ONLY ONE THING WILL END THE WAR- Cutting Funding-- So Why Won't the Mandated Dems Do It?

Question

Wasn't that their platform. Don't tell me they lied?

Answer 1

If they cut funding while our troops are in harms way, the dems are sunk. People will use dogs to hunt down the ones who get away.

Answer 2

The Democratic Party did not have an official platform in 2006. Many individual Democratic candidates pledged to bring the war to the end, but that is different. Many other Democratic candidates expressed their opposition to the war but they did not pledge to end it right away. A few Democrats (such as Senator Joe Lieberman) have publicly expressed their support for Bush's war.

Given the lack of consensus on how to end the war (and if immediate withdrawal of American troops would be in our best interest, the Democratic leadership chose to pass legislation that would bring an eventual end to the war, while protecting American troops already committed.

No one thinks the bills passed by the House and the Senate are ideal, and many progressives, both in and out of Congress, agree with you. However, in the end, several of the most severe critics of the war decided to allow this vote to go through, knowing they could never get Congress to agree to cut off funds immediately.

No, this is not betrayal by the Democratic Party. Instead, it is a very necessary first step to ending the war that the President insists must continue. We have to keep the pressure on both the Congress and the White House. Hopefully, a solution can be found prior to the 2008 elections.

Answer 3

What "mandate"? examine the information; Democrats are elected via fact they're liberals; the media is controlled via liberals. that's a ask your self whether all and sundry is ever elected who's on the area of Americanism. Clinton actually wasn't: he replaced into against conflict to the factor of being a draft dodger (yet he sent our troops into harms course extra circumstances than the different President). study the form: the President has the means of the veto. additionally, the President is the Commander-in-chief: he's the actually head of the army. The conflict WILL linger: do you elect for it over there, or right here in our streets?

Answer 4

Dear Joe taxpayer, why are you writing to the anonymous mass instead of to the very Dems you condemn? = If you leave them swinging by the purse strings, they may not sway in your direction all the way.
So, assume that responsibility and let these well paid decision makers know how strongly you want to end the war and to get on with repairing the leaky roof on the rotunda.
I know! no one had noticed that the American backyard is full of weeds and the facade is crumbling too. Tell the ones in charge of this democracy thing that they need to attend to the foundation, quit funding dangerous war games and start restoring the old home.
The rest of the world may respect you for it and some may also trust you. That is real people power.

Answer 5

I want you to work hard on this. Pull you head out of you a$$. The government does not work on real money. There is only one way to stop a war WIN IT. Either we win or we loose. If we leave without winning then we loose which will make the situation over there worse then it is. If we stay with the way things are we will be there forever it seems. We need to go at this war like we did WWII. If your going to fight you use all your power to end it quickly. Problem is that there are way to many COWARDS in office and in the public to let our troops do what needs to be done.

Pull the funding. All that does is destroy moral in our troops and make things hard for them. I know I was in the military when Clinton kept cutting our funding. The things we had to do to make things work we unbeliveable. We had 11 aircraft in our squadron. at the low point we had 5 that would fly and 2 that were battle ready. the other were parts birds. We had to work 200% harder to keep what we had then we ever should have but you know what. We still had to do the job. Cutting funding will crush the troops and make them weak but they will not leave the war. Cutting funding will cost us dearly we will loose troops faster than ever before becasue the equipment they have to work with will not be in top working order.

Cut funding = Troops getting killed for no reason other than there is nothing but COWARDS making noise here in the states soing what they think they need to do to get elected.

Grow a sack, Get some ball$, Cowboy up, Pull your head from that warm smelly place you sit on and support getting the job done by whatever means neccary!!!!

Stop the war by having the guts to win it!!!
Yes that means people have to die, even children in some cases. Look at what we did in Japan, we bombed a city with a Nuke. We had strong Americans in the states that understood that winning meant killing anything and everything if need be to win.

Stop being a bunch of panty waste sissys and get behind the idea that winning at all costs is the only way to finish this!!!

Answer 6

Cutting funding to the troops is political suicide.

The Dem's are going to scream, whine and threaten but in the end they are going to fold because if one soldier is killed over the Congress not funding them or the supplies they need .........the media will crucify them and the voters will never forget.

The media feeds on bad news and the Congress knows it. So the Democrats are going to blink instead of losing their new found power.

Answer 7

Cutting funds will end the war there and bring it back home. Dems trying to protect there own political power committed to defeat.Pull your head out of your *** and do whats really right for this country.America doesn't lose.

Answer 8

First, they can't beat a veto. They had to add tons of pork to get a simple majority. Overriding a veto requires two-thirds.

Second, they won't. If a Dem gets in the Presidency in '08, which I think will happen, all that "end the war" talk will die a sudden death.

However, there is one thing, and only one thing, that will end the war. Kill all the Islamic Arab insurgents- that't about half of all Arabs.
-

Answer 9

I think when you talk about cutting funding - would that actually bring the troops home or would some rep or senator get less pork in their offices? It may have been part of their platform, but it doesn't always mean what we think it means - a platform is different than a law; a platform is a "proposal" whereas a law is introduced, debated, and passed, then signed into law by the president. Do you think Bush would sign any bill that would force troops to come home?? Well, as far as I can see, he wants to kill more of our young and patriotic men and women - not bring them home from an unpopular war!

Answer 10

Cutting funding doesn't end the war, it only leaves our troops ill protected from attacks.