Why don't the Congressional members who oppose the war, debate REAL legislation to bring the troops home?

Question

If that is their goal, why don't they grow a pair and cut the funding? I know most of them are Democrats and that they have a hard time standing up for anything, but a nonbinding resolution against the troop surge? That's it? How ridiculously weak can they be? "Sorry troops, we support you, but we think your mission is hopeless. We don't have the cojones to do anything about it, but rest assured, we told the President we disagreed. That will show Bush he doesn't control everything." What a joke!!! Is this really what people voted for in November? Thanks everyone, way to make a difference... maybe... not really.

magime - I'm glued to C-SPAN every chance I have. The only way Congress can do nything about the war is to stop funding. Instead of doing that, they are debating a resolution that does and means NOTHING.

g - I agree with most of what you are saying, but if they want a change, why don't they offer one? It has been well over a year since the momentum swung in their favor, and yet they still only talk about Bush's mistakes. That is not a solution. If they want a changed strategy, they need to come up with an alternative. Bush is going to do what Bush wants to do as long as no one comes up with anything better.

Answer 1

Soft diplomacy will be the doom of this great country one day! As a Democrat I don't see how we expect to pull out now, with all that we've done. Don't we owe the Iraqi people to have a future, by all that we did there? Or do we abandon them to the wind, and allow fate to decide? We have done some huge mistakes there, and need to continue to fight, until we can help the Iraqis to sustain themselves. Thus, saving at least some face, by not abandoning them shamelessly.

Ever reversed the situation and thought about it, what would you want then for your child, wife, mom, dad, siblings, you friends...and on and on....we have no choice you all!

Answer 2

There are some who are willing to bring up bills to stop funding for everything except bringing the troops home. Dennis Kucinich springs instantly to mind on this. As I understand it, the reason that these bills have not been placed on the floor is because the House (the only branch of Congress with a clear Democratic majority) is now debating the whole Iraq surge. There is a disagreement between different Representatives over whether it will be more effective to first pass a non-binding resolution (where they hope to pick up Republican votes) and then go for a binding resolution, or whether it makes more sense to go for the binding resolutions right away.

Recent developments seem to indicate that a small number of GOP members have decided to oppose the troop buildup:

http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_5223393

Perhaps this is why many Dems are leaning towards taking their time on the resolution.

Answer 3

Democrats, unlike Republicans, don't make rash decisions that could put people's lives at risk... which the bill you're talking about possibly could...

even if people are calling them "rediculously weak"... our responsibiltiy to America is much more important than just appearing strong... unlike Republicans... who seem to only care about ideas of "cajones" more than the well being of our troops...

and most democrats I've seen don't support a full "right now" pullout... only Murtha and Kucinich (sp?) and maybe like a few more are only ones that seem to want this...

most seem to want changes in strategy that will lead to our eventual with draw... with a stable Iraq...basically what Jim Webb said in the demorcatic anouncement after the state of the union...

Answer 4

Democrats know that when history rates the government in the Iraq situation, and the broader war on terror, they show there weakness and are not sure if what they are doing is right, this way they can pass a resolution that is meaningless while at the same time telling their supporters "see what we did". It takes very little to satisfy there base. Oh yes and lets not forget the major reason they get to bash the President during this crucial campaign period. Its all politics.

Answer 5

Getting out of Iraq is like getting a jar off someones head. Congress can pull only so hard until it looks like we are hurting the country. It is a glass jar. So I am in favor of using a hammer and if the Bush Administration gets hurt too bad. The Republicans got the jar stuck on their head they should feel it just as the soldiers fighting for us have.

Answer 6

The Congressmen should stop talking about politics but must be working to make laws especially the withdrawal from Iraq and to divert the funds to beneficial projects instead of wastage in the war equipment.

Answer 7

Sigh. They are caught between Iraq and a hard spot. They cannot cut off funding for the troupes. How could they? That would be unmerciful.

What needs to be done is for the Congress to get the troupes outta there, and they can do that! Dubya be damned!

Answer 8

Ok here is the deal. The Demonicrats are holding meetings to bring about legislation, but they also want the troop casualities to soar through the roof to get the whole country, congress, etc on their side. By doing that no one risks hurting their name. Its about saving face.

Answer 9

It is a joke that you don't read the news or watch the Congressional hearings? They are right now doing that, their Plan is to slowly start bringing them home by March 31st, and have all of them out by May of 2008!

Answer 10

The Democrats know that if they cut off funding the Republicans will use it as a weapon against them .........Sounds like this....

"Democrats don't care about the troops because they cut off the funding so they couldn't adequately accomplish their mission!"