Mike Levin: “I would agree. Now to the last paragraph, which for reasons beyond me has been stricken. We referred to the campaign…”

“I would agree. Now to the last paragraph, which for reasons beyond me has been stricken. We referred to the campaign plan--without objection. There was a campaign plan we referred to which said, what are the conditions in that plan that must be met in order to provide for the transition of security responsibilities to Iraqi security forces? There is the campaign plan. There are the conditions which have been laid out, which of those conditions must be met in order to achieve the goal which we have agreed on in this document--transition of security responsibility to security forces. Then we have agreed that the report has to contain a schedule for meeting those conditions. What are the conditions? What is the schedule for meeting them? Three times we refer to that schedule in that same paragraph. No objection so far. But now we say that campaign plan should also contain estimated dates for the phased redeployment of the United States Armed Forces from Iraq as each condition is met. The conditions are already laid out. What is the campaign plan with estimated dates for the phased redeployment as those conditions are met? Then we explicitly acknowledge that, with the understanding that unexpected contingencies may arise. We have already made reference to the phased redeployment. That is the first time we have made a reference to phased redeployment.…”