Democrats to pass non-binding anti-surge resolution...in the house...next week - Page 2

Diesel66 · 02-08-2007, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

While i agree with you, we also need 60 senators to agree. In effort to try to get them on board we need to get it on the floor to debate.

Its a simple spending bill, all you need is 51 people that refuse to fund the war.

DosEquis · 02-08-2007, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Its a simple spending bill, all you need is 51 people that refuse to fund the war.

I don't believe it to be advisable to discontinue funding. I think our soldiers need to stay there but redeployed to Iraqs borders to prevent syrian, iranian, and other foreign interests/weapons from entering the country. Killing the funding is equal to cut and run. I dont believe anyone in government anyway, is for an immediate withdrawl of every soldier.

We need a change in strategy, which involves getting our soldiers out of baghdad and out of playing referee in this pseudo civil war they are having.

lew · 02-08-2007, 06:01 PM

Ron Paul is for bringing them home now.

Diesel66 · 02-08-2007, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I don't believe it to be advisable to discontinue funding. I think our soldiers need to stay there but redeployed to Iraqs borders to prevent syrian, iranian, and other foreign interests/weapons from entering the country.

Congress has NO authority in that regard. They either pull their support completely or fund the war the President wants to fight.

Killing the funding is equal to cut and run. I dont believe anyone in government anyway, is for an immediate withdrawl of every soldier.

So is pulling back to the borders.

Pro Street · 02-08-2007, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Its a simple spending bill, all you need is 51 people that refuse to fund the war.

can it be vetoed?

Pro Street · 02-08-2007, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Congress has NO authority in that regard. They either pull their support completely or fund the war the President wants to fight.

It's a trap

So is pulling back to the borders.

No, it's forcing the Iraq Government to step forward
It's increasing funding for the ISF
It's pulling our troops out of the civil war
It's still maintaining our presence there in case we are needed

RMNIXON · 02-08-2007, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Oh please don't even try this "message to the troops and families"

The troops aren't retarded. Resolution or not they know what's going on here.

I posted "troops and enemies." A quotation should be an actual quote. Not you emotional reaction.

And your right. They know it means nothing in term of actual support. It just makes them look like they are doing misdeeds to the wrong people who don't need anymore encouragement.

RMNIXON · 02-08-2007, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

can it be vetoed?

No, the President can only Veto what is passed, not reverse what is blocked.

Pro Street · 02-08-2007, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

No, the President can only Veto what is passed, not reverse what is blocked.

I can't believe I didn't remember that from civic class.. definitely something worth knowing

JSmythe · 02-09-2007, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by lew

FUCK THAT. We don't need any more fucking debate. People are dying daily. We need to pull our asses out of there. I don't care if Democrats get the credit for it. I don't care if Republicans get the credit for it. Those soldiers need to get out and we need to stop fucking with other nations. FUCK those politicians on both sides of the aisle that look forward to this "debate", like it's a fucking 12th grade Debate class assignment.

There is no credit to be given for pulling the troops out. As soon as it happens and Iraq clusterfucks, as it were, then whoever did the pulling out is gunna get tore up by whichever party didn't.

hsmith · 02-09-2007, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

In the case of meaningless self-serving jestures I would say yes!

And don't even think about the great message this sends to the troops and our enemies when the money is sent and the plans go into action. The same people who approved of Gates and the New Iraq Commander who both approve of this action. So when it comes to substance they are cowards!

The troops aren't paid to think, I don't see why it is an issue. they are supposed to be deployed and fight. I thought the whole argument from the get go is they aren't supposed to care one way or another, that it is their job

hsmith · 02-09-2007, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Congress has NO authority in that regard. They either pull their support completely or fund the war the President wants to fight.
So is pulling back to the borders.

Uh, they control the budget, they can stipulate how the money is spent. They can attach strings so it allows for certain actions and not others.

They can specify to keep funding the war, but no escalation. It is a law, not some silly gesture.

Diesel66 · 02-09-2007, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

Uh, they control the budget, they can stipulate how the money is spent. They can attach strings so it allows for certain actions and not others.

They can specify to keep funding the war, but no escalation. It is a law, not some silly gesture.

They already gave the Pres authority to fight the war as he sees fit.

As long as he can show he is following this:

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it

RMNIXON · 02-09-2007, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

The troops aren't paid to think, I don't see why it is an issue. they are supposed to be deployed and fight. I thought the whole argument from the get go is they aren't supposed to care one way or another, that it is their job

But if they are deployed on behalf of the United States Government and the American people what do they get with mixed messages? The point is they do think. Well maybe not according to John Kerry, but I believe it so.

RMNIXON · 02-09-2007, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

I can't believe I didn't remember that from civic class.. definitely something worth knowing

Even the press talks about the Presidents Budget like it is real. But in legal terms it is only a wish list! He gets nothing until they sign for it. The only Veto power is to reject what is approved. A very big part of seperation of powers.

Diesel66 · 02-09-2007, 06:29 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Even the press talks about the Presidents Budget like it is real. But in legal terms it is only a wish list! He gets nothing until they sign for it. The only Veto power is to reject what is approved. A very big part of seperation of powers.

He can veto the entire budget as a last desperate wish, this would shut down the entire govt.

BUT Bush hasnt included the Iraq money in the budget so he is shit out of luck if Congress chooses to end the war.