Bush vetoes Iraq pullout timetable in clash with Congress (Roundup)
US News
By Mike McCarthy and Tony Czuczka May 1, 2007, 23:19 GMT
Other features coming soon.
Talkback
page: 1 2
Good. We need to finish the job.
good for you uncle george.
im proud of you you showed them who's boss and who's running the show.
whats a dead soilder now and then.keep up the good work
There is only one solution to the LIARS BUSH and CHENEY, to impeach them. They have brought nothing but voilence and mockery to USA.
...but first go find anyone in Congress with a backbone to do it...
By now, even the worst libnazi knows, all the backbone is at 1600 PA ave.
Bush: Try that ham Harry,it's from Virginia! I won't even eat a ham from another state, boy. Ever eat them chickens from Arkansas, they lie even when they're dead...at least about Whitewater... heh heh....it's a joke Harry. Karl Rove told it t me. I just love it there boy!
Reid: Yes sir, I see the humor. Sir, I've got a problem...
Bush: What can I do for ya boy?
Reid: you vetoed the war spending bill sir.
Bush: You're sharp Harry, Ill give ya that...
Reid: Yes sir, I was refering to all the pork attached. We have some stuff that was going to fly in that bill and...
Bush: aw shucks Harry, you get all that when you remove th time limits! Go ahead on boy, I'll deeliver for ya!
Reid: Well sir, that's the problem, we have constituants that just have to have that timetable...
Bush: You have constituants that expect something? Harry! Who knew! When did they show up? Where're they from boy? Mexico They run over that fence? How'd we miss em...?
Reid: I know sir, it surprised me too. CBS and ABC told us about them, on the TV...
Bush: aw sheeiit Harry, they's just pullin your leg! Hell, Ol Danny Rather tried that crap on me with that fake document, remember? Heck, Harry, they just make them polls lie like a Clinton lawyer! Ya gotta ignore that boy! How you ever gonna get that new Interstate or water project? Who's gonna pay for that damn leaky tunnel fatboy Kennedy and ol lurch are bankrollin in Boston? Jesus harry, you'll be stoppin up th sink here boy! whattsamatter with ya?
Reid: I'm afraid sir...
Bush: Harry, go t that special safe place I always tell ya t go t an say 'there's no place like home' boy. Jist keep sayin it until the piss quits runnin down yur leg ther boy! Here, take my napkin. You can always blame it on age, Harry!
Reid: Sir, you have to capitulate. I can't move this without a concession...
Bush: Well, Harry, It's yur lucky day boy! All I'm gonna do is just let the money run out and let the repubs whip yur ass in the public arena for running out on th troops! After a gd ass whippin, you just bring me another bill an we'll get er done!
Reid: Really? Oh, thank you sir! My constituants won't see a thing!
Bush: you betcha boy! Harry, ol GWB deelivers. Now git out there an deliver Harry. I'll let ya whip ol Albeertos ass, let ya abuse Condi, hell we'll even get nightsticks an work that cheecaaano over right in the oval office! It's a favorite pastime Harry, in Texas! I'll invite Dick, an Karl! We'll do a smoker...just like th ol Skull an Crossbones Harry...
Reid: That's OK sir, I'll wait my turn...
Bush: Good! Now git out there an make it look good boy! Daddy's countin on ya!
Another wannabe 'playwrite' at work!
How could Bush give a scenario for withdrawal if there was no scenarion even for the war,neither correct information about its causes ;etc .The usual 'trial and error ' method seems to be the working scenario .It is plain for all to see except the hardcore hillbillies from the republican party and neocon allies that there is no progress to a happy ending in this war .If this is to be become a war of attrition most cereteinly the insurgents will win ,just like in Vietnam they did .THe costs of occupation are skyrocketing and the bill for the taxpayer too .
Yet there are still a few simpletons calling to finish the job .So a few qyestions to them;What job would that be ?.SEcondly how do you think to achieve that result ?
Let us get something else than the usual empty words .Come on GOP supporters let me have a working plan ,nopt just the usual improvisation .
The n put your troopers life at stake .Anything else is in fact abandonning the soldiers at the field of war .Hey this sound just like the argument Bush is using .Only now it is used against himself .
