It's on him now.

[anonemouse 1]

The Senate has passed the Iraq funding bill with the withdrawal deadline in it. It's up to Bush to sign off on it. I can guarantee that if he doesn't, the Democrats (and a lot of Republicans) will be very vocal about him failing to support the soldiers in Iraq. It's up to him, now. He'll be the only person stopping those soldiers from getting the equipment they need if he doesn't sign the bill into law.

I have to admit, I feel like I should be feeling sorry for him. He's really between a rock and a hard place. Either he passes the withdrawal deadline or he fails the troops. I am sure that if I were a nicer person, I would be feeling sorry for him. But really, all I think is that it couldn't have happened to a better guy.:heh:

[Carlene 12]

I'm betting he won't do it.

[DerickM 1]

I hope he holds firm and vetos it.

[bitteroldhag 0]

I think they put a bunch of pork barrel stuff in to get the blue dog Democrats to vote with the party. They do this all the time, and the budget seems reasonable, but they have really put GWB on the line here which is what they intended to do. If he vetoes the bill, he will be seen as not supporting the troops and if he signs it, he will be committing himself to a deadline. He can't win for losing. I'm just tickled to death that the Congress actually stood up to him. I'm getting sick of having a king instead of a president. I personally think the Dems are setting up the 2008 elections and the Republicans really don't know what to do with such a junk yard dog Congress. They haven't experienced this in years. Ain't politics fun?

[Fauxnaif 1]

Hmmm..pork barrel or many, many more deaths for God knows how long????

Oh yeh. Very hard choice.

[anonemouse 1]

I think they put a bunch of pork barrel stuff in to get the blue dog Democrats to vote with the party. They do this all the time, and the budget seems reasonable, but they have really put GWB on the line here which is what they intended to do. If he vetoes the bill, he will be seen as not supporting the troops and if he signs it, he will be committing himself to a deadline. He can't win for losing. I'm just tickled to death that the Congress actually stood up to him. I'm getting sick of having a king instead of a president. I personally think the Dems are setting up the 2008 elections and the Republicans really don't know what to do with such a junk yard dog Congress. They haven't experienced this in years. Ain't politics fun?

It's great, isn't it? The man needs to learn how to compromise. It's always been his way or the highway, and this Congress isn't going to roll over like a whipped dog and let him do anything he wants. He could have avoided this if he had actually formally funded the war when it started. That would have happened under the Republican congress. Sucks for him that he waited until the Dems were in power to try to get formal funding.

Hmmm..pork barrel or many, many more deaths for God knows how long????

Oh yeh. Very hard choice.

Exactly. It's not like every other bill passed in Congress isn't chock full of pork. That's how just about any bill gets passed. I bet that if the bills passed in the Republican congress were closely examined, they'd look like a side of bacon. It's just how congress works.

[anonemouse 1]

'time tables' have to do with ball games not national policy.

Unfortunately, if we don't have a time table, we'll never get out of Iraq. The Iraqis need to know that we aren't going to be there forever and that they've got a limited amount of time to get their shit together. Right now, they know that the US will be there to pick up the pieces and baby them along, so they aren't exactly giving it their all. All the while, we're losing men.

[lisah25 3]

The Senate has passed the Iraq funding bill with the withdrawal deadline in it. It's up to Bush to sign off on it. I can guarantee that if he doesn't, the Democrats (and a lot of Republicans) will be very vocal about him failing to support the soldiers in Iraq. It's up to him, now. He'll be the only person stopping those soldiers from getting the equipment they need if he doesn't sign the bill into law.

I have to admit, I feel like I should be feeling sorry for him. He's really between a rock and a hard place. Either he passes the withdrawal deadline or he fails the troops. I am sure that if I were a nicer person, I would be feeling sorry for him. But really, all I think is that it couldn't have happened to a better guy.:heh:

OK, I'm with you about the better guy thing, but I'm ticked that the dems put all the other stuff in there. I feel like they put the troops in the middle of a tug of war that isn't fair. I want us out of Iraq, and I'm no fan of Bush and his administration, but this bugs me a lot.

[mousecrazy 2]

When has it been a good idea to show your hand, then make your bet?

Besides, more Americans are killed by ILLEGAL aliens (before I am accused of being anti-immigrant) than have been killed in Iraq. Maybe we should get some of our ire up on that one. I believe the figure is 12 per day/360 a month.

Bonus: an issue exists where I am in disagreement with President Bush.

[anonemouse 1]

Besides, more Americans are killed by ILLEGAL aliens (before I am accused of being anti-immigrant) than have been killed in Iraq. Maybe we should get some of our ire up on that one. I believe the figure is 12 per day/360 a month.

