Instead of us going after Bin Laden and actually getting the ones who attacked us on 9-11, Bush would cut off funding and leave us in Iraq dodging civil war bullets so we cant re-deploy to catch the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11
2007-04-01 12:42:33 · 22 answers · asked by Shoe 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Not surprised. He wants to veto the bill because it includes accountability for the Iraqi government wherein a deadline for them to get their act together.
Common sense tells anyone who has run a project that you set milestones and deadlines.
He wants an open ended war where he has to be accountable to no one and no timetable for this travesty to end..
He could not care less about the "pork" that was included considering he had not met a " pork laden "spending bill he had not liked. It is just the deadline and oversight and a need to explain how the money he is spending is being spent that is his problem.
Lack of oversight has resulted in at least $9 billion unaccounted for. This is way too much. He needs to tell us his employers what he is doing with the money.
2007-04-01 12:54:24 · answer #1 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋
I think the political point making is coming from Ms. Pelosi and company, don't you? President Bush said long ago he would veto the bill if they sent it to him in that form. They are sending it anyway instead of trying to get a good bill he can sign.
Everybody wants out of this mess. So why not quit horsing around, fund the thing, get it done, and get our folks home as soon as possible without pulling out too early and creating a vacuum that we will regret for generations to come?
Should we have gone? Is it justified? Who's war is it?
Hindsight is always 20/20. But nearly everyone supported this thing at the start. They all voted for it!
Lets stop thinking Democrat and Republican and start thinking American! What do you say?
2007-04-01 19:57:52 · answer #2 · answered by AK 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
If you were a soldier, you would know that your enemies in this country are NOT in the White House, but in the democrat-controlled congress which is using this bill to give your enemies in Iraq a date certain for your surrender.
If you were a soldier, you'd know that a war is fought on many fronts, and your assignment in Iraq is just as important as the one in Afghanistan, the Philippines, or wherever Islamic Fascism raises its ugly head.
Instead, you are part of the fifth column in this country who attempts to hide its contempt for our military and its mission with words like "re-deploy" and "going after Bin Laden."
Bin Laden appears in many forms, not the least of which is the group of appeasers who haven't the stomach to confront evil in our time, perpetuating it in the process.
2007-04-01 20:33:39 · answer #3 · answered by cop4amendment2 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes he should go ahead and vote for guarding peanuts. 74 million dollars of tax payers dollars to watch the little devils so they don't run away. Plus a hefty pay raise for Congress and travel expenses for them too all from tax payers pockets. Yes Yes OH Yes please vote for this, they want to raise taxes so that someone on the low end of income has their taxes raised over a 1,000.00 a year. Sounds good to me to. Get real.
2007-04-01 19:50:55 · answer #4 · answered by grandma 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No sane person at least. Bush will do anything to make a political point. It is pathetic and shameless that he is playing with troops lives just because he is essentially having a temper tantrum over being told to get the troops out of Iraq.
God forbid he does what the American people want, then again he never has so why should he start now.
2007-04-01 19:46:49 · answer #5 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 5⤊ 6⤋
I'm not. He promised to veto a bill to would take away the ability of a soldier to defend himself and put command of the war in the hands of congressional idiots instead of field commanders.
He's already told the congress to send him the bill with the funding alone and he'll sign it.
2007-04-01 19:48:15 · answer #6 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 4⤊ 5⤋
I don't believe your in or have ever been in the military. Bush is not cutting funding to our war effort It's the libs....or democrats
2007-04-01 19:49:16 · answer #7 · answered by 1st Buzie 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Get of the merry go round spin kid.
2007-04-01 19:54:28 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
He is doing the majority of the republican party a great disservice, not to mention America and Iraq.
2007-04-01 19:46:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋
If you were a soldier and if you were in Iraq you would know the answer to your question!~!
2007-04-01 19:48:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