We cant help people who fight against themselves. All we are doing is sending our troops over there to die. Bush is techniqully part of the military so maybe with his plan to send over all those other troops he should be deployed right along with them... lets see how long he makes it!!!!
Perhaps a week ago, on a forum now latent, I stated that the Democrats should have offered the funding, BUT with a proviso that in September, either the Iraq Study Group, or an independent equivalent, should use some preset benchmarks to judge the progress on the part of the Iraqi government.
Guess what - the Republicans are buying into precisely that idea, and Bush is losing support for his blind obstinacy. Those planning to run in 2008 cannot have Iraq hanging over them. A Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll released late last week showed that voters by 56 to 37 percent supported the congressional troop withdrawal plan. In the same poll, 55 percent said victory in Iraq -- a war that has lasted more than four years and has claimed more than 3,350 American lives -- is no longer possible.
Republicans say they're willing to require the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to agree on certain issues, such as sharing oil revenue, in order to receive a proposed $5.7 billion in annual U.S. economic and reconstruction aid. Those benchmarks were part of the war spending plan vetoed by Bush. Senator Lott said he, too, is interested in talking to the Democrats about benchmarks for the Iraqi government. 'You can't say it's time to negotiate and then say no if it includes this, that or the other,'' Lott said.
Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky already have started talks on post-veto moves for war funding. Another Republican, Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, said the leaders should discuss all issues in seeking a deal. 'Everything has to be on the table. If the urgency is as significant as it is for the military, and it is, it means some compromise has to be arrived at,'' said Voinovich.
This is going to escalate. If the Democrats are smart, they'll agree to the funding (Bush's amount - theirs was higher), and ask for additional funds for the VA and other troop-related expenses in the U.S. The Dems and Republicans can agree on 'Iraqi benchmarks', to be measured when Gen. Petraeus testifies in September. Invite representatives of the Iraqi leadership to address the U.S. Congress, in joint session, to explain what they've accomplished (or to hear the complaints if they have NOT done anything).
The pressure will be on the Iraqi leaders, who planned a 2-month holiday in July and August. That's where the pressure belongs; not on our troops to provide a 'military victory' that cannot happen. The militants can be forced by al-Maliki to back off, to let their government get things done - instead of terrorist attacks, let them work through their Congress. The Shia majority is going to rule, something Bush Sr. tried to avoid. The Sunni can force Al Qaeda to butt out, as we can see from today's news. Al Sadr can influence their Congress, instead of shooting at his fellow Iraqis, and the same goes for the Sunni. Let them try to win over their own people through the Democratic process. If they want Democracy, let them try it on for size.
If this cannot be maneuvered into a lessening of attacks through September, nothing else will work, even the 'surge'.
...from one desperate act to another.
Why is it, the ones who make the most mistakes, are the same ones who are least willing to own up to them ?
The war in Iraq was:
1) To prevent an imminent threat from WMD ... hmmmm. NO
2) To remove an evil man ... OK. I'll give you that one. YES
3) To free the Iraqi people ... Getting a bit philosophical now. What is freedom? To be able to live your life, to work, to raise your family in a safe, secure environment? As opposed to a civil war, where many tens of thousands are already dead, and many more tens of thousands are fleeing to avoid the risk of ethnic cleansing? Doesn't sound like mission accomplished to me. Therefore: NO
4) To plant the seeds of freedom in the Middle East ... Well. That's not really working out too well either. Yay... lets all be like Iraq! Sorry, ya gotta lead by example. NO
5) To fight the terrorists and stop them following us home ... Oh yes. The 'terrorists' who keep materializing. Al Qaida - the biggest organization in the world it seems. 100,000 to 700,000 dead so far, but STILL they keep coming. Holy crap!... let's send more troops. Sorry: NO
Bollocks to this BS. The Congress and Senate should continue to send, to this most deranged President of ours, funding bills that specify benchmarks and timetables.
Let him veto the funding, time after time after time. At some point it will become a critical issue for the troops, where the lack of funds make their withdrawal the only option.
Bush will have to either sign the legislation to continue the funding according to the timetable, or immediately withdraw the troops.
Sorry. America is no longer run by the decider. The people have a voice again. Bush will learn to listen to it, just as we have learned to stop listening to his.
