Please Explain. - Democratic Underground

JFN1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:06 PM
Original message

Please Explain.

Edited on Tue Oct-30-07 04:12 PM by JFN1

http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20071030/D8SJP5AG0.html">WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats are debating whether to approve $50 billion to $70 billion more for Iraq and Afghanistan, less than half of President Bush's $196 billion request but enough to keep the wars afloat for a few more months.

Such a move would satisfy party members who want to spare the Pentagon from a painful budget dance and show support for the troops as Congress considers its next major step on Iraq.

Now, could some please explain exactly how the FUCK funding a war - is supporting the troops? I desperately want to understand what is going through these people's minds when they take such a stupid position...

Edited for link

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sicksicksick_N_tired

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:10 PM
Response to Original message

1. linky please

The Democrats are trying to restrain the administration's intentions to expand the war (and redirect money where it should not be going) by only funding what's necessary to sustain our troops.

I'd also guess some serious oversight provisions are in all defense and war appropriations bills, these days. Too damn much money gone missing while our soldiers have gone without what they should be provided.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JFN1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Added the link

But I think you must be kidding. Serious oversight? From this Congress?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sicksicksick_N_tired

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #2

7. Thank you. If there's no oversight, junior wouldn't've been bitching this morning. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JFN1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. Junior wans't bitching about oversight

He was petulantly screaming because Democrats didn't give him what he wanted RIGHT NOW.

The delay by Dems is just for show, methinks - as is Bush's bitching.

Political theater, for our benefit, for Bush KNOWS he'll get what he wants.

And he'll get it like he's always gotten it from this Congress (and the last).

NO STRINGS ATTACHED.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

walldude

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:14 PM
Response to Original message

3. Re-election is what's going through their minds

They seem to think that when Bush says "you aren't supporting the troops" that it's true, and that the American people believe it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JFN1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #3

5. Hmmm

So they are not thinking about:

- The troops or their families
- National security
- The effect on the economy
- Mideast peace
- Innocent civilians
- The state of our armed forces
- America's standing in the world
- Veteran's health (both mental and physical) after the war
- The environment

It's EXCLUSIVELY about THEM?

Do I have this correct?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

walldude

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #5

9. Not exactly, but whenever one of those subjects comes up

or a vote on one of those subjects comes up, re-election chances figure in how they vote and how they address the issue. They do not think exclusively about what is right and what is wrong. Keeping their job is a huge consideration in whatever they do. If I'm wrong about this then please explain to me how the bankruptcy bill passed and the SCHIP bill didn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NMMNG

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:19 PM
Response to Original message

4. Sending the troops to be killed is supporting them

Duh.

Why do you hate America?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tierra_y_Libertad

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:26 PM
Response to Original message

6. Politics as usual at it's ugliest. Aka - "practical politics".

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RufusEarl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-30-07 04:46 PM
Response to Original message

10. I may be completely off base here,

and probably am. But i understood Bu$h wanted 80+billion in this funding to retro fit B-1 bombers to be able to drop bunker buster bombs. Perhaps just perhaps congress is holding back monies to keep Bu$h from doing just that.

After all we don't need that munition in Iraq are Afghanistan, the only place we need that capability is in Iran. So perhaps that's the reason for the cutback in funding, if it is and i don't know that it is, that may be the reason.

Of course cut all funding and problem solved!

Peace!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon May 06th 2024, 05:39 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.