23 May 07
Not to mention if the war is ended right now. All of our forces leave, I'm sure they fear a radical anti-US group will other throw whatever government there is now, and then cut off the oil supply.
I mean I don't know what the right answer is now for the war, I do know that we should have never gone in the first place.
23 May 07
Originally posted by lepomisThey loaned out their collective "moral courage" to a member and it got lost when said member found out that congressional approval ratings are lower than George Bush's approval rating? I feel bad for the "member" who lost it. Reading polls while taking a dump is bad enough. But to lose the "collective moral courage" down the crapper while doing so is inexcusable!😉
Why are the democrats in the US not ending the war in Iraq? What do they have to gain by keeping it going? I thought they were elected to end this godless war. Does anyone know?
23 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by AndrewKnottHindsight is always 20/20, except when it's not.
Not to mention if the war is ended right now. All of our forces leave, I'm sure they fear a radical anti-US group will other throw whatever government there is now, and then cut off the oil supply.
I mean I don't know what the right answer is now for the war, I do know that we should have never gone in the first place.
I was never a supporter of going into Iraq before the war because it seemed like a big operation for little payback. A project like that is going to take no less than 10 years to accomlish. The average America has no interest in something that drags on for a decade or two so I figure we would end up pulling out and having what is essentially a false start in the WoT.
The future might prove that I was wrong. If we do manage to stay with it and get the job done, the long sweep of history might make a fool out of my initial thoughts on the matter.
23 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by lepomisThey are afraid they will be held responsible for the consequenses. It is much safer to let the war continue and blame their opponents for the consequenses of the continuation.
Why are the democrats in the US not ending the war in Iraq? What do they have to gain by keeping it going? I thought they were elected to end this godless war. Does anyone know?
They are irresponsible cowards.
23 May 07
Originally posted by AndrewKnottBased on my personal assessment of the American people. Polling shows that I was right about the Average American not wanting us to be a part of a war that drags on or a part of nation building.
Well the average American based on what?
Cause the country is almost evenly split on this one. I think that is why.
Granted the ones that are for this war, I believe to be misinformed.
23 May 07
Originally posted by MerkAnd that's the case. However, once a politican is elected. He is free to vote any way that he/she sees fit. They only then have to worry about getting re-elected, those are the times when they really listen to the polls. Election years. Cause most Americans go on what is in front of them, not what that rep did 2 or 4 years ago.
Based on my personal assessment of the American people. Polling shows that I was right about the Average American not wanting us to be a part of a war that drags on or a part of nation building.
And while it seems like that would do it, it's tough because, once in office, they enact policies to keep themselves in office. And of coruse that is one issue that the Dems and Reps can agree on.
The incumbancy(sp?) rate is outrageous here.
(Sorry if this is spotty, trying to type and take calls at work at the same time)
23 May 07
Originally posted by ivanhoeI think this is an accurate assesment. The Democrats are prooving to be utterly spineless. Impeachment was "off the table" on day 1 because they don't care to reign in the outrageous crimes of this admin as much as they want to wield those same powers in '08.
They are afraid they will be held responsible for the consequenses. It is much safer to let the war continue and blame their opponents for the consequenses of the continuation.
They are irresponsible cowards.
23 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Darth SpongeAgree on both his point and yours.
I think this is an accurate assesment. The Democrats are prooving to be utterly spineless. Impeachment was "off the table" on day 1 because they don't care to reign in the outrageous crimes of this admin as much as they want to wield those same powers in '08.
23 May 07
Originally posted by Darth SpongeI would agree that democrats are generally spineless... they will take a poll to find out if the DNC should serve chicken or pork. Of course pork may be offensive to some... so chicken or vegan chicken.
I think this is an accurate assesment. The Democrats are prooving to be utterly spineless. Impeachment was "off the table" on day 1 because they don't care to reign in the outrageous crimes of this admin as much as they want to wield those same powers in '08.
We elect these folks to make informed decisions for us... if we all had the time to be informed we could just do it ourselves. Polling the American people is a good way to make bad choices.
I guess in this case they are standing up for something... and telling the people that voted them into congress to "shut your cake holes and let us handle the tough issues"
23 May 07
I have been waiting to see if anyone mentions the obvious. Congress COULDN'T END IT IF THEY WANTED. The constitution gives ALL power of foreign relations and military power to the President alone. All they can do is consent and advise. He ALONE is the commander.
All congress can do is fiddle with money. How would you like to defend being responsible for the death of american soldiers because you cut off their financing and the president kept them in what he and a good proportion of the american population considers a legitimate war against terror?
23 May 07
Originally posted by StarValleyWyby controlling the money, they could cut off the funding for the war entirely. Without funding, the war would cease.
I have been waiting to see if anyone mentions the obvious. Congress COULDN'T END IT IF THEY WANTED. The constitution gives ALL power of foreign relations and military power to the President alone. All they can do is consent and advise. He ALONE is the commander.
All congress can do is fiddle with money. How would you like to defend being responsible ...[text shortened]... and a good proportion of the american population considers a legitimate war against terror?[/b]
Are you suggesting that the Bush could continue the war without funding? How would he pay the soldiers? Salt? (and if the Decider decided to keep the troops unfunded in a war- are you saying that he would bear no responsibility for their wellbeing?)
It's an extremely dubious claim that "a good proportion of the american population considers [the War in Iraq to be] a legitimate war against terror". What is a "good proportion"? FOX News watchers?