BLAME AMERICA FIRST LIBERALS: Why Haven't You Cut Off Funding For the War Yet?

Question

You have a congressional majority, where's the legislation cutting off funding for the War? No courage of your convictions or no plan, or both?

Answer 1

I agree with the poster. The thing to do if you believe the war is wrong is to cut the funding. It won't hurt the troops at all because there is already enough money allocated for the troops to tidy whatever it is they are doing and start redeploying. Oh Haliburton and a few other defense contractors might come up short, but War is Hell.

The won't do it for one simple reason they simply can't get the most important polling numbers they would need. What percentage of the American people that want us out of Iraq will remember to vote for us in the election cycle?

Now before you all think I am a neo con democrat bashing let me assure you there is enough fair weather conviction to go around.

Sen McCain, Pres Bush and other last ditch effort supports who say we are committed to winning in Iraq, unless this surge fails, or the Iraqi president can deliver are actually sticking to there guns (no pun intended) either.

You have an ideological struggle between "Cut and Run" and "Blame and Run".

That having been said if you want courage in convictions don't look to politicians go to church just not in America.

Answer 2

I don't think they are going to cut troops funding.
They are going to cut funding in order to get Iraqis to handle their won security.
If Iraq has an ARMY.
And we are told they have an army.
Then why does Iraqi government need private security firms paid for by U.S?
Pushing four years already....they could have put a person through West Point in that amount of time.
And we are told that the Iraqis have Regiments and Divisions and yet they cannot provide their own security.....
This sectarian BS is not a job for us.
It is job for Iraqis.
We should concentrate on the borders and let the Iraqis handle the situation in Baghdad. A little test.
Without an American holding their hand.
And I sure hope we are not providing funding for Iraqi troops.
That is Iraqs responsibility.

Answer 3

First of all liberals do not have control of Congress. Democrats have control of Congress. If you had bothered to do even the tiniest bit of research you would know that most of the new Democrats in Congress are not liberal. Secondly, the new leadership is doing something the old leadership did not do. They are trying to build consensus so that the representatives of all of the people can be heard instead of just a vocal few. Thirdly, cutting off funding would not impact the President's 'surge' plan as funds are already in place. Lastly, the Congress is taking it's time looking at the funding issue as it is a complicated matter and they want to make sure that funding is in place to cover troops currently in Iraq as well as that which will be required for turning over responsibilities to Iraqui units.

I am a liberal. I do not blame 'America First' as you misstate in your question. I blame the President and many members of Congress for moving us into a war under false pretenses, badly managing our efforts in that war, decreasing our rights as US citizens, and encouraging divisiveness that can only harm our country in the face of our enemies. You sir are also guilty of that latter point.

Answer 4

those politicians are the WORST of the worst too. No diverse than the AARP putting their endorsement in the back of Obama for the duration of the marketing campaign. They in no way checked with their individuals and as a effect, lost some 40,000 individuals who provide up. i'm a VFW member and that i would be confident to hold this exciting situation up.

Answer 5

They want to NOT fund whatever verb Rice chooses to use for sending in more Americans (augementation, escalation, or surge). They are not cutting funds to support our treasure that is already over there in harms way. Nice try.

Answer 6

So which way do you want it, War Monger? Do you want the funds cut off suddenly and our troops left defenseless in Iraq or do you want to continue a bloody war that cannot be won? Your attitude is the reason why Dems won a majority in Congress. They will let the war taper down and insist that Iraqi forces take over. We cannot stay there forever. Use your brain instead of your big mouth.

Answer 7

I think it's obvious: democrats never intended to impeach Bush or cut off war funding. Remember, they did vote for war funding back in 2001 and 2003. They just said that so they could get into office. I think what they'll do is be more critical of the war's progress, but they couldn't really campaign on that because liberals crave Bushate.

Answer 8

The Democrats are not going to cut funding to the troops already in Iraq. They never said they would. They simply refuse to fund George's escalation of the war. I say more power to them.

Answer 9

They said they won't support cutting funding as long as the troops are in harms way....

Answer 10

Libs are just malcontents, who just want to criticize anyone that does anything. Cutting off funding would be doing something so they can't do that.