[merloermfgj]

Their next action is supposed to be no later than Tuesday when they will introduce a bill to stop the funding of the surge and limit the scope of funds in general.

In the bill it will call for a "redeployment of troops" (IE Surrender and leave) to begin no later than June.

Al Quaeda and Iran are sitting back right now, telling their men that all they need to do is to hide and wait. They have won.

It doesn't matter how few are left, what supplies they have, what influence they carry.

The "message" is to our enemies.

And it says: "You win. We will leave shortly."

[LesLattis]

The "message" is to our enemies.

And it says: "You win. We will leave shortly."

It's strange how black and white the pundits of the war make it out to be.

Our presence in Iraq is not about winning or losing since neither have been defined. It's Bush's hollow rhetoric about "Victory" without telling us what victory would mean that has set us up for failure.

We went into Iraq under false pretenses, but we did take out Saddam which is not a bad thing. The problem is that the administration naively assumed that the Iraqis would pick themselves up by their bootstraps and create their own democracy. They had no plan B. Now we are in a mess without a real solution. So our choice is "lose now" or "lose later".

Sorry, but the realities of the way it's turned out mean that it's a no win situation. The perception that we are "losing" by withdrawing was created largely because of Bush's grandstanding predicting that we would prevail.

So we lost the Battle of Iraq... but there are no real winners in that battle anyway. It's not like we lose the War on Terror. I'm sure the War on Terror is still on full tilt. We just need to find a more effective way to wage it. The War on Terror is not a conventional war.

[merloermfgj]

Your thoughts and feelings (many being justified by past and current actions, I agree) do not change the message this sends to the enemies in Iraq...the Iranians and Al Queda.

"Hold out until June. We have won."

Thoughts and feelings don't change the message that has been sent.

[PypeMaypetasy]

this accomplished jack shit and is such a stupid move

the surge already happened

they only got 17 republicans to cross the line

so it looks as it has since 03

partisan bullshit by people who really need this war to fail so they dont get egg on their faces


democrats have hoped , prodded, and spoken of quagemire failure for 4 years
this resolution is just one more statement

TROOPS WE DONT SUPPORT YOU

geuss what the troops have heard their voices

[LesLattis]

this accomplished jack shit and is such a stupid move

the surge already happened

they only got 17 republicans to cross the line

so it looks as it has since 03

partisan bullshit by people who really need this war to fail so they dont get egg on their faces


democrats have hoped , prodded, and spoken of quagemire failure for 4 years
this resolution is just one more statement

TROOPS WE DONT SUPPORT YOU

geuss what the troops have heard their voices

Well, the troops haven't failed us, this is a case of failed policy. So basically, the administration loses, America loses, and the troops fought valiently for a lost cause. Blame Bush for putting our troops in harms way without giving them a more clear objective than "secure the area". The war was excellent in our initial attack, but mismanaged ever since at all of our expenses.

BUSH WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU

is the message of the resolution.

[annouhMus]

OK, then why waste time and effort with this non-binding tripe?

Matt

For good bad or indifferent. Bush is the President and has the power to pull the plut, or No. Even of he would agree, it can not be an instantanious pull out, as was attempted in Nam. because of the even more disasterous effect on the Iraqis than would be if you gave them warning, and more time to prepare.

It is more reasonable to let him know that he is in deep dodo, and will be even deeper if he doesn't listen to reason. In short, give him a chance to reconsider his intended actions..

[ballingham]

Nothing demonstrates deep conviction like a non-binding resolution.

Seems kind of like the legislative equivalent of masturbation.

Matt

Translation:

"HAHAHA! YOU WANT TO STOP WAR BUT CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT! HAHAHA!"


Bravo Matt, bravo!

[Heliosprime]

Well, if I felt that the war was wrong and I didn’t want the surge to go forward I would want my leadership, to stop passing gas and actually do something concrete….like pulling the funding…its simple….move on your convictions ..this non binding nonsense is just cheap political cover that really isn’t any cover at all..its the congressional way of saying nya nya nya nya..


they want to be able to say; "hey we didn't pull funding from the troops see"? BUT they want to be able to say as well, "hey we tried to stop it and went on record as to our diffrences with the plan"...fine..thatill net them zero...


