Would Joe Lieberman Sign this Letter?

Would Joe Lieberman Sign this Letter? –updated–

UPDATED: This story just got picked up by AP.

I don't mean to harp… okay, yes I do. But does anyone really think that Joe
Lieberman would sign on to the
letter Senator Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi sent to George W. Bush today?

Of course, we all know Senators Kerry and Feingold already pushed the envelope
on Iraq action, but that was weeks ago.

Now Democrats are making another push to get Bush to actually do something;
that is, besides send more troops into Baghdad.

If Joe Lieberman won't back Senators Kerry and Feingold, but also won't sign
on to the letter coming from the leaders of the Democratic Party in both the
Senate and the House, is he really a Democrat anymore? And if you say he is,
what kind of Democratic Party member is he?

I would suggest that Senator Lamont knows what it means to be a member of the
opposition party. It's obvious Joe Lieberman does not.

But let's get down to the nitty gritty. George W. Bush has now assigned U.S.
military to be policemen in the middle of sectarian fighting, which has spun
into a civil war. Our troops didn't sign on for this mission. Policing Iraq? You've got to be kidding. Unfortunately, it's real. Some Republicans — very few — understand the precarious nature Bush is putting us in today. Most Democrats understand this is a disaster, but Joe Lieberman
does not.

… Under a new security plan for Baghdad that President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki announced last week in Washington, 4,000 American soldiers who had been due to return home had their tours extended last week. Today, United States Representative Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican visiting Baghdad with four other members of Congress, warned that domestic support for assigning American troops to police the capital may not last. “Americans are not going to be very patient about having American forces essentially being police officers and maintaining order between indigenous Iraqi groups,” he said. Leaders in Iraq Strongly Rebuke Israel

Democratic leaders just sent this letter to President Bush. Do you think Joe
Lieberman would sign this letter? I bet Senator Ned Lamont would.

The President The White House Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. President: While the world has been focused on the crisis in the Middle East, Iraq has exploded in violence. Some 6,000 Iraqis were killed in May and June, and sectarian and insurgent violence continues to claim American and Iraqi lives at an alarming rate. In the face of this onslaught, one can only conclude that the Baghdad security plan you announced five weeks ago is in great jeopardy. Despite the latest evidence that your Administration lacks a coherent strategy to stabilize Iraq and achieve victory, there has been virtually no diplomatic effort to resolve sectarian differences, no regional effort to establish a broader security framework, and no attempt to revive a struggling reconstruction effort. Instead, we learned of your plans to redeploy an additional 5,000 U.S. troops into an urban war zone in Baghdad. Far from implementing a comprehensive “Strategy for Victory” as you promised months ago, your Administration's strategy appears to be one of trying to avoid defeat. Meanwhile, U.S. troops and taxpayers continue to pay a high price as your Administration searches for a policy. Over 2,500 Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice and over 18,000 others have been wounded. The Iraq war has also strained our military and constrained our ability to deal with other challenges. Readiness levels for the Army are at lows not seen since Vietnam, as virtually no active Army non-deployed combat brigade is prepared to perform its wartime missions. American taxpayers have already contributed over $300 billion and each week we stay in Iraq adds nearly $3 billion more to our record budget deficit. In the interests of American national security, our troops, and our taxpayers, the open-ended commitment in Iraq that you have embraced cannot and should not be sustained. Rather, we continue to believe that it is time for Iraqis to step forward and take the lead for securing and governing their own country. This is the principle enshrined in the “United States Policy in Iraq Act” enacted last year. This law declares 2006 to be a year of “significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq.” Regrettably, your policy seems to be moving in the opposite direction. This legislation made clear that Iraqi political leaders must be informed that American patience, blood and treasure are not unlimited. We were disappointed that you did not convey this message to Prime Minister Maliki during his recent visit. Reducing the U.S. footprint in Iraq will not only give the Iraqis a greater incentive to take the lead for the security of their own nation, but will also allow U.S. forces to be able to respond to contingencies affecting the security of the United States elsewhere in the world. We believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006. U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to a more limited mission focused on counterterrorism, training and logistical support of Iraqi security forces, and force protection of U.S. personnel. Additionally, every effort should be made to urge the Iraqis to take the steps necessary to achieve a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources. It is also essential to disarm the militias and ensure forces loyal to the national government. Finally, an international conference should be convened to persuade other governments to be more involved, and to secure the resources necessary to finance Iraq's reconstruction and rebuild its economy. Mr. President, simply staying the course in Iraq is not working. We need to take a new direction. We believe these recommendations comprise an effective alternative to the current open-ended commitment which is not producing the progress in Iraq we would all like to see. Thank you for your careful consideration of these suggestions. Harry Reid, Senate Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, Senate Assistant Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer, House Minority Whip Carl Levin, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee Ike Skelton, Ranking Member, House Armed Services Committee Joe Biden, Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Tom Lantos, Ranking Member, House International Relations Committee Jay Rockefeller, Vice Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee Jane Harman, Ranking Member, House Intelligence Committee Daniel Inouye, Ranking Member, Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee John Murtha, Ranking Member, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee

But Lieberman laughing while Bush makes fun at not finding WMDs in Iraq, while soldiers are dying? Words escape me.