Where they stand on the "surge"

According to the Press-Citizen this morning (and this answers, in part, some of the questions raised about Dave Loebsack's current position about the war in earlier posts):

Freshman Rep. Dave Loebsack said Tuesday that he opposes President Bush's expected plan to send additional troops to Iraq to quell sectarian violence.

"It doesn't make any sense," the Iowa Democrat said in an interview. "I'm certainly quite opposed to it. The more troops we send, the more problems we have."

Instead of sending more troops to Iraq, Loebsack said he would like the president to "begin immediate disengagement" over the next year.

Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin also opposes Bush's plan.

"My position is clear: There is nothing to be gained by escalating our involvement in Iraq and putting more of our brave young men and women in the midst of a civil war," he said. "The deteriorating situation in Iraq cannot be solved through military action. It requires a political solution."

Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said he talked to Bush on Monday but wouldn't comment on his conversation.

Grassley said any additional U.S. troops would have to be accompanied by an agreement that the Iraqi prime minister would spend an additional $10 billion and commit more Iraqi forces.