Big news involving the United States and the 'war' in Iraq. Congress has passed a bill that provides over $97.5 billion for the U.S. Army soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is a catch: The bill states that soldiers will steadily withdraw from Iraq within 120 days, with most combat operations ceasing by March 31, 2008.
President George W. Bush, however, has announced that he will veto any bill that puts a timetable on troop withdrawal from Iraq, claiming that "...we expect there to be no strings on our commanders. And that we expect the Congress to be wise about how they spend the people’s money.”
In other words, he wants a bill that funds the soldiers in Iraq with no strings, such as troop withdrawal, attached.
Going back to the subject: he just doesn't get it...Bush is NOT going to get far by vetoing any strategy that would get our soldiers out over time. We're not saying for everyone to leave now: we're saying that we'll settle for something that gives them the money and resources they need, but we would like something good in return.
Bush has also claimed that if he has no bill to sign by next month, he will be forced to cut back on current resources in Iraq, meaning a cut in equipment, weapons, and maintenance. In short, it will cause even more problems than what we have now.
I hate how politicians are always saying stuff like "if we leave Iraq, there will be dire consequences" or shit like that. They paint the picture that all hell will break loose if we leave. All hell is already breaking loose!
Listen to me on this: I am a soldier in the United States Army. Although I have yet to experience the 'war' in Iraq, that does not mean that I have not heard the stories, that I have not analyzed our situation. Yes, we do have somewhat of a reason to still be there (train Iraqi soldiers, nothing wrong with that) but the fact that they want us to be there for even longer than we should is just too much. I'll be honest, I think we have overstayed our welcome, and it's only a matter of time before things get out of hand not only over there, but here in the States.
If Bush continues to veto these bills, there will be a massive public outcry. Bush has already slipped in the polls (more than half the population does not trust his decision-making and his actions towards the 'war'), and he is quickly becoming a President elected by the people, AGAINST the people. Our country has been through enough wars to know what to do and what not to do, and it seems the powers-that-be do not understand where the citizens stand on all this.
George W. better strike a deal with Congress. If he doesn't, there will be a devastating backlash on our military, our government, and (most importantly), our people.
-=Brian=-
p.s. as you can see, whenever I address our situation in Iraq, I quote the word 'war', because it's not much of a 'war' anymore...it's a waste of time, money, and manpower.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mystic_rhythms wrote: [/QUOTENAME] I hate how politicians are always saying stuff like "if we leave Iraq, there will be dire consequences" or shit like that.
[/QUOTE]
What they should have said was "if we ENTER Iraq, there will be dire consequences".
From the beginning Bush has said he'd veto any spending bill with troop-withdrawal strings attached. It's no surprise. Nothing this idiot does is a surprise.
Not that it will do us or our soldiers any good, but if/when he does veto this bill, the lack of supplies and funds needed over there will be HIS fault and his fault alone.
Unfortunately, I find no comfort in that.
[/QUOTE]
What they should have said was "if we ENTER Iraq, there will be dire consequences".
From the beginning Bush has said he'd veto any spending bill with troop-withdrawal strings attached. It's no surprise. Nothing this idiot does is a surprise.
Not that it will do us or our soldiers any good, but if/when he does veto this bill, the lack of supplies and funds needed over there will be HIS fault and his fault alone.
Unfortunately, I find no comfort in that.
This is all part of his plan, haven't you guys figured that out yet?
He knows the people hate him, and he knows that he's unpopular. But he also knows that there will not be massive protests publicly against him (for more than a day or so) and he also knows that the Democrats don't have the majority needed to hold impeachment hearings (the Republicans may be the minority, but they still need some of them to swing to the Democrats to impeach him. None of them are willing to do that).
So, of course he'll veto the bill. He's got nothing to loose. They can't impeach him because the Democrats don't have enough power, and they can't over-ride the veto because they don't have enough power either. So, he'll veto, and he's PRAYING that they won't come up with a budget he can sign. That way, he can cut the supplies needed by our military, and when things go to hell (as if they aren't already there) he can turn around and blame the Democrats, saying "They tied my hands....They wanted it this way....its THEIR fault."
The only way he can come out looking better than when he went it is to veto the bill and have nothing happen to replace it. If they do come up with something for him to sign that he does sign, then he touts it as a victory.
I can't believe people are surprised by this. It's common sense, and anyone with half a brain can see it.
He knows the people hate him, and he knows that he's unpopular. But he also knows that there will not be massive protests publicly against him (for more than a day or so) and he also knows that the Democrats don't have the majority needed to hold impeachment hearings (the Republicans may be the minority, but they still need some of them to swing to the Democrats to impeach him. None of them are willing to do that).
