Democrat Senators want to withhold funds for housing and feeding the troops in Iraq?

Question

until President Bush changes his policy on Iraq.
You may not agree with the war, but do you agree with using our soldiers as pawns?

Seen on Fox News this Morning as stater by Senator Jon Kyl
http://www.foxnews.com

Bob: That's interesting. You are saying the senator would say something different, like on CNN?

Answer 1

That there way of supporting the troops>Like there way they voted to go to Iraq>When the going gets tuff the tuff get going
so they Dem's left>>What else is new>>Open borders & Amnesty for all>Free everything>There using the USA & citizens for pawns>Our troops are doing a great job & will win retreat & defeat is not a solution>>

Answer 2

Bush vows to veto a bill to set a deadline for troops leaving Iraq which would in turn deny funding to the same troops. Is this supposed to be a comfort to the troops? A bill ladened with pork to entice others to vote in favor of it. Is this supposed to be a comfort to the anti-war citizens? How about the citizens who detest pork? Each side seems so determine to appeal to their bases that it is getting almost comical...i mean scary. What is scarier is this is the group of individuals that the citizens of the United States of America voted to have as representatives. This is too much.

Answer 3

Per the Constitution, congress holds the purse strings of the military.

They can choose to either fund it or not fund it, period.

They can complain and criticize all they want, but they have no authority to do anything about the military other than control the funding.

Edit - If congress exercises their constitutional authority to cut the funding, it is up to the commander in chief (president) to either remove the troops from the war or keep them there and have no funding for the troops.

Right or wrong, that is how our founding fathers wrote the rules.

Answer 4

I dunno...it seems that using our troopers as mercenaries for the Oil Mafia is the center of the problem. Give it a think. Had we spent all of those billions of borrowed dollars on building up a 'less oil' infrastructure instead of sending in troops to perpetuate the Bush Junta's 'Oil Only' energy policy a lot of people would still be alive and Saddam and company would either be gone any way or still in their tight little box. Also, our 'troops' currently have everything they need and more and nobody is going to pull the financial plug and strand them in desert. I've heard some of the right wing radio bozos screeching about that but don't they always? Before any funds are withdrawn there will be plenty of lead time to get out of Dodge....and beside that, there's a growing platoon of Republicans that are also against continuing this absurd occupation of Iraq. Even they know they've been suckered as do 2/3 of the american public. Give it a think!

Answer 5

I love how they say "why aren't you serving" and all that other nonsense when most of them have probably never even considered enlisting in the military. I support our military and I know most of them don't want to leave until the job is done. I may not serve in the military but my husband does and I stand by him and support him. He volunteered for his current tour in Iraq, imagine that Democrats, people actually volunteer to go to Iraq.

Answer 6

I wouldn't be surprised if they proposed kicking families out of ON BASE housing if it would further the liberal agenda. Yeah right, a Democrat says "we support the troops", what they mean is, we want to score a lot of points off Bush and we don't give a rat's backside who gets hurt in the process. After all, supporting the troops just means "RA RA CIS BOOM BAH GOOOOOO Troops!", not actually paying to feed, house, and clothe them. Don't forget, Democrats tend to live outside reality.

Answer 7

Dems will do or say anything to further their agenda. That includes withholding essentials from our troops, or selling out their own mothers!

Answer 8

The American people elected a democratic majority to congress largely because the American people do not support this war any longer. September was the first month in over a year that saw a decline in civilian deaths, and we are supposed to credit the surge, but there is no corrolative evidence that one has anything to do with the other. The purpose of the surge was to help the Iraqi government meet the benchmarks. That hasn't happened, and it isn't likely to happen.

According to the 20 member independent panel led by retired Marine Gen. James Jones several weeks ago, the surge is hurting the mission. He recommended that "significant reductions, consolidations and realignments would appear to be possible and prudent." Said Jones, "The force footprint should be adjusted in our view to represent an expeditionary capability and to combat a permanent-force image of today's presence."

By with-holding funding, the democrats hope Bush will be forced to either do the right thing and begin the draw-down in earnest - or he can continue placing soldiers in harms way without funding. If he chooses the latter, it's on him - not the dems.

BTW, the GOP was singing a different tune last year. I remember seeing McCain actually suggest with-holding funding as a means to force the president's hand then. Stop watching FoxNews if you actually want to be informed.

Answer 9

I am a cheerleading coach. One of my former girls Danielle is serving in Iraq right now.
We just had a collection to send her battalion food and personal hygiene items BECAUSE - they get one GOOD meal a day if they're lucky. If they don't have enough food they ration them to 1 meal a day. We sent 15 boxes of stuff and with 40 people in their unit it won't last long.

FYI - OUR SELFLESS TROOPS asked for toys for the Iraqi children instead of more stuff for themselves. They said it makes the kids happy in a war zone and that in turn makes them happy. GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!

Answer 10

THAT'S ALL THE DEMOCRATS KNOW HOW TO DO. IT SEEMS THAT THE LEFT HAS PROBLEMS WITH FOX NEWS SINCE IT COVERS THE REPUBLICANS MORE FAIRLY THAN THE OTHER NETWORKS. AS FOR THE BUSH TWINS SERVING IN IRAQ. I DON'T SEE THE SPAWN OF ANY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP THERE EITHER. LAST I LOOKED CHELSEA CLINTON IS ELIGIBLE FOR SERVICE.