PRO-7 official proposes for more cops, logistics

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Anti-war Democrats in the US Senate lost a bid to use Congress's power of the purse to compel President George W. Bush to withdraw most combat troops from Iraq by March 31, 2008.

But defiant Bush opponents, smarting Wednesday from again failing to handcuff Bush on war strategy, vowed to step up a battle of attrition in the hope of ending a four-year entanglement which polls show, most Americans now oppose.

The latest burst of acrimony between Congress and the White House on Iraq, also drew new battle lines for a tough round of compromise talks, also involving the House of Representatives, on a new war funding budget next week.

"Our resolutions have not passed, but they will pass, I don't know how many more bodies will come home, how many more injured soldiers there will be," said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin.

The Democratic measure, overwhelmingly knocked down by 67 votes to 29, would have required troop redeployments to start within 120 days of the bill becoming law, and would have choked war financing when complete.

The White House said the Senate made clear it opposed the timetables for withdrawal which Bush has always vowed to reject.

"Simply withdrawing on a timetable is not something that the American people or for that matter Democrats and Republicans in the Senate support," spokesman Tony Snow said.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell added: "only 29 members of the Senate voted for establishing a date for defeat."

But Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, who authored the resolution, said the coalition to end the war in the Senate was growing.

"The support for changing course in Iraq has grown considerably since ... last June," when only 13 senators voted for a troop withdrawal date, he said.

The Senate was expected to vote on Thursday on a resolution clearing the way for new talks with the House and White House aides on producing a merged replacement budget that Bush would sign.

A Republican amendment sponsored by respected Senator John Warner, that required Bush to report to Congress in July on the Iraqi government's progress towards certain political benchmarks, scored 52 votes for and 44 against.

Though short of the 60-vote threshold needed to advance, Democrats billed the tally as a sign of increasing Republican disquiet over war strategy.

"I believe today's votes mark the beginning of the legislative end game on Iraq," said former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.

Wednesday's votes were scheduled by Senate Democrats to test Senate opinion on Iraq, crank up the heat on Bush, and probe growing anxiety on the war among the president's Republican backers.

Leading Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, her top rival Senator Barack Obama and fellow 2008 hopefuls senators Chris Dodd and Joseph Biden also voted for the withdrawal bill.

In a significant toughening of her position, Clinton, still criticized on the campaign trail for voting in 2002 to authorize Bush to go to war, said Tuesday she wanted to send a "clear message" that Democrats were united on ending the war.

Obama said, though he did not agree entirely with the measure, he wanted to put Bush on notice that a change of course was vital.

Feingold's measure, co-sponsored by Democratic leader Harry Reid, would have allowed only operations against terrorists in Iraq, training of Iraqi troops and protection of US installations after March 31, 2008. Veteran Democratic senator, and 2008 presidential candidate, Joseph Biden, reflected his party's tactics, as he vowed to keep the heat on Bush.

"I am not crazy about this legislation ... but I am crazy about the fact that we have got to keep the pressure on," he said.

Some activists campaigning to end the war said they detected a trend of rising congressional anxiety over it, reflected in the votes.

"By September or October, there may be a veto-proof majority, including many Republicans, ready to "call it quits" in Iraq," said John Issacs of the Council of the Livable World, a national security advocacy group.

A second Democratic amendment, which would have punished the Iraqi government for failing to meet political benchmarks, with US troops withdrawals, was withdrawn over a White House veto threat.

Bush wielded his veto for only the second time two weeks ago to strike down a joint Senate and House bill tying war funding to the timeline to start bringing home 146,000 troops in Iraq in October, from a war which has killed 3,399 of their comrades.

Since then, the House has passed a new version, which cuts funding for US operations in half. Bush would get 43 billion dollars now, then be forced to return to Congress in July to report on progress by the Iraqi government, before a vote is taken on releasing a further 53 billion dollars.