http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070308/ap_on_go_co/democrats_iraq
2007-03-08 11:59:19 · 21 answers · asked by BAARAAACK 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That's the only plan they have ever come up with....just sugar coat it some, make it look different.
Here's your white flag
2007-03-08 12:05:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Iraq war should no longer be a partisan issue. Most of the violence in Iraq is between the Iraqi's themselves. The Bush administration set the benchmarks for the Iraq government to meet and also said there would be serious consequences if they did not meet them. Congress is behind him on that and plans to hold him to his word. Congress is also being generous with the funding, taking care of veterans, and the needs of the troops with more money than the president asked for.
If time limits are not set, Iraq will not push to meet these benchmarks. If we do not set dates, this could continue endlessly. Let me rephrase that. This could continue until China decides to cut off the funds and the U.S. is officially bankrupt. That is what happened to the USSR in the war with Afghanistan. They were there for years until they went broke and their nation collapsed. This is exactly what the terrorists are hoping will happen to us. They can't actually win a war with us, they will just wear us down until we have nothing left if we let them.
What do we gain by "winning" a war and losing our country in the process. Ultimately, Iraq is the only one who can fix Iraq.
2007-03-08 23:46:28 · answer #2 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sure glad those boneheads aren't in charge of the security in this country ! I'm friggin serious ! These whiny liberals best stand in the back or they will get bowled over by some pretty angry Americam citizens who believe that security, at all costs, comes first in this country !
Damn these people who think they will be allowed to disgrace this country like we were in Vietnam ! This situation is completely different from Vietnam. We have an enemy out there that truly means us harm, and no goddamn democrat will allowed to pull down our defenses, so this (9/11) can happen again.
2007-03-08 20:10:01 · answer #3 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You mean, Congress following the mandate given by their constituents, and actually doing what the people who elected them wanted them to do? There's got to be a first time for everything.
Or do you mean Congress exercising their constitutional authority to decide when war is declared and to control how much money is allocated to the military?
I find it amusing that the phrase "cut and run" is used for anything less than a permanent allocation of US military resources to police a decade's long civil war. But then again, if you can't argue a point on the merits, at least come up with a catch phrase to hit people's emotional buttons.
2007-03-08 20:04:52 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
I believe thwe president's plan is to stall this little fiasco of a war until his tenure is over and let the next person in power figure a way out.
The Dems are trying to force the issue in a very lame way.
If they had any BALLS at all they would demand a strategy for pull out now , not late next year. Our boys are getting their asses handed to them, they are inadequately supplied, have no medical when injured, no money to send home and Bush keeps cutting Military bennies while he asks for more money to support his war.
If you support the troops, send them home!
2007-03-08 20:06:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you consider occupying Iraq for over 6 years "cutting and running" I think you should really learn the definition of what it is to cut and run.
2007-03-08 20:03:06 · answer #6 · answered by wisdomforfools 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i believe we need to start to put more pressure on the Iraq's to stabilize their own country, I don' t think setting predetermined date is feesable. Nobody can forsee the furture enought to know all that can happen in that amount of time. If we have dates they need to be flexible enough to adjust to the changes that we will no doubt run into.....
2007-03-08 20:03:31 · answer #7 · answered by cyborg_2099 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think we should call in several AC 130 gunships and give em a taste of what their jihadist brothers got in the video link attached.
2007-03-08 20:04:49 · answer #8 · answered by mr_methane_gasman 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sounds great. If the Iraqi's wanna kill each other, let them. What is it to you? We can take care of any al qeuda camps as they crop up. Personally I am tired of being the nanny for Iraq.
2007-03-08 20:03:33 · answer #9 · answered by beren 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It looks like Bush plans to cut the funds out from under the troops. You would think that the president would support the troops but no he has his own agenda.
2007-03-08 20:02:43 · answer #10 · answered by Its Hero Dictatorship 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