2007-01-04 09:38:21 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Harry Reid has already said he will send the troops if requested. I think it will be a HUGE mistake and against the Democrats stated plans for Iraq which included gradually withdrawing troops and strategically redeploying the rest. Unfortunately, I think the Democrats are more worried about "looking good" to the American public, and I think that the way they think they look good is by not being "obstructionists" to Bush's failed policy. It's moronic, but it's the only way they think they'll get a shot at the presidency in '08. I've never taken anything a politician has said at face value, and I never intend to.
The tragedy is more American lives will be lost just to "prove" Democrats aren't anti-security. They've been painted into a corner by Republican rhetoric and instead of giving them a big FU, they sit in that corner and take it.
I say if the surge options does as Abizaid and Casey said it will, and causes more problems then we pull out every damn troop until the President can figure out what the hell he's doing. He's playing with peoples lives like they are toy solidiers, when in reality those men and women have families.
2007-01-04 09:52:24 · answer #1 · answered by Mrs. Bass 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The main surge supporter, Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, is now hedging. Perhaps the tiny realistic detail that there are not 40,000 combat troops available has changed his mind. So, Bush may change his language from a "surge" to a "bump" for Baghdad.
2007-01-04 09:48:12 · answer #2 · answered by TxSup 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They can't do anything about it. One of the things the Republican congress did was pass the military budget. Bush has all the money he needs to send more troops. He is still on his stay the course crap. I guess in his next speech he is going to try and make you feel guilty if you don't sacifrice everything you have.
2007-01-04 09:48:16 · answer #3 · answered by firewomen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since before the war started, the Democrats have been major enablers of Bush and his immoral war. If this does not change now, there will be a major political crisis in this country, and Hillary can kiss the Presidency good-bye.
2007-01-04 09:41:10 · answer #4 · answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
there is little that congress can do.
congress can deny money for the operation in iraq, but that is very extreme. even then, bush can just include the bill into the general defense budget. congress could block that money too but that would even be more extreme.
2007-01-04 09:43:08 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. O 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a damn thing, they already did. The voted and gave him permission for war! The only thing they can do now is cut funding. Think they would chance that with 08 around the corner?
2007-01-04 09:40:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hey. Quit complaining. Don't you know what a decrease looks like, ya idjit??!! This gret cun trah o' owaz wonted a woah an' by criminy we ain' gon' de - ny them loil Amurrikuns this gret privilige an' test o' man hood.
2007-01-04 09:41:41 · answer #7 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Seems the Democrats solution, thus far, to get us out of Iraq, is to instate a draft.
It will be interesting.
2007-01-04 09:42:10 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nothing. Its gonna be "stay the course" until Iraq has wiped itself off the map.
2007-01-04 09:42:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
cut his funding is unfortunately the most they can do at this time (quickly anyway) the rest will take time... .. congress can't dig us out of this whole quickly.. but they can keep it from getting worse until we get a new president to aid in healing the nation
2007-01-04 09:42:14 · answer #10 · answered by pip 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