This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/americas/6370847.stm

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
US Senate seeks Iraq troops vote US Senate blocks vote on Iraq war
(about 10 hours later)
The US Senate is holding a rare Saturday session on whether to vote on a resolution criticising President George W Bush's troop surge in Iraq. The US Senate has decided not to debate a resolution criticising President George W Bush's troop surge in Iraq.
The session follows a non-binding vote in the House of Representatives, in which 17 Republicans joined the majority Democrats to oppose the rise. The rare Saturday session followed a non-binding vote backing the resolution in the House of Representatives.
Correspondents say Republicans could block a Senate vote, but Democrats will be able to claim moral victory. In the House, 17 Republicans had joined the majority Democrats to oppose the increase of 21,500 troops.
Mr Bush now faces battles with Congress over funding for US troops in Iraq. Democrats needed the support of 60 of the 100 senators to advance the same motion in the Senate, but they only managed to gain 56 votes in favour.
Mr Bush still faces battles with Congress over funding for US troops in Iraq.
Although both the Congressional resolutions are non-binding, the president needs the legislators to support his $93bn (£48bn) emergency troop-funding measure.Although both the Congressional resolutions are non-binding, the president needs the legislators to support his $93bn (£48bn) emergency troop-funding measure.
Saturday's vote follows days of fierce debate, during which the Democrats have made it clear that more decisive steps to limit Mr Bush's war policy could follow.
The White House has dismissed the vote, and warned Congress against trying to cut off funding.The White House has dismissed the vote, and warned Congress against trying to cut off funding.
Under Mr Bush's new Iraq strategy, 21,500 extra troops are being sent, mostly to the capital Baghdad, to help enforce new security measures.Under Mr Bush's new Iraq strategy, 21,500 extra troops are being sent, mostly to the capital Baghdad, to help enforce new security measures.
Wafer-thin majority 'More war or less war'
The Senate session is due to start at 0800 local time (1300 GMT). A vote in support of the troops that is silent on the question of funds is an attempt to have it both ways Republican Mitch McConnell class="" href="/1/hi/world/americas/6370459.stm">Text of resolution
Let us be clear - anyone voting 'no' is voting to give the president a green light to escalate the war Harry ReidSenate Majority leader Senate Democrats were hoping to repeat their Friday success in the House, when the motion criticising the president's Iraq policy was passed by 246 votes to 182.
Written by the Democrats, the resolution - identical to that in the House - states that the Senate "will continue to support and protect" US soldiers in Iraq but that it "disapproves" of the 21,500-strong troop increase. "Today's vote is an opportunity to send a powerful message," said Democrat majority leader, Senator Harry Reid, during an emotional discussion.
But Democrats hold only a wafer-thin 51-49 majority in the chamber, and last week failed to gain the 60 votes needed to override Republican delaying tactics. "The Senate's responsibility must be to vote on escalation, whether the so-called surge is supported or opposed. This is the choice. More war, or less war," the Democrat leader told the Senate.
The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says that if the Democrats manage to win a vote they will probably come out on top and further embarrass the White House. Republicans sought debate on a different motion, which would have ruled out any budget cuts affecting troops already in Iraq.
If they lose, he says, they will still win a moral victory by trying to get the subject aired. "A vote in support of the troops that is silent on the question of funds is an attempt to have it both ways," said Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader.
"Americans deserve to know whether their senator stands with the president and his plan to deepen our military commitment in Iraq, or with the overwhelming majority of Americans who oppose this escalation," said Majority leader Harry Reid. Only seven Republicans broke ranks with the party, and so the Democrats failed to reach the 60 votes needed to pass the motion.
"Let us be clear: Anyone voting 'no' [on Saturday] is voting to give the president a green light to escalate the war."
However, Republicans are hoping to vote on a separate proposal that promises not to cut off funds for troops in combat.
'Tragic goal''Tragic goal'
This country needs a dramatic change of course in Iraq and it is the responsibility of this Congress to consummate that change Democrat John Murtha class="" href="/1/hi/world/americas/6365715.stm">Debate in quotes class="" href="/1/hi/world/americas/6370459.stm">Text of resolution The House vote on Friday in support of the non-binding motion brought to a close the first full debate there since the Democrats took control of Congress in November.
The House vote brought to a close the first full debate there since the Democrats took control of Congress in November.
Speaking after the vote, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it would send an unmistakable signal to the White House.Speaking after the vote, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it would send an unmistakable signal to the White House.
"The bipartisan resolution today may be non-binding. But it will send a strong message to the president - we here in Congress are committed to protecting and supporting our troops.""The bipartisan resolution today may be non-binding. But it will send a strong message to the president - we here in Congress are committed to protecting and supporting our troops."
House Minority Leader John Boehner had urged lawmakers to vote against the motion, saying it was "the first step towards a tragic, unthinkable goal".House Minority Leader John Boehner had urged lawmakers to vote against the motion, saying it was "the first step towards a tragic, unthinkable goal".