why can't congress just NOT fund the war?

i admit; i'm pretty naive & underinformed in many ways, but i just don't get why congress could'nt pass a bill funding the withdrawal in advance, have it sitting on the shelf ready to send to * should he ever wake the fuck up, and then just NOT DEBATE OR VOTE ON ANY MORE FUNDING FOR IRAQ OPERATIONS?

a pre-funded withdrawal bill could counter the tired "support the troops" charge, especially if it had generous PTSD counseling funds in it.

what don't i get about just NOT funding this pointless bloodbath?

I have been lobbying for this. Fund the withdrawl, not the occupation.

American public still apparently not there yet w Iraq

The first defunding bill was Cooper-Church, which passed in early 1971 and cut off funding for operations in Cambodia, but not Vietnam.

US involvement wound down during 1972 (Nixon's "secret" plan to get reelected), to the point that at the end of 1972 there were only 24,000 US troops in Vietnam (down from over 155,000 in 1971 and over 500,000 in 1968). The paris peace treaty was signed in early 1973. The Case-Church amendment, which cut off funding for further operations in Vietnam, was passed in June 1973 after US military operations were essentially over.


So, in a sense, the defunding didn't end the US involvement in the war, although effort to defund (and the successful defunding of operations in Cambodia) helped force Nixon to pull back. And, in a sense, the defunding did end the war since it ultimately set the stage for the South Vietnamese to give up the fight.

ain't they?

"Cutting off fund for the troops" and so far congress doesn't have the spine to stand up and call bullshit.

even gung-ho military famlies want this over.

there doesn't seem to be any alternative to de-funding, but i don't see the groundwork being laid to frame the issue.

their fear is "Democrats cut off funds for the troops because democrats don't support the troops, see we told you."

... seriously.

Reid and Pelosi and the campaign consultants are deathly afraid that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly ... Richard Bruce Cheney, Newt Gingrich and Mitch McConnell will call them bad names.

If the Democrats gave-in to the wishes of 70 precent of the American people, and did not send a war funding bill to the White House, the above mentioned folks would call the Democrats "surrender monkeys", "unpatriotic", "cutters and runners", and various other names. And the Dem leadership is mortified that somebody out in America will believe what those radical Republicans say about them, too.

Apparently the Congressional Dems are not strong enough to withstand the onslaught of name calling -- if they actually tried something more than symbolic that would bring the troops home.

Seriously ... prove me wrong.

I don't think the American people have yet figured out that it is the only way. I would be real interested to see a poll like that if you have one. Thanks!

i was trying to say 2 things: the amurkan public wants this over, and i don't see any other way to do it.

realize it.

leave the troops there anyway, with less and less support and equipment as the money dwindles. It is a horrible scenario that only a madman would even consider, but perhaps it says something, if true, about what Congress thinks of him.

But you couldn't even really have a debate about that. As soon as you start down that road, and Bush states flatly that the soldiers aren't going anywhere until "the job is done", then you have to start visualizing scenarios, none of which have a good outcome. You would have to be VERY confident you could win that debate.

On the other hand, Bush has already shown that he will use signing statements to do just about anything he wants, and perhaps he would find some way to divert funds or something.

They are not representing us, for sure.

TC

g with Bush, no matter what they say/

It is going to take a while before american public realizes defunding the only way.

Watch cspan and you will see that Dems are trying while Repugs spew coordinated talking points and pose coordinated silly parliamentary challenges/

it is going to take longer still until republican reps and senators stop covering Bush's ass.

What is my strategy?

Pressure my REPUBLICAN reps and Senator to place country before the ego of George Bush.

my senators are Murray & Cantwell, my rep is Bagdhad Jim McDermott.

You and the Dems who believe this are simply putting politics before peoples' lives. Not only that, but this "conventional wisdom" is out of touch with reality. The reality is that more people favor defunding the war than oppose it(and note that this is a Faux poll of all things<http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/030107_Bush_Iraq_Iran_web.pdf>

Sorry, but most of the Dems in Congress are continuing to play politics with peoples' lives. Meanwhile the public, which elected the Dems to majority last fall specifically to end the war, are once again way out in front wanting our troops brought home by any means necessary.