So, of course he'll veto the bill. He's got nothing to loose. They can't impeach him because the Democrats don't have enough power, and they can't over-ride the veto because they don't have enough power either. So, he'll veto, and he's PRAYING that they won't come up with a budget he can sign. That way, he can cut the supplies needed by our military, and when things go to hell (as if they aren't already there) he can turn around and blame the Democrats, saying "They tied my hands....They wanted it this way....its THEIR fault."
The only way he can come out looking better than when he went it is to veto the bill and have nothing happen to replace it. If they do come up with something for him to sign that he does sign, then he touts it as a victory.
I can't believe people are surprised by this. It's common sense, and anyone with half a brain can see it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I can't believe people are surprised by this. It's common sense, and anyone with half a brain can see it. [/QUOTE]
I worked for a guy who was constantly doing the most insane and obnoxious things. Not only did he get away with them, but he somehow advanced his position time after time. While it never
'surprised' me, I was always amazed at his brazen arrogance and how he always came out of things unscathed. I think it's that same disgust - not surprise - that many of us feel toward the attitude and actions of this unfortunate choice of president.
I can't believe people are surprised by this. It's common sense, and anyone with half a brain can see it. [/QUOTE]
I worked for a guy who was constantly doing the most insane and obnoxious things. Not only did he get away with them, but he somehow advanced his position time after time. While it never
'surprised' me, I was always amazed at his brazen arrogance and how he always came out of things unscathed. I think it's that same disgust - not surprise - that many of us feel toward the attitude and actions of this unfortunate choice of president.
You worked for President Bush!?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You worked for President Bush!?[/QUOTE]
LMAO!
LMAO!
That was funny Music Man. Good to know some people have a sense of humor about this.
You know, maybe this is a sign. We've been rolling down the wrong road for quite some time, and I think the President needs to understand that you gotta know when to step up, and when to back down.
But nope. Bush believes that by backing down, we would fail our mission in Iraq. My rebuttal is this: what mission?
We first went in under the belief that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. A few investigations later, and we find NOTHING. Bush then claims that Saddam is plotting to commit heinous crimes against the Iraqi population. We caught him, and they killed him.
Doesn't that mean, mission accomplished?...
I guess not.
We knew when to get out of Vietnam, i mean it was a little too late, but hey. Better late then never. It doesn't help our country, and it doesn't help our image if we continue to procrastinate about a country that we should have no business with at this point. We've done what we need to do. What else is there?
-=Brian=-
You know, maybe this is a sign. We've been rolling down the wrong road for quite some time, and I think the President needs to understand that you gotta know when to step up, and when to back down.
But nope. Bush believes that by backing down, we would fail our mission in Iraq. My rebuttal is this: what mission?
We first went in under the belief that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. A few investigations later, and we find NOTHING. Bush then claims that Saddam is plotting to commit heinous crimes against the Iraqi population. We caught him, and they killed him.
Doesn't that mean, mission accomplished?...
I guess not.
We knew when to get out of Vietnam, i mean it was a little too late, but hey. Better late then never. It doesn't help our country, and it doesn't help our image if we continue to procrastinate about a country that we should have no business with at this point. We've done what we need to do. What else is there?
-=Brian=-
I say just wait till election '08 if you're hoping for any changes in foreign policy. You can't reasonably believe that GW is just going to suddenly adopt the Democrats' stance on the war. I honestly don't think another two years is going to matter THAT much.
Except to the soldiers who die between now and then, and their families, and the innocent Iraqis and their families.
Oh, and possibly Iran if he decided to adopt the same stance with them.
Oh, and possibly Iran if he decided to adopt the same stance with them.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]mystic_rhythms wrote: [/QUOTENAME]That was funny Music Man. Good to know some people have a sense of humor about this.
You know, maybe this is a sign. We've been rolling down the wrong road for quite some time, and I think the President needs to understand that you gotta know when to step up, and when to back down.
But nope. Bush believes that by backing down, we would fail our mission in Iraq. My rebuttal is this: what mission?
We first went in under the belief that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. A few investigations later, and we find NOTHING. Bush then claims that Saddam is plotting to commit heinous crimes against the Iraqi population. We caught him, and they killed him.
Doesn't that mean, mission accomplished?...
I guess not.
We knew when to get out of Vietnam, i mean it was a little too late, but hey. Better late then never. It doesn't help our country, and it doesn't help our image if we continue to procrastinate about a country that we should have no business with at this point. We've done what we need to do. What else is there?
