President Bush vetoed the troop withdrawal bill today. Yet in your opinion who do you think is right, should there be a fast withdrawal of troops. Or a more gradual one. Is there a right choice or will any plan that people come up with cause more chaos.
2007-05-01 11:25:14 · 20 answers · asked by Lisa B 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The Congress. Apparently the American people think so also as I seem to recall they took over both houses in the last election.
2007-05-01 11:33:28 · answer #1 · answered by lcmcpa 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
Bush has the power to control the Military The Houses have the power of the purse.
Bush asked for funding, the Houses have asked him to surrender some of his power, this will set a dangerous trend wreaking the Presidents, as well as future Presidents power.
If the Houses are that against the Military being there they , have the power to withhold all money forcing the Presidents hand.
The way they have chosen to go is to, is wrong, they seek power and have padded the bill with pork spending.
This Bill has embolden the enemies knowing we are split and More American and Iraqis will DIE.
2007-05-01 11:41:06 · answer #2 · answered by tom 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Lisa,if you need to ask this question ,then you probably have no opinion or have no clue that we are in ww3.Pres. Bush tried to fight a politically correct war.We should have used the scorched earth policy of ww2. You go in kill all resistance ,then tell the survivors what the program will be.No negotiations,no bullshit,follow the rules or die.It has worked since year 1(like the beginning of time for u libs).Today we have lost our balls as a nation.
2007-05-01 11:56:33 · answer #3 · answered by dumbuster 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Neither. I think we should withdraw most of our troops, but it should be slow, and with not timeline. Putting a timeline on it is pointless. I think it should be vetoed. This bill had so much pork in it, and like it or not, the president is commander in cheif of the armed servies, it is ulitmately the presidents decision. We will have a new president in Jan of '09 and they can decide what they want to do.
2007-05-01 11:32:59 · answer #4 · answered by Angelus2007 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I would have to go with the President. I think that Dem's just wanted to avoid the war in the next election. So set a time table to get out before the next election so you can try a take credit for getting out of the war. With a time frame then you set up a good chance to have to return to the area if 10 to 15 years because it went back to a big pot of s**t.
2007-05-01 11:56:02 · answer #5 · answered by aldistrict7colorado 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
neither. i don't think that people sitting high and mighty in washington should have such a big say in what goes on in war. i think that general petreaus is right. whatever he says goes, since he's the commander of all american troops in iraq. i think both parties are wrong because they're both putting an obstacle between the troops and the money they need to survive over there. they should be ashamed.
2007-05-01 15:16:19 · answer #6 · answered by Julie N 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Founding Fathers foresaw that in a state of war decisions could not be made by committee, they gave the direction of the war into the hands of the President, the Congress is wrong for even trying to usurp that principle. Moreover the increasing desperation of the insurgence in Iraq, its frantic actions over the last month, reflect a very real fear of losing. As a soldier I know I feel it, they hate to fight, they hate to be brought to battle and they do not have that many willing suicide bombers or large numbers to waste, yet their losses have been huge and intel has been taken that is sure to increase those, while they waste bombers like they have no end of them just to create that impression. Soft target suicide attacks have a single purpose, to create headlines and body count. They have no military significance other then buying time on CNN to weaken our resolve. We are not losing, they are in a state of desperate flailing and we are relentlessly hunting them down. That is the reality of the situation on the ground. Let the military handle the fight.
2007-05-01 11:38:01 · answer #7 · answered by pechorin1 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
President Bush is right to not give in to the Democrats seditious attempt at giving aid and comfort to the enemy. There should be a speedy withdrawal...only when the commanders feel that the Iraqis can defend themselves and not one second sooner.
2007-05-01 11:31:02 · answer #8 · answered by MrCrowther 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I do not believe he has vetoed it yet but he will.
As a military Mom, I agree with the President. His plan has not changed, the war is just lasting longer than anticipated.
What kind of war or even fight can you tell people when you are quiting? That is the worst strategy I have ever heard of.
2007-05-01 11:36:09 · answer #9 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
President.
2007-05-01 11:27:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
I think the President is right. It doesn't look like congress sees the very pontential risks that we would be taking by pulling out before Iraq is ready.
2007-05-02 06:01:36 · answer #11 · answered by Blue 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