DC4
I base my assessment of the accuracy of Bush's grasp of matters by his speech 4 years ago - when he announced 'victory' in Iraq !
You're all nuts. Give Bush credit for letting you live in freedom and not constant terror!
You're the ones in america who live 'in terror'. The rest of the world accepts that terrorist events may happen, takes reasonable steps to guard against them and then gets on with life. Events happen in life - you take a chance on whether it involves you or not, just like getting an illness, being in a motor accident or whatever, but you can't let in rule your life or induce the sort of paraonia found in america
I'm sick of this 'Hate bush' stuff. If you guys can do a better job, then go for it? If not, then shut your mouth. You have no idea what it's like to lead a country which is always divided because of political parties.
Dwight Eisenhower once said 'History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid.' So who are you guys? The weak ones who want the world to deal with it's own problems? Or the one's who will take a stand agianst those who cause fear and injustice to others.
Well Lochemel - surely any democratic country is 'divided because of political parties' - if its not, then it is a one party state or a dictatorship. Is that what you actually want ?
(Para 2) If you look at the situation dispassionately, it seems to me that it is America which is causing 'fear and injustice' in the Middle East
'Jim May 2nd, 2007 - 08:53:19
You're the ones in america who live 'in terror'. The rest of the world accepts that terrorist events may happen, takes reasonable steps to guard against them and then gets on with life. Events happen in life - you take a chance on whether it involves you or not, just like getting an illness, being in a motor accident or whatever, but you can't let in rule your life or induce the sort of paraonia found in america'
Post of the year, Jim!
The rest of the world has dealt with terrorism and other, more powerful threats, for centuries and decades, without completely re-inventing their societies based on FEAR as the
...prime directive.
You lived with the blitz but had a leader that was steadfast in ending it. You lived with the IRA but never quit endevouring to stop the troubles.
That's the problem with the other side of the pond: you let it get out of hand and then cry for help.
Bush is doing exactly what is expected: letting both political sides run on it for 2008, instead of letting them out of it. They're not helping him, so he's not helping them.
The WMD's. Not the 500 they found in various states of repair (yes, they actually existed all along!)not the weapons themselves, but the folks who improvise them. The chlorine gas, the IED's.
It seems Mr. Bush, correctly, understood that the WMD worth concerning yourself about is the person who makes them, not the easily available ingredients.
As for the other stuff...freedom in the middle east, etc., the Iraqi's and the Lebanese are conquered people, so I'm having doubts.
When this is over, the President will be able to say, as Clinton did, that we can only help some, not all.
The dems will say the saved soldiers, although they passed this war JUST like the republicans, and the republicans will claim they were trying to change the world. This president will just put it to them and let them pack it through 2008.
Be that as it may, the war has outworn it's welcome, and the only way the Republicans will get in is to cash-in on the Democrats' withdrawl promise, which is why they have been steadily turning on Bush. Whatever happens, Bush and his friends will be remembered (sympathetically perhaps) for having made things worse through arrogance and mismanagement, and the Republicans have to think about the future -
If they dissassociate themselves with this administrations failures, they can appear emerge as the 'next generation', who cleaned up the messes of both previous Democratic and Republican administrations, and thus regain the credibility of the party.
It seems unlikely that Americans will be in a mood at the next election to be placated with more patriotic slogans and ambiguous declarations of 'mission accomplished' and 'stay the course', etc.
At this point, everyone knows the emperor is naked, but they might prepared to forgive (as long his successor is prepared to stop conning them and put some clothes on).
page: 1 2
Similar articles
- Senate confirms Petraeus for Central Command
- Top commander in Iraq to head US forces in Mideast (Roundup)
- Top Iraq commander Petraeus to become regional chief (1st Lead)
- Top Iraq commander Petraeus to become regional chief
- US officers reprimanded in connection to Haditha killings
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Fort Hood gunman conscious (Extra)
- 2. Fort Hood offers prayers for victims of mass shooting (2nd Roundup)
- 3. Fort Hood offers prayers for victims of mass shooting (Roundup)
- 4. Senior US senator demands 'terrorism' probe into army killings
- 5. Fort Hood offers prayers for victims of mass shooting
USA
Your Talkback on this Story