There is no good excuse for not defunding the war and bringing our troops home, and frankly if the Dems fail to do so they will pay a heavy price come election time.

The Dems have the power to bring this war to an end, it is past time for them to do so.

what price will the dems "pay" next election for not de-funding? its not like we have a viable party on the left of the dems to vote for. they have us over a barrel.

i'm infuriated & exasperated with the dems' inability to end the war or impeach, but i will only register my anger in the primaries - i'll vote straight democratic in the general.

Sorry, but if the Dems are going to continue to enable the war like they're 'Pugs, why in the hell should I vote for them? In fact how, in good conscience, could any committed anti-war person vote for them? Hell, Hillary's already stated that she'll essentially keep the war going. Pelosi preemptively took defunding the war off the table, even though the Dems were elected to a majority with the specfic task of ending the war by any means necessary. Yet, instead they continue to fund it, enable it, support it.

We the people are supposed to set the agenda for this nation through the reps that we elect. And when those reps fail to fulfill their duty, we have every right to kick them out of office. At this point it apparently doesn't matter whether it is a Dem or 'Pug in office, both are going to continue the war. Therefore it is our right, our duty to vote for those who best represent us. Anything else is giving tacit approval of these pro-war positions, something that I cannot do.

Sure, if people abandon the Dems in droves, they will lose. But perhaps a party will rise in their place that actually listens to the people rather than to the politicos and the corporations. It has happened before in this country, seems like it is about time for it to happen again.

The last thing we need are more republicans.

The Dems have put forth non-binding resolutions and bills that don't get signed, followed by a continued funding of the war. And the killing goes on.:eyes:

We have to:

1. convince people the spin of "leaving troops hanging" is bullshit

2. Convince Republicans to put party before country/Bush and vote with the DEMS

I write my Repub reps and Senator every week. How about you.

That the American people overwhelmingly want the Dems to end the war, using any means necessary(see the poll I linked to upthread). We don't need to cultivate bipartisan support, all the Dems need is the collective spine to hold up each and every supplemental war funding bill in committee forever. Hold back the funds and bring the troops home. That is the fact of the matter.

Defunding is an idea(again as I showed upthread) that more Americans support than oppose. Thus the Dems have the will of the people behind them, they have the power of the purse in Congress, again, all they need is a spine.

And if you really want to sit down and have a little tete a tete about who's the more responsible citizen and who has been more active in regards to the government and our country over the past thirty five years, PM me and we can get into it. Otherwise it is not fair to the OP to get into a pissing contest here.

Can you tell me what post it is in?

Because that is great news. (I agree w you that defunding is the way to get out of this mess)

All of the polls I have seen suggest that the American people have not wrapped their heads around defunding yet and still oppose it.

Post number fifteen.

But they ARE representing the American people as a whole, whom consistently poll around 60% opposing cutting off all funding for the war.

and just in iraq - not afganistan.

that's not "cutting off all funding for the war". its cutting off the funding of offensive operations.

perhaps waiting as the pointless meat grinder or iraq kills more & more of the military is the only way to bring the public around - eventually the public will wake up. but it is so S L O W. over 50% of MILITARY families want this over, per the NYT sunday.

It was vetoed. We could not override it. I highly doubt your option would be any more veto-proof than the one that was previously sent.

That said, the September debate will have a decidedly different tone than the previous ones had, as more and more Republicans are coming over to the anti-war side. It will be much more difficult for a veto to be sustained this time around, and I'd rather have the timetables we already passed once. Oh, and there is already expected to be much better funding for PTSD in the mil-con approps bill.

They can write any type conditions they want in an appropriations bill. But they keep telling us, the troops would be left in a trap with no funding. Such BS!

The public can be convinced of this if a little effort was put forth. But since the public isn't already there, few are willing to go out and promote the idea.

We won't get anywhere if we wait for the public to decide what we believe in. We have to make the case.

and that is unacceptable!