John Edwards to Congress: Cut Iraq War Funds

[BrewCityBuck]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/2/...4823.shtml?s=ic How could he do this when troops are on the ground? This is absurd. Let's cut funds and have our soliders pay for it just so John Edwards can f*cking play politics. You give the soliders/country everything they need before the last troop get's on the helicopter to leave.

 

[The`Dream]

Indirectly is says two things:1. It tells Bush congress isn't happy with the war2. Sets up Edwards' possible presidential campaign with his message.I hate to say this but its probably true. By cutting costs, the Army has to restrict budgeting and probably lessens money that goes to an unnecessary cost.

 

[BrewCityBuck]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L_C @ Feb 14 2007, 05:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Indirectly is says two things:1. It tells Bush congress isn't happy with the war2. Sets up Edwards' possible presidential campaign with his message.I hate to say this but its probably true. By cutting costs, the Army has to restrict budgeting and probably lessens money that goes to an unnecessary cost.</div> Yeah, just some Washington politician playing politics with a war and our troops. I've lost a lot of respect for John Edwards.

 

[redneck]

Politics will lose a war faster than the men fighting it, its sad but its true. The librals talk about not wanting another Vietnam, yet if they cut funding that is exactly what will happen. Instead of cutting funds, they need to pressure the pentagon into making the right decisions over there.

 

[MaRdYC26]

He's trying to send the message to Bush to get the F*ck out of Iraq.

 

[KobeBryant_24]

You go into a war to win, that's why Bush is sending 20,000 more. BUT In my opinion, let the sunies and shites kill eachother off there in their civil war...But John Edwards and Kerry are assholes...

 

[SirLaker]

That is just stupid. Why would you cut funds while our troops are still there? Cutting funds means less support in technology, armory, vehicles etc. Not a good idea. They need all the support they can get. Instead of trying to save our tax money by not giving funds to the war...how about we stop spending it on the illegal immigrants in our country that are in prison. The US has spent over 1 BILLION dollers on illegals incarcerated here in the states. The cost of social services dealing with illegals is well over 300 BILLION. I don't know about you but that is just absurd.

 

[MaRdYC26]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KobeBryant_24 @ Feb 15 2007, 11:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You go into a war to win, that's why Bush is sending 20,000 more. BUT In my opinion, let the sunies and shites kill eachother off there in their civil war...But John Edwards and Kerry are assholes...</div>What people like you don't get is this is a war you don't win.We already got Saddam. There is NOTHING left in Iraq. Honestly, there isn't. I'm so sick of Bush and his dumb reasons why we are there. It's obviously for the oil. How about we DIRECT OUR ATTENTION to the ONE who KILLED THOUSANDS on 9/11.Your the one who is an ***hole. We redirected thousands of troops that were hunting down Bin Laden because Bush got a feddish that "Saddam Hussien had WMD!!!"...and you people actually support him.NOW THAT'S absurd.

 

[redneck]

There is a lot left to do in Iraq, we have to stablize the region or its going to become a terrorist hotzone and wreack havoc all over the world. Iraq may not have had WMDs in 2003, but they did have them at one point so it wasn't a stretch to think that they still had them somewhere. We just can't leave a let them kill each other, because than Iran would invade. Once Iran got control of Iraq, they would likely join forces with Syria and possibly Jordan to attack Isreal. which means the US, and most other NATO/UN countries would be back over there. but we wouldn't be fighting just sparce pockets of terrorist, but a highly trained and highly moble military force with control of most the worlds oil. with them in control of the oil, the US would need to dip into our own reserves, which means the government would limit the ammount of oil availble to the public. The re-invasion of the middle east would likely cost tens of thousands of lives.We must stay, we must stablize Iraq, and we must help build them a military. This war was never about oil, if Bushco wanted oil, they could have invaded Kuwait, Mexico, Venezula, Canada, Alaska, Texas, Utah, or New Mexico a lot easier and a lot cheaper. The war was either done because Bushco honestly believed that Iraq posed a threat to the US, or it was vengence for Saddam trying to assassinate George HW Bush.

 

[SirLaker]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (redneck @ Feb 16 2007, 10:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There is a lot left to do in Iraq, we have to stablize the region or its going to become a terrorist hotzone and wreack havoc all over the world. Iraq may not have had WMDs in 2003, but they did have them at one point so it wasn't a stretch to think that they still had them somewhere. We just can't leave a let them kill each other, because than Iran would invade. Once Iran got control of Iraq, they would likely join forces with Syria and possibly Jordan to attack Isreal. which means the US, and most other NATO/UN countries would be back over there. but we wouldn't be fighting just sparce pockets of terrorist, but a highly trained and highly moble military force with control of most the worlds oil. with them in control of the oil, the US would need to dip into our own reserves, which means the government would limit the ammount of oil availble to the public. The re-invasion of the middle east would likely cost tens of thousands of lives.We must stay, we must stablize Iraq, and we must help build them a military. This war was never about oil, if Bushco wanted oil, they could have invaded Kuwait, Mexico, Venezula, Canada, Alaska, Texas, Utah, or New Mexico a lot easier and a lot cheaper. The war was either done because Bushco honestly believed that Iraq posed a threat to the US, or it was vengence for Saddam trying to assassinate George HW Bush.</div>Agreed. Another country we have to worry about is Iran. They are the real threat here. The terrorist groups from there go to Iraq to bomb us excetra. They dictator is a crazy lunatic who hungers for nuclear weapons so he can bomb us. Stupid Diane Sawyer actually had an interview with him recently and looked like she felt bad for him..what a bi*ch. That brod should keep her nose out of everything. You have to compare these terrorists groups and radical muslims to the Nazis IMO. Not all Germans were Nazis and not all Muslims are radical. The point is the ones that are MUST be destroyed. We can't retreat out of there waiting for another 9/11 to happen. 9/11 if anything woke us up to reality and how evil these terrorist groups are. We can't take our troops out now.

 

[redneck]

Very good comparison between the Nazis and Radical Islam. If Ahmadinejad got nuclear weapons I doubt he'd be stupid enough to use them against the US, nutjob or not the guy is concidered by some to be one of the most inteligent world leaders. If he had the bomb chances are he'd use it against Israel. he hates Israel and wants to see it distoried. He would also use the threat of the bomb against his neighbors, basically exthorting from them everything he wants or needs.