English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i am not from the states and i am trying to understand how it works. Does it mean they do not get paid, do not get supplies etc.

2007-04-11 05:48:56 · 4 answers · asked by Goosemoon 2 in Politics & Government Military

So if they do not pass it does that put the troops at risk

2007-04-11 06:04:20 · update #1

4 answers

If the Congress does not pass a funding bill that the president is willing to sign, the troops will run out of money for training, supplies, salary, etc.

Essentially, Congress has "the power of the purse" - the power to de-fund the war and force the troops to come home.

President Bush has the power to run the war, but if Congress refuses to fund it, he has no legal power to force them to.

Essentially, public opinion will shape what eventually happens - how the Congress will act.

I hope this was helpful. :)

2007-04-11 06:01:35 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1 0

As I understand, all the funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are supplemental. The funding for the general military expenditures are higher than they were when Bush took office by several tens of billions I believe, and separate from the supplemental I believe. Thank your lucky stars that GW is in office he saved the military from President Bubba's administration!!!! I'd have to know what defence bill you're refferring to to answer your Q directly though. Look that stuff all up!!! No the soldiers do get well-supplied, but more goes to the efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan (equipment deployed, etc.) than in other theatres (we have troops in Korea, for example, who will be funded under the std. expenditures for discretionary DOD spending budget). Look up the website at the bottom I didn't have time to look at it myself. Yes, the troops are much better supplied than they were on 9-11. Not only have the supplemental Iraq-Afghanistan bills been passed in the past, the general military DOD budget has increased under Bush.

2007-04-11 13:05:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The president would have the ability to spend money that would have gone to other projects. Around July the military will truely run out of money. Then weapons, food and fuel will be scavaged and then the guys in Iraq would have to scavaged among the population.

2007-04-11 13:10:32 · answer #3 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 1 0

I think the bill is an amendment, I am probably wrong though. But an amendment changes the way the money is already being handled.

2007-04-11 12:58:11 · answer #4 · answered by eldude 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers