Congress is trying to send the President a message. The spending bill by itself can't bring back troops, only the President can do that. What the spending bill can do is cut off the funds. It seems to me, being right or wrong is something each person decides. The real question is "is congress acting on behalf of the people". Recent polls would indicate that most people want the war ended. I would hope that if funds are cut off, and the President will not bring the troops home, we the people do not tolerate stranding our young men and women half a world away.
2007-03-28 02:27:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by John B 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Congress (the Democrats supporting deadlines) is in the wrong. I don't understand how anyone can put a "deadline" on war. It just doesn't work like that. You can't throw out an amorphous date and expect everybody to be happy and nice and all the fighting to be done by then. Why do you think World War II ended? Not because we told Japan, "okay now, I think we should stop fighting in a few months," but because we -kept- fighting and dropped the a-bombs.
Edit: laughingman: it hasn't been 5 yrs going on 6, it's been 4 years going on 5. 2007-2003 = 4. We are in the 5th year. Please get your math right. Thank you.
Not only is Congress in the wrong for putting limits on war, they are in the wrong for setting a goal for the enemy to "hold out" on. The terrorists just need to wait for a year and half, then they can set up their rule of Islamic oppression. Do we really want that? We came in there to kick Saddam's butt out of Iraq, so people would be free of suffering. We don't want the Iraqis to go back to suffering.
2007-03-28 01:49:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
My opinion is that you shouldn't put a deadline on war. You should finish what you start. If this deadline passes, the insurgents will lie in wait for the troop withdrawal and then most likely double their terror. The only reason this bill is full of pork is because they wouldn't have been able to get it to pass otherwise.
2007-03-28 01:44:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Yes. It's the only way that they can have any leverage on the president. Afterall, we DO NOT live in a dictatorship country and we shouldn't be following one person's actions, just because he thinks it's the best way to go. Bush was elected to lead America, but to act on the best interest of the people. If the people believe (the majority) that change is necessary, he should follow their request. If he has solid, rock hard proof why we should be in Iraq, then he should state his case, with supporting documentation, not just use heresay and "could be" or "might happen" type of statements. That is what he used to get us in this war anyway. A simple solution would be to move the white house to any area that the president believes we should be at war with. That would surely put a stop to it, if he had to live in Baghdad for example.
2007-03-28 01:50:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by auditor4u2007 5
·
0⤊
3⤋
finally getting it right. I though the lessons we learned in Vietnam were not to send American troops anywhere without clear cut objectives and an exit strategy. We never had either for Iraq, just a lot of chest beating and flag waving: rhetoric, no proof.
2007-03-28 02:14:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by guy o 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Amy----glad you asked because I need to get this off my chest-----------like it or not--------there is a quest for global dominance--------and jihad has been declared against the free world.
We cannot blame President Bush for this since it was already under way before he took office------it is a tough situation and if we do not face the facts then we could lose-----we must not let this happen.
2007-03-28 02:24:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by EZMZ 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Do you understand how the spending bill works?
They wish to incrimently cut off funding for training, supplies, and equipment to the armed forces. They know and hope that this will cause great U.S. casualties giving the commanders no choice but to withdraw.
THEY ARE USING SOLDIRES AS PAWNS.
2007-03-28 01:47:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Voice of Liberty 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
They are totally wrong. Using our Troops as pawns is never just.
2007-03-28 01:45:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by RUSH MAKES OBAMA CRY !! A LOT !! 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think they are dead wrong. Possibly millions will die because of it.
Self-centered is making our troops suffer while Congress plays politics.
2007-03-28 01:43:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
ITS BEEN 5 years going on 6. STOP DUMPING MONEY. NO MORE BLANK CHECKS. You got to draw the line somewhere...somewhere the Iraqis got to take responsibilities for themselves or does the American Public have to give the IRAQIs a blank check. Its like Welfare on the Global Sense. At least Europeans and Japanese got on their feet as a sense of honor and self respect. Time for them to ACT right and join the Civilized World.
2007-03-28 01:47:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Laughing Man Copycat 5
·
0⤊
4⤋