They whine and complain about the Iraq War all the time. Their own Senate leader is saying the war is lost and Queen Pelosi is kissing the feet of Syria's leader. With all this hate and complaing about the war, why don't they defund the war? Their is enough money in the pipeline now to bring the troops home. The liberals simply have to defund it but they don't. Would anyone like to give me an answer that doesn't blame Bush or the Republicans? It WAS Bush's War, but now it is in the hands of Congress. If they hate they war, bring the troops home. Don't give many any crap about how it is not that easy either. We didn't have a problem passing a resolution going to war. Spin away libs.
2007-04-26 16:47:30 · 8 answers · asked by Billy 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Unfortunately they will defund it, its just going to take them time to make it look like it Bushs fault. I dont think theyre going to draft a defense bill that is not without a withdrawl timetable. Bush will never sign on to it, therefore they will try to make it look like he defunded it. They are already making statements consistant with that action.
The Q is, are the American people going to stand for that nonsense? Sorry libs, but if you vote to go to war, you see the damn thing through, not play politcal games and pin the tail of blame on the president.
2007-04-26 17:09:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
That's exactly what they're trying to do. The war power is broken into two basic parts. The president is commander in chief(makes war decisions). The congress is responsible for funding of wars. Get it?
No funding, no money for war.
That's the strategy for the congress. They're trying to force the commander in chief to stop the war by cutting off funding.
The president however still have power to make war decisions so he is saying 'I'll keep troops in Iraq no matter what. And if congress don't fund it, shame on them.'
That's the president's position. Only he can order troops home.
The congress can't order troops home because the president is commander in chief. The congress can only force it indirectly by cutting off funding.
There's no spin here. You just don't understand how things work.
2007-04-27 00:32:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you just defund and Bush keeps the troops there what would happened to the troops? Remember people in government are not godly figures and their job is to represent the will of the people from their districts so if the people want to go to war then they have to bring that will to Washington and if the people decide it is time to stop the occupation then it is the Representatives job to bring that change to Washington and if the president veto`s he or she is deifying the American people`s will.
2007-04-26 23:58:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It really is very simply. Congress can pass resolutions and create laws but the President is empowered with the VETO. As it stands currently the Dems do not have the votes to overturn the inevitable veto so no they CANNOT just bring the troops home.
2007-04-26 23:51:05 · answer #4 · answered by Who cares 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why did you call Nancy Pelosi a queen? She's not a queen. Do you have problems with women in positions of authority? Delay was way more manipulative of the Republican ranks than she is of the Democratic ranks.
And she never kissed the feet of Syria's leader.
2007-04-26 23:51:53 · answer #5 · answered by I'll Take That One! 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
They're waiting to see which way the political wind is blowing -- just as they were doing when they funded and supported it originally... Clinton, Kerry, et al.
You're right. They could end the war tomorrow. But that would take courage and adherence to principles. A commodity not in abundance in Washington today. It's the next election that matters now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just pick this one again?
Or try this.
They know that cutting funding will not solve the problem. Some people can see past Fox news talking points. They are putting the US military in a position to eventually leave Iraq. Something the war architects do not want.
What is your reason for wanting the US military to stay in Iraq permanently? I can assure you it is far different than those who put us there to begin with. How is construction going on those permanent military bases going by the way?
Also, it seems President Bush will be de-funding the war with his veto.
2007-04-26 23:54:06 · answer #6 · answered by Think 1st 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
will you con cowards stop playing this horrid game of political chicken with the troops in the middle.
find something else to feel good about.
americans care about the troops and detest our president.
and there isn't a thing in the world you can do to change that...
2007-04-26 23:53:33 · answer #7 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
do conservatives know how the government works?
take a civics class... please...
read the first answer if you're confused...
why are facts "spin" to conservatives? is this satire or are you serious?
2007-04-26 23:55:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