time to tell them to draw the line in the sand and only give Bush funding bills that come with a plan to get all american soldiers out of iraq within the next 12 months. Time for if Bush vetoes such funding bills to issue funds earmarked solely for the withdrawal of troops out of iraq...that way no one can lie and say they were abandoned in the battle field with no bullets---that is unless Bush chooses to abandon the soldiers in iraq with no bullets. In which case Bush will have to answer why he did not do the people's will, congress will and bring the troops home usinig the funds congress allocated, and why he allowed them to swing in the wind in Iraq with no bullets?
2007-09-13 02:31:59 · 11 answers · asked by ez f 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You have the right, as an American citizen, to contact your representatives and tell them anything you wish. I recommend a letter as opposed to a phone call, but it's your choice.
That said, all Americans do not agree with you, as evidenced by actions already taken by Congress.
Older Americans recall with horror the slaughter of the Cambodians after the US left the region and Congress defunded the war. We don't want that to happen in Iraq.
2007-09-13 02:38:38 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That's why George W. Bush is President and you're not!
We can't leave nearly 150,000 of our sons and daughters
in harm's way without supplies which funding bills provide.
I would more favor upgrading the personnel carriers and
other vehicles to make them safer for our troops...I feel
only the best for our military and spend what we need to
get the best.......That is what I will tell my senators that I
want....
2007-09-13 09:59:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Anyone who cuts off funding for preznit pissypants 'legacy' is going to get smeared as anti-american, anti-troops, pro-terrorism, and pro-defeat in iraq (whether or not that has any bearing on reality).
There is an important election coming up, and noone wants to be seen as weak on defense (even if cutting off funds to dubya's 1/2 trillion dollar quagmire in iraq would actually free up funds and troops to defend our borders, and actually fight terrorists worldwide, instead of giving them an infinite supply of recruits.
2007-09-13 09:45:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I completely understand your point. However, I do not agree with it. If you were there, how would you feel if your government were to pull out funding that could and would save your life? It is not fair to use the soldiers lives as a bargaining tool. We need to think about them, not just ourselves and our pocketbook. There are other ways to bring them home. Refusing them equipment is not the right option.
2007-09-13 09:41:06 · answer #4 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I have already done that several times and just recently I have done it again. They have listened unfortunately they are only 3 people and do not alone controll the Congress.
2007-09-13 09:59:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You are so far wrong, you are completely off the reservation. Cutting off funding is not an appropriate action. The Dems in Congress would not have the guts to do it, even if they believed it was the right course of action...which it is not.
2007-09-13 09:38:30 · answer #6 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No. It's time to tell them no more funding for their way too high salaries, their leather chairs, their mahogany desk, their pork spending, and all the money they just give to other countries every year.
2007-09-13 09:45:16 · answer #7 · answered by jim h 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It worked with the immigration bill.
2007-09-13 09:37:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I don't think so, but is it time for your parents to ask you what you did with all that money they gave you to get an education.
2007-09-13 09:39:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Good one .... leave the troops with no bullets. Jerk.
2007-09-13 09:42:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