Let them stand up and do what they SAY they want to do..stop the war..pull the funding..its that simple.. Introduce an honest to god resolution to do so, lets go on the record in a binding vote…..reps and dems….don’t be cowards….just do it…I am wondering why dem and rep. anti war supporters aren’t pissed off…....well, know why and I think anyone who wants to be honet can see it,,,they are playing cheap theatrical politics.. no wonder congress's
approval ratingsare 10 point lower than bushs...*sigh*

[Heliosprime]

For good bad or indifferent. Bush is the President and has the power to pull the plut, or No. Even of he would agree, it can not be an instantanious pull out, as was attempted in Nam. because of the even more disasterous effect on the Iraqis than would be if you gave them warning, and more time to prepare.

It is more reasonable to let him know that he is in deep dodo, and will be even deeper if he doesn't listen to reason. In short, give him a chance to reconsider his intended actions..

they have done that donistan.Bush is going forward…period….the sniping is unnecessary and counter productive IF they are just going to crow about it and not take REAL action…

is there any question as too were they stand?

No theres not....we know who they feel..we have been inundated by how they feel….how abut something new..novel..like pelois saying; “we don't agree with the surge….but in the interests of trying one last attempt at victory, we are going to support it all we can....if successful all the better, if not, we'll Watergate this thing to hell and back..lets get on with it.” ...

and if it is successful? they are to be congratulated, ….they are covered and did their level best to help get us to victory...and can claim such....if its not successful, they can go ahead and do what they feel they have to do.....they lose nothing, but gain by at least appearing statesman like and non divisive regards our goals…it’s a win win..but looking at the democratic history ala McGovern and the dem machinations in that era. they will find themselves again, on the back end of history and another election…

[ballingham]

Well, if I felt that the war was wrong and I didn’t want the surge to go forward I would want my leadership, to stop passing gas and actually do something concrete….like pulling the funding…its simple….move on your convictions ..this non binding nonsense is just cheap political cover that really isn’t any cover at all..its the congressional way of saying nya nya nya nya..


they want to be able to say; "hey we didn't pull funding from the troops see"? BUT they want to be able to say as well, "hey we tried to stop it and went on record as to our diffrences with the plan"...fine..thatill net them zero...


Let them stand up and do what they SAY they want to do..stop the war..pull the funding..its that simple.. Introduce an honest to god resolution to do so, lets go on the record in a binding vote…..reps and dems….don’t be cowards….just do it…I am wondering why dem and rep. anti war supporters aren’t pissed off…....well, know why and I think anyone who wants to be honet can see it,,,they are playing cheap theatrical politics.. no wonder congress's
approval ratingsare 10 point lower than bushs...*sigh*

So why make them your enemy when it's apparent judging from your post that they are in collusion with the war effort?

Even Feingold, whom I do support because he is truly trying to stop the war, called out Democrats as well.

So are you angry that Democrats are down with war but just playing a game with the American people? It's what you said... so why are you mad? You're not indifferent to a rubber stamp congress vs. one that just plays the part that would garner the same results? Why?

[Heliosprime]

collusion ? how so?

well good for feingold, then why doesn't he introduce a bill pulling the funding?

did I personally allude to anger? I said IF I were an anti war person, I would be upset that my leadership won’t come right-out and take action in a meaningful and concrete manner….. that they are spinning their wheels instead of actually doing something meaningful.....


I am "mad" as its a waste.....and nets no one anything other than the T's who see the divisiveness and the troops who’s moral suffers......as I said IF the anti war crowd were to get on board for one more heave ho, this would play a lot differently …..my contention is, they are shooting themselves in the foot….we all can respect a man for his convictions…I do..in my eyes the are right or wrong isn’t necessarily the sine qua non that frames my feelings….I respect honest disagreement………its the games I hate….

the American public by and large suffers memory lapses when election time comes but this will be as it was before different….either put up, or shut up...they are playing a cheap theatrical game of nonsense....just do it..if thats how they feel and believe, then do it..I have more respect for Kennedy/Feingold right now than Pelosi by far… et al...at least he’s up front and hasn't played games ....but still adding to that HE should introduce a bill as well..BUT his dem leadership won't let him...there ya go...I wonder why?

[annouhMus]

they have done that donistan.Bush is going forward…period….the sniping is unnecessary and counter productive IF they are just going to crow about it and not take REAL action…

is there any question as too were they stand?

