Why Is It Strategically Sound to Fund the War?

I don't get it.

Sure, it's likely true that a majority of congress supports the war.

And it may well be true that the majority of Americans believe the war shouldn't be stopped until the sitting president says so, even if they say they want the war ended in polls.

Still, it seems to me that the only way to build a lasting majority is to provoke debate on the issues and force citizens to take a stand. The Democrats may think they have no choice but to fund the war because they will be castigated as defeatists in the future. But this is only because they LET the GOP determine the narrative. They could get on TV and simply say "We have accomplished all of our objectives in Iraq. It's time to let the Iraqi people determine their own future. We will not vote for any additional bloodletting in Iraq. All allocated funds are to be used to withdraw soldiers from Iraq. Once withdrawal begins, we will allocate funding to make sure the withdrawal is peaceful and successful. Until that happens, President Bush will not receive another penny in our name."

Stand up for your beliefs. Tell the American people that every penny meant for Iraq will now go towards health-care, education, and paying down the national debt for our children. Let them know that there are choices in American politics.

Instead, we get more cynicism and more war funding. When is enough enough?

It wouldn't be all cotton candy, not at all. But that would be a hell of a lot better than a completely unfunded withdrawal, you'd think.

not wasting englands blood and treasure on a needless war.

this stupid shit never ends.

If the politicians had the guts to do the right thing once in a while.

No matter. We'll still be in Iraq 5 years from now most likely. And there will still be people on DU saying its all Ralph Nader or Cindy Sheehan's fault.

want to defund the war immediately. Last polls I saw put the number between 8% and 18%