Will the Dems pull another Viet Nam?

Question

and cutoff funding for our troops?

Answer 1

probably! It's really sad for our troops over there fighting for our FREEDOMS here and the dems can't see that! I support them whole-heartedly

Answer 2

they do no longer have faith Iraq is Vietnam, they purely see how there are some mind-blowing similarities between them. First, they have been the two released on premises that proved to be fake, The Gulf of Tonken Incident in Vietnam, it relatively is assumed to have not exceeded off, and the WMD's in Iraq, which have been in no way discovered. 2nd, whilst going into the rustic, the two presidents made the errors of questioning that as a results of fact the populous did no longer like the previous rulers that they might include the U. S.. it relatively is the main mind-blowing similarity.

Answer 3

No they won't and please get your un-facts straight! Don't believe bloggers, do your own research, like who controlled Congress!

"It was only in 1970--five years after the U.S. invasion of South Vietnam--that the anti-war movement seriously pursued a legislative strategy, and it remained focused on a timetable for unilateral withdrawal, not on demanding a compromise political settlement. By then, Nixon had been able to reduce the urgency of the issue of withdrawal by undertaking his own unilateral withdrawal. Congressional support for a timetable for complete withdrawal always fell short of a majority. The McGovern-Hatfield amendment of September 1970, which set a date of the end of 1971 for complete withdrawal, failed 55-39. In June 1971, the same legislation lost by a 55-42 vote.

Although it was inevitable that the U.S. occupation of Vietnam would be ended by a negotiated settlement rather than by a complete victory for one side or the other, peace negotiations did not play a significant role in the anti-war position from 1968 through 1970. Not until George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign did a proposal for negotiations emerge as a serious alternative to Nixon’s diplomatic position. The idea that putting enough people in the street would provide the political muscle to face down the Nixon administration was mistaken. Nixon was able to rebuild public support to prolong the war in part by exploiting public resentment felt by more than half the population--including many who were not pro-war--toward the mass protests. And the war continued for another four years."

Answer 4

i hope so, bring the troops home already. too many of them dying for no reason, they're more needed here at home. they're fighting a war that they can't win, just like vietnam. let the iraq's kill themselves if they want, then when it's all over, clean up the mess.

Answer 5

Too late. The Repugnants have already created a Vietnam in Iraq. Hopefully, we'll learn from history and get out sooner than we did in Nam.

Answer 6

A better question is "why the hell are we there?".
If you had a buch of Iraqis in your town for the sole purpose of oil, you would probably do anything to get them out. Why waste more US lifes?
PS, Follow the money

Answer 7

Short of impeaching Bush (which should be done)

They have no other option.

They've tried reasoning with the man ....but he's the decider cause God said so!!

http://bushwatch.org/evangelist.htm

Answer 8

it`s possible that they will
i say Bring Our Troops Home

Answer 9

I believe they will if they feel that's what the majority of their base wants to do - unfortunately, the majority of their base may well not be the majority of the people.

Answer 10

It is what they do best and we should another Ft Sumter on their butts, if they do.