Bush’s escalation, the legislation is binding – and will cap the number of troops at January 10th levels. Congress would use its power of the purse not to fund any more troops than this amount.

The Act sets up various benchmarks, and directs that withdrawal will have to begin no later than May 1st of 2007, with all troops gone by March 31, 2008. It’s far from a radical idea, and is actually consistent with what the Iraq Study Group has already recommended. "It is time for us to fundamentally change our policy," said Obama.

But shouldn’t Congress just cut off all funding of the war right away – leaving the Bush Administration no choice but to withdraw, as Democrats like Maxine Waters and Dennis Kucinich have proposed? Ideally, yes, but our troops are already there and stuck in a quagmire – and to cut off all funding overnight will allow Republicans to attack Congress for not “supporting our troops.”

More
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=4174#more