-=Brian=-[/QUOTE]
what he shouldve been doing is worrying about his own country, protecting us here, instead of trying to change another country cuz daddy didnt finish his job. what they shouldve been fighting for is to FIND THE GODDAMN TERRORISTS THAT SO EASILY ELUDE US. thers so much technology out there and forensic work that could find them within a month, im sure! but were too distracted with a war that shouldnt be happening. find the terrorists that caused the mess of 9/11, and come home. but since there is already a fight goign on in the hallways, its hard to break them up when someone else caused it.
not sure if im making sense at all, but i guess im saying is, bush made his bed, he has to lie in it because theres really no tactful way around this. he shouldve attacked the people who were clearly against us, instead of an excuse to finish his dads job. its all just a circus now. whoever takes over after bush i hope does a much better job, and does a decent job cleaning up his mess.
i raelly dont know much about politics, or how they work, to be honest, but i am american, i observe his flaws, and i cant stand bush being a president. his first mistake was manipulating his way into an office.
its really a wonder that he hasnt been harmed.
You know, maybe this is a sign. We've been rolling down the wrong road for quite some time, and I think the President needs to understand that you gotta know when to step up, and when to back down.
But nope. Bush believes that by backing down, we would fail our mission in Iraq. My rebuttal is this: what mission?
We first went in under the belief that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. A few investigations later, and we find NOTHING. Bush then claims that Saddam is plotting to commit heinous crimes against the Iraqi population. We caught him, and they killed him.
Doesn't that mean, mission accomplished?...
I guess not.
We knew when to get out of Vietnam, i mean it was a little too late, but hey. Better late then never. It doesn't help our country, and it doesn't help our image if we continue to procrastinate about a country that we should have no business with at this point. We've done what we need to do. What else is there?
-=Brian=-[/QUOTE]
what he shouldve been doing is worrying about his own country, protecting us here, instead of trying to change another country cuz daddy didnt finish his job. what they shouldve been fighting for is to FIND THE GODDAMN TERRORISTS THAT SO EASILY ELUDE US. thers so much technology out there and forensic work that could find them within a month, im sure! but were too distracted with a war that shouldnt be happening. find the terrorists that caused the mess of 9/11, and come home. but since there is already a fight goign on in the hallways, its hard to break them up when someone else caused it.
not sure if im making sense at all, but i guess im saying is, bush made his bed, he has to lie in it because theres really no tactful way around this. he shouldve attacked the people who were clearly against us, instead of an excuse to finish his dads job. its all just a circus now. whoever takes over after bush i hope does a much better job, and does a decent job cleaning up his mess.
i raelly dont know much about politics, or how they work, to be honest, but i am american, i observe his flaws, and i cant stand bush being a president. his first mistake was manipulating his way into an office.
its really a wonder that he hasnt been harmed.
"Bush has also claimed that if he has no bill to sign by next month, he will be forced to cut back on current resources in Iraq"
That really is tantamount to murdering his own troops. I feel.
That really is tantamount to murdering his own troops. I feel.
Well, one could easily argue that, to some degree, Congress is also playing politics with our soldiers' lives and are just as much to blame for the soldiers' deaths.
"Here, you can have the funds necessary to protect the troops, BUT you have to promote my agenda as well."
"Here, you can have the funds necessary to protect the troops, BUT you have to promote my agenda as well."
"Congress is also playing politics with our soldiers' lives and are just as much to blame for the soldiers' deaths."
Well... yeah!
Well... yeah!
Well... first, this situation is indirectly caused by the American population itself... After four years Bush-regime, the whole world was already sick and tired of him. Though the Americans re-voted him. Now the whole word has to eat the consequences of that.
I don't know why Bush is so ignorant. His own population is turning against him, same is the rest of the world. Though he keeps going and going. The situation will stay unstable for many years, with or without the support of foreign troops. Though he should understand that the Americans are really unwanted there. Therefore he should hurry with training Iraqi people. Beside that, other countries can help.
About Iran... I think is 'smart' enough to avoid an even bigger mess. But maybe he should have attacked Iran in the first place, instead of Iraq. As I believe that Iran is a bigger thread to the world population that Iraq has ever been.
I don't know why Bush is so ignorant. His own population is turning against him, same is the rest of the world. Though he keeps going and going. The situation will stay unstable for many years, with or without the support of foreign troops. Though he should understand that the Americans are really unwanted there. Therefore he should hurry with training Iraqi people. Beside that, other countries can help.
About Iran... I think is 'smart' enough to avoid an even bigger mess. But maybe he should have attacked Iran in the first place, instead of Iraq. As I believe that Iran is a bigger thread to the world population that Iraq has ever been.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=#CC0066 face="Bradley Hand ITC"> The Mir@cle </font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME] Though the Americans re-voted him. [/QUOTE]
HALF of the Americans, not all, thankyouverymuch.
HALF of the Americans, not all, thankyouverymuch.