Well, if we get out of Iraq, we can put that money towards the immigration problem.

[faithmd 14]

Unfortunately, if we don't have a time table, we'll never get out of Iraq. The Iraqis need to know that we aren't going to be there forever and that they've got a limited amount of time to get their shit together. Right now, they know that the US will be there to pick up the pieces and baby them along, so they aren't exactly giving it their all. All the while, we're losing men.

Uh huh, and the fundamentalists are sitting and waiting very patiently until we give them the date. Guaranteed the dayafter the last troops go, the Jihad will start because no one will be there to stop it.

But ya know what? Maybe that's not such a bad idea...

It is sad we are losing men, but guess what, it's WAR. Wait, it's not "war" it's a conflict because Bush (this I have a big beef with) declared the war over and us the victors when it was far from over and we are so clearly not the winners. In any case, (and NOT to say this next statement makes it better, because a life lost is a tragic thing) this is a conflict and in armed conflicts, people die. I think our troops are doing as good of a job as possible and are not deserving of this tactic. Consider this:

Nearly 4,500 Allied and American troops lost their lives in mere hours on 6 June 1944 alone.

There have been 3,503 coalition deaths in the war in Iraq as of March 29, 2007, according to a CNN count.

WWII, which was from 1939 (but the US wasn't in it immediately) to 1945, resulted in a loss of 407,000 US troops.

It is certainly not anything like what our parents and grandparents lived through and they supported those troops fiercely. They gave money and time and their scrap metal and drove on bald tires so the rubber was there for use in making weapons and tanks. They welcomed them home with a heroes welcome and thanked them for the job they did. I am saddened to see the lack of support this country has for our troops.

And BTW, the President is the Commander in Chief (do I think Bush is a good one? No, but that's besides the point), he controls the Armed Forces along with men and women who have spent their lives learning about strategy and how to operate and lead in times of conflict. How many of our Reps and Senators can say they are career military? And yet they are trying to run a war? It is not their job, it is not what they know or are trained to do.

And that's all I have to say about that...

[anonemouse 1]

Guaranteed the dayafter the last troops go, the Jihad will start because no one will be there to stop it.

Being there isn't stopping it, either.

I am saddened to see the lack of support this country has for our troops.

Wait, so keeping the troops in mortal danger is somehow supporting them? I don't think so. Keeping them in an area that is imploding and continuing to fight a war that we can't win isn't support.

Continuing to fight a war that we cannot win is not only stupid, it's completely insane. When you can't identify the enemy, you can't win the war.

[Wheetsin 714]

I am saddened to see the lack of support this country has for our troops.

I think there's a big difference between supporting the war, and supporting the troops. I want to see our troops home, back with their families and friends. What's more supportive than that? Saying, "Let's make them stay over there and keep risking their lives!"? No - I support the troops. I don't have to be for the war to do that.

*Edited - accidentally submitted too soon

What do you see happening that indicates that we (the country, not LBT) don't support the troops?

[faithmd 14]

I agree it would be nice if they came back home, but folks, the war will come with them. Are you hoping to see a war on our fields and in our streets and cities? Us being over there trying to get the situation stabilized (which is sadly become fruitless because I fully believe our enemy was not only underestimated, but largely unknown) is largely the reason we haven't had another 9/11. That and our improved intelligence.

Granted, our intelligence was wrong about WMD that took us in in the first place, but that's not Bush's fault, he acted on what he believed and was told to him was credible information. But our intelligence has kept us relatively safe since then. But there will be the day when that isn't enough. And if our men and women aren't fighting there, they'll be fighting here.

The last time a war was fought on our soil was too long ago for anyone alive to remember. I think that complacency is part of the problem.

These people cannot be rationed with, you do not sit down at a table and "discuss" being nice to one another and living happily together. Anyone remember the Nobel Peace Prize Carter won for bringing a peace accord to the Middle East? How long did that last? Do you think that those who chop off the heads of civilians and broadcast it on the internet can be reasoned with? Do you think that if we leave this will all just stop?

How can we get it to stop without military force? I wish we could, I really do.

Maybe we could put Prozac in the Water supply when we rebuild it. (that was a joke)

[lisah25 3]

Uh huh, and the fundamentalists are sitting and waiting very patiently until we give them the date. Guaranteed the dayafter the last troops go, the Jihad will start because no one will be there to stop it.

I don't see that we are stopping much, there is still a LOT of violence going on. I don't think we can stop it, too many generations and too much history of it for us to step in from the outside and make a difference.

I am saddened to see the lack of support this country has for our troops.

Please don't confuse lack of support for Bush with lack of support for the troops. I support them enough that I don't want more to die for a conflict I don't believe we can win.