More Republicans doubt Bush Iraq policy

[Ron Burgundy]

AP - One by one, even the most senior Republicans in the Senate are expressing doubts that the administration's new war policy in Iraq will work.

"I am not confident that President Bush's plan will succeed," Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record), R-Ind., said in advance of a vote Wednesday on a resolution that opposes the president's decision to send more troops into Iraq.

Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, planned to reject the resolution — but not before registering his own concerns. He suggested stepped-up oversight, including seeking assurances from the administration that it is planning for the possibility of failure.

"I say to my colleagues that we are selling our powers short with this resolution," he said in prepared remarks.

At least eight other Republican senators say they now back legislative proposals condemning Bush's decision to boost U.S. military strength in Iraq by 21,500 troops.

The growing list — which includes Sens. Gordon Smith (news, bio, voting record), George Voinovich (news, bio, voting record) and Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) — has emboldened Democrats, who are pushing for a vote in the full Senate by next week to rebuke the president's Iraq policy.

In his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, Bush urged skeptical members of Congress to give the plan a chance to work.

Many lawmakers remained reluctant.

"I wonder whether the clock has already run out," said Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine. She said she was worried that U.S. troops in Iraq are already perceived "not as liberators but as occupiers."

Bush did get a word of support from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, one of the 2008 Republican presidential hopefuls.

"I believe we should give the president the support to do this. I want us to be successful in Iraq," he said Wednesday on NBC's "Today" show. "I know how important it is to the overall war on terror. Success in Iraq means a more peaceful world for America, it means a victory against terrorists. Failure in Iraq means a big defeat against terrorists and the war on terror is going to be tougher for us."

But Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), D-Ill., appearing on the same show, said, "I think all of us are talking about a phased redeployment which would leave American troops in the region to send a strong message, not only to the Iraqi government that we want to help them, but also to neighbors, like Iran, that we're not abandoning the field."

The nonbinding resolution being voted on Wednesday by the Foreign Relations Committee was drafted by the panel's chairman, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., along with Sens. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record), R-Neb., Olympia Snowe (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, and Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich.

The resolution declares that increasing U.S. troop strength in Iraq is not in the national interest. The resolution was expected to pass, with each of the committee's 11 Democrats voting for it, alongside Hagel.

GOP defections for Bush's Iraq policy spell trouble for an administration that has come to rely on congressional Republicans to champion its agenda. While many Bush loyalists remain, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record), R-Ky., other lawmakers say the president cannot continue down a path the public does not support.

White House officials "realize you can't conduct a war with one party for it and one against it, and we're getting in that type of position," said Brownback, R-Kan. "And that is not a durable position."

Sen. Norm Coleman (news, bio, voting record), R-Minn., initially reluctant to sign on to the Biden-Hagel resolution because he deemed it too partisan, said he would try to amend the language to broaden its appeal. Sens. Christopher Dodd (news, bio, voting record), D-Conn., and Obama — two presidential hopefuls — planned to weigh in with proposals that would toughen the measure.

Collins, along with Smith, R-Ore., and Coleman, R-Minn., are co-sponsoring a resolution drafted by Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), R-Va., that states Senate opposition to the president's plan to send 21,500 troops but leaves open the possibility of Bush sending in a much smaller number of troops, particularly to the western Anbar province.

On Tuesday, Brownback and Voinovich, R-Ohio, said they too were inclined to vote in favor of Warner's measure.

As a member of the panel, Coleman is expected to offer two amendments to bring it closer to Warner's resolution.

"He feels it important to distinguish between troop increases in Baghdad where the conflict is largely sectarian, as opposed to Anbar where we are engaged in a battle against al-Qaida and terrorists forces," spokesman LeRoy Coleman said.

Warner, a prominent Republican and former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, cast his measure as a milder alternative to the one backed by Democrats.

As lawmakers considered their next steps, the Army general tapped to implement Bush's plan told a Senate panel Tuesday that more troops are necessary and he could not do his job without them.

"We face a determined, adaptable, barbaric enemy," Lt. Gen. David Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "He will try to wait us out. In fact, any such endeavor is a test of wills, and there are no guarantees."

___

On the Net:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee: http://www.senate.gov/foreign/

source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070124/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq [link]