The Dems (and some GOP friends of theirs) are at it again. While it is reasonable to look for a better plan than Bush's latest (after all, he admitted that Iran was one of the keys, but implemented no strategy to deal with Iran), you'll note that "The resolution is not expected to offer any alternative to Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq for deployment primarily in Baghdad." It's another of those measures intended only to hurt Bush, rather than add anything to intelligent discourse on the subject.
As for the caps on troops, you may want to note that not only is Bush the Commander-in-Chief, but Congress gave him the authority to deploy the military to deal with the Iraqi situation in any way he sees fit.
"Countering Boehner's claim that Democrats don't have an alternative plan for Iraq, Daly said that the party has been saying for months it's for "responsible redeployment" of troops out of Iraq." "Responsible redeployment," Daly, is neither a strategy nor responsible. Democrats have been saying that we need to pull out according to some mythical timeline that would ensure that Iraq wouldn't fall to pieces. In this case, responsible seems to simply be tacked on for effect, while redeployment seems to have been defined as ending deployment.
There are other parts of note, such as Daly assuring everyone that the Democrats would never be against funding the troops. You really should read the article.
Cox and Forkum has a nice cartoon to accompany the article.