No theres not....we know who they feel..we have been inundated by how they feel….how abut something new..novel..like pelois saying; “we don't agree with the surge….but in the interests of trying one last attempt at victory, we are going to support it all we can....if successful all the better, if not, we'll Watergate this thing to hell and back..lets get on with it.” ...

and if it is successful? they are to be congratulated, ….they are covered and did their level best to help get us to victory...and can claim such....if its not successful, they can go ahead and do what they feel they have to do.....they lose nothing, but gain by at least appearing statesman like and non divisive regards our goals…it’s a win win..but looking at the democratic history ala McGovern and the dem machinations in that era. they will find themselves again, on the back end of history and another election…

A couple of weeks ago. Pelosi said they wouldn't cut the funding. Well, she can't and won't stick to that, first of all she doesn't have the only say in the matter, just the most vocal one. The ball is already rolling to change that conception, In a couple days you will see. Then Matts wish will come to fruitation.

[ballingham]

collusion ? how so?

well good for feingold, then why doesn't he introduce a bill pulling the funding?

did I personally allude to anger? I said IF I were an anti war person, I would be upset that my leadership won’t come right-out and take action in a meaningful and concrete manner….. that they are spinning their wheels instead of actually doing something meaningful.....

Now you're going into hysterics. First of all, discourse on the War in Iraq never saw the light of day with the rubberstamp Congress, okay? Now that we have a new Congress, these actions being taken are bring public discourse into the light of day.

You can't just hop, skip, and jump from elected into Congress and next day stopping a war. You are just being childish on this subject. Even a page in Congress knows that stopping a war without discourse would certainly backfire... duh! You don't think Democrats can predict Republicans screaming foul if they did that?

What they are doing is getting discourse on the subject so when they do move forward they will have the ability to say that they have heard all arguments on the subject and will proceed to move forward on ending the war. That takes ammunition away from the Republicans.


I am "mad" as its a waste.....and nets no one anything other than the T's who see the divisiveness and the troops who’s moral suffers......as I said IF the anti war crowd were to get on board for one more heave ho, this would play a lot differently …..my contention is, they are shooting themselves in the foot….we all can respect a man for his convictions…I do..in my eyes the are right or wrong isn’t necessarily the sine qua non that frames my feelings….I respect honest disagreement………its the games I hate…. Disingenuous. You had no problems with the Republican Congress. May I refer to the games being played on K Street that you have no problem with. May I refer to the many indictments the last Congress sponged in. Get real, your angle is purely partisan. Do you really think you can fool others into believing otherwise? Your comments are purely inconsistent except on the angle that Democrats can do no right.

the American public by and large suffers memory lapses when election time comes but this will be as it was before different….either put up, or shut up...they are playing a cheap theatrical game of nonsense....just do it..if thats how they feel and believe, then do it..I have more respect for Kennedy/Feingold right now than Pelosi by far… et al...at least he’s up front and hasn't played games ....but still adding to that HE should introduce a bill as well..BUT his dem leadership won't let him...there ya go...I wonder why? Discourse is not a cheap theatrical game of nonsense. Why not just say "What the hell is debate all about in a Democracy?!" Again, you make no sense.

[gernica]

Me too, I am symbolically happy that at least something is being done.

Except of course a couple of the campaign promises they made ..

[SallyIsNice5]

Continue your rant, but we ain't listening.(at least not many of us.) We would prefer to wait for further "EXPECTED" actions.

You're obviously reading it if you keep commenting, Doniston.

Matt

[YpbWF5Yo]

A lot of the "cut the funding" mantra is coming from the those who have supported the war .. so when the funding does get cut, they will be able to jump all over the democrats with "you don't support the troops .. because you cut the funding".

Neat trick .. but we've heard this song before.

[merloermfgj]

You're obviously reading it if you keep commenting, Doniston.

Matt

((And he isn't a Foxwatcher either....))

/chuckle

[annouhMus]

You're obviously reading it if you keep commenting, Doniston.

Matt

And you obviously aren't ignoring me because you are responding. besides I never said I wouldn't read your erroneous statements. Now if you are thru with the personal stuff, can we stay on subject???

[aabbaDE]

Nothing demonstrates deep conviction like a non-binding resolution.

Seems kind of like the legislative equivalent of masturbation.

Matt

While these sentiments could have easily been delivered from the steps of the Capital,
with 246 members of Congress assembled on the steps,
this non-binding resolution lends credence to their sentiments in a uniform way.

I actual would really like to see each of these 246 members of Congress take the walk down Pennsylvania Ave.
each carrying their respective State Flag and hand deliver this non-binding resolution to the President first-hand.
Now that would make a statement heard around the world !

[gernica]

A lot of the "cut the funding" mantra is coming from the those who have supported the war .. so when the funding does get cut, they will be able to jump all over the democrats with "you don't support the troops .. because you cut the funding".

Neat trick .. but we've heard this song before.

Or perhaps it is a way to entice their constituency.