I thought Bush was ready to "Stand down" when Iraqis could "Stand Up" ? So did he already know that we would ?

Question

>>>>be there regardless?

Liberals Relent on Iraq War Funding
House Likely to Pass Bill With Pullout Date
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 23, 2007; A01

Liberal opposition to a $124 billion war spending bill broke last night, when leaders of the antiwar Out of Iraq Caucus pledged to Democratic leaders that they will not block the measure, which sets timelines for bringing U.S. troops home.

The acquiescence of the liberals probably means that the House will pass a binding measure today that, for the first time, would establish tough readiness standards for the deployment of combat forces and an Aug. 31, 2008, deadline for their removal from Iraq.
A Senate committee also passed a spending bill yesterday setting a goal of bringing troops home within a year. The developments mark congressional Democrats' first real progress in putting legislative pressure on President Bush to withdraw U.S. forces.

---------------
One would think he'd be glad for a deadline. After all, it would bring the troops home earlier.
Oh. but of course. The long range plan of course, was that the troops would remain there indefinitely to begin with, wasn't it.

EVERYONE IN THE WORLD DOES NOT - REPEAT -- DOES NOT WANT A WESTERNIZED DEMOCRACY OR LIBERTY . EVERYONE IN THE WORLD IS NOT JEALOUS OF THE UNITED STATES. EVERYONE IN THE WORLD IS NOT BEHOLDEN TO THE WISHES OF GEORGE W. BUSH!

GOT THAT.!!

Answer 1

Bush has NO idea how to be Commander-in-Chief.

He can't strategize, can't lead, and is famously dense. He even said if only Laura and his dog Barney were behind him he still would continue on in Iraq.

I guess Bush doesn't care what our GENERALS think, if he's that stupid and stubborn.

We all pretty much know how Bush will do down in history:
A complete failure, a total loser.

Answer 2

No, that was and is not the "long range goal". It has been stated over and over and over and over.

That you have so little understanding of the goal makes it clear that you are not bothering to listen.

I can't think of a more seditious act than for the congress to try to usurp the powers of the Commander in Chief through budget cuts. It emboldens the enemy and will cost US lives both in Iraq and here at home eventually.

I DO NOT want our military over there one second longer that is absolutely necessary to ensure that what we have worked so hard to achieve will be able to maintain itself indefinitely.

Conversely, I do not want our men to come home before that result is assured.

This war is not about politics and budget. It is about fighting against islamic fascist where and as necessary. That one focus is in Iraq is but part of the whole picture.

I am ashamed of democrat (and rebublican) efforts to undercut the President in executing this war. They dishonor the sacrifice of men and families who have died for the concept of freedom in the world.

We are a world power, perhaps the only one at this time. If we don't act like a world power to foster, support and yes even die for freedom and liberty around the world, then who will? France? Germany? England? Canada? China? Japan? Mexico? Sweeden? Italy?

Name one that will stand up for freedom and liberty of people in this world. Name one!

So while everyone is hooting and hollaring about cutting funding and focusing on pulling out of Iraq, some of you watch and listen closely.

If we pull out prematurely before Iraq can defend and police itself you will find that the enemy will have been emboldened, will expand their influence and control in the area and that the people of Iraq will suffer not to mention here in America, people will suffer in numbers that make our military losses seem like nothing.

Answer 3

Frankly, I doubt any of the Bush Administration were intelligent enough to predict the fiasco that is Iraq.

Answer 4

God forbid there would be a plan in place regarding Iraq.

Answer 5

Yeah, that is part of the conservative exodus program from the Republican party. "Imposing liberal democracy on the middle east is not conservative, it is Jacobin." Something like that.

Answer 6

Do you think mindless leftists will continue to pose questions that are irrelevant and feature impossible scenarios?