They cut off funds in Vietnam & want to bug out of iraq as well.
They passed the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974 cutting off funds for the war & now want to set a deadline for retrear in Iraq.
2007-04-24 05:54:02 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
TO GUITAR MAN. IT'S AN ALL VOLUNTEER ARMY. WHAT ARE YOU DOING ANSWERING ME INSTEAD OF SERVING THE COUNTRY? DON'T LIKE IT THAT I DON'T LIKE THE DEMS
THAT'S TOO BAD. MOVED OUT OF THE BASEMENT LONG AGO & I AM ENJOYING RETIREMENT FROM WORKING & SUPPORTING FAILED SOCIAL PROGRAMS.
2007-04-24 06:38:01 · update #1
Yes, and their disdain for the American military is quite evident as well.
2007-04-24 07:15:54 · answer #1 · answered by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Gosh.. you mean the way dems were in control for WW II? hmm.. bet you selectively forgot that bit of history... and how we support the war on terror... which Iraq is not a part of.. and that we want to get back after Bin Laden.. someone this administration "isn't very concerned with"... yup.. sure sounds like retreat and surrender to me *rolls eyes*
2007-04-24 06:00:29 · answer #2 · answered by pip 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Withdrawl from Vietnam had strong bipartisan support in Congress, and, was truly a waste of a war mismanaged by the military, and slaughtering 52,000 americans, and over 1 million vietnamese. A sad waste of lives for a cause that was utterly unjustified.
2007-04-24 06:03:14 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
on the prospect of being labeled "militia", i think of it incredibly is time for a third occasion 2012 President. That 410 billion Omnibus funds had 40% Rep beef and 60% Dem beef. i replaced into incredibly disillusioned with the Reps. in the event that they actually wanted to come again to their center values/concepts, there would not have been one ounce of Rep beef in that funds. it incredibly is obtrusive neither you are able to administration and self-discipline themselves fiscally. If a third occasion President replaced into on board and unswerving to the folk and not the occasion - i think of that would desire to convey some genuine and useful exchange.
2016-11-27 01:22:07 · answer #4 · answered by benedith 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
guess you've been hiding under a rock for the past few months. 2/3 of America want out of Iraqistan and we voted in a bunch of Democrats to get the job done because the Republican party was deaf. It's getting lonelier by the day at the President's side.
2007-04-24 06:04:34 · answer #5 · answered by Alan S 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hmmmm...now your party must be the party of retreat and surrender too since Gates just told the Iraqi no more screwing around or we're pulling out.I also believe he gave them a timetable.Hmmmm
2007-04-24 06:11:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
They aren't a surrender group. Congress (meaning the democrats as well) agreed to go to war. They are the turn coats that don't give damn what's good for anyone, just weaseling into power. They are the trendy kids that do whatever is cool at the time, and then bag groceries when they are thirty and bum money from hard working people.
2007-04-24 06:03:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Since they were voted into office by Americans to end the war, I guess the majority of Americans also favor retreat and surrender, as you put it.
2007-04-24 06:01:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
The flag currently above the DNC Headquarters has gone from the American Flag to the Surrender Flag.
2007-04-24 06:01:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I'm beginning to think that. The poster 2 down from you is part of the problem.
2007-04-24 05:58:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