What's the point of the non-binding resolution about the troop surge?

Question

I know what they have said, polls show something like 60% of Americans want to bring our boys home - but I think that was with the understanding that the situation is STABLE over there. It seems like this vote will only encourage our enemies as well as be something useless the politicans can point to "see, I voted to do nothing"

Is there something here I'm missing???

Answer 1

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE as they say on South Park...

the point is to make a whole lot of noise without actually making any new plans. It is ridiculous and a waaste of Congress' time. Its akin to saying that you will promise next Jan 1st to stop whatever bad habit you have, and then completely ignoring it. Saber rattling, little more.

Answer 2

Congress is between a rock and a troublesome position. The President & Co. lied about Iraq involvement with al-Quaeda and WMD's with the intention to get the bypass-ahead to invade Iraq. Now Congress has constrained alternatives in the thanks to regulate the President's dedication to a conflict that grow to be poorly planned. the yank people's 2006 congressional vote grow to be a referendum on the Republicans', and President Bush's coping with of the conflict. yet, Republicans do no longer prefer to undercut "their" guy at the same time as they attempt to distance themselves from the politcal fallout of the conflict's failure so some distance; hence, the non-binding decision formally denouncing the President's plan. the alternative of reducing the funds for the troops in Iraq will be used as data of a no longer-helping-the-troops suggestions-set. besides the undeniable fact that in trouble-free terms 30% of people nonetheless trust the lies that were given us into this conflict, people as a rule do no longer prefer to make certain the infantrymen bypass without needed resources. The in all probability effect is that the President will proceed to ignore almost all of u . s . of america's those who prefer to deliver our troops domicile.

Answer 3

The attack on Iraq was unprovoked from the stand point of Iraq being an immanent threat against national security even though it was billed as such. The jehaudists could have not produced better evidence for their cause than the Neo Cons blunder into this comedy of errors.
The present debate is a shot across the bow, the administration is going to ignore it, IMO violence in the slums of Baghdad will increase as a result of both the legislatures withdrawl of support for escalation and insurgent reaction to US escalation on it's own right, It’s a road to nowhere but blood and destruction but it is a road of the Neo Cons own doing. One might speculate the resolution is simply a platform on which the politicians can safely sign off on the Executive folly in Iraq. Question is, as escalation leads to escalation will they dare thread the war on into Iran (China's foremost oil resource) figuring if they can get us in deep enough we will be forced to grasp at any straw to preserve Petro- luxury and thus support additional funding and perhaps re establish the draft as a foot note when and if the Dems find themselves in the white house and running out of meat to grind in the sausage machine of responsibility the Neo Cons made.

Answer 4

It is the effort of a new Congress to send a wake up call to the administration that says we don't want to get ugly, but we disapprove of what you're doping and what you plan to do. It tells our enemies that there are those in American government who will behave as rational adults in a decent manner, but the foolishness must stop or else...

Answer 5

it is now as stable as it will ever be, so let's bring the troops home.

Answer 6

because Congress is good at accomplishing nothing.