Senate preserves house timeline to withdraw

[jackoroe]

after 218-212 in the House

50-48 in the Senate

wow - what a mandate

LOL

You are, of course, right Chance. 50 out of 100 isn't even a majority, much less a mandate. If this was the popular view the vote would have been lopsided. The correct headline should read "Democrats support US surrender by razor thin vote along party lines". Bottom line is there was not enough support for a binding vote in the Senate. The dems are heading for a train wreck, just get out of the way and let 'em go!

 

[Andross]

Funny how a president can use a "veto" to override things like this. Why not declare him King George I. right away?

 

[doctorsun]

^Congress can override the veto. It's rare, but it can happen. With the bill passing by such narrow margins, a veto probably won't be overridden, but this is still an important precedent.

 

[chance1]

So what is the plan after the last troop leaves Iraq. How far do we retreat? Just a question to ponder?

Otherwords, what is the long range solution other than political victory in Washington DC?

The plan is appeasement

withdrawal

defeat

what a plan

oh you mean we have to do something after we pull the troops out?

we'll worry about that then - it'll be our candy store then

that's the current dem leadership talking out loud by the way

 

[chance1]

Funny how a president can use a "veto" to override things like this. Why not declare him King George I. right away?

it's called the u.s. govt

it's worked well

thanks

 

[naked gent]

Can anyone who has posted here explain to me the difference between timetables and benchmarks?

The obvious difference is that democrats prefer timetables and republicans prefer benchmarks but beyond that......what?

In the real world, on the ground in Baghdad as it were, it seems to me to be a distinction without a difference.

If timetables are tantamount to surrender what is the implict threat of benchmarks should they not be met?

If the timetable says we're outta there by Sept 08 and by that time no benchmarks have been met is there any difference.

This is assuming that the benchmarks have some teeth, without which they have no meaning.

If timetables mean we pull troops out do unmet benchmarks mean we put more troops in.....because thats not my impression.

The administration wants the Iraqi's to stand up so we can stand down......if by Sept 08 they have not stood up do we just extend the deadline. Is it actually the case that we're staying until they do stand up even if that takes another 10yrs?

Anyone think there are members of congress who want to take that to the voters?

 

[unclaimedblessing]

Obviously many of us are against the Iraq war.
The voters and Congress have taken the first legitimate steps in ending it.
Now is the time for the equally critical international community to come forward and guarantee that their armed services will take appropriate action if any country (notably Iran) interferes with Iraqs independence.
The USA was harshly and justifyably criticized for our invasion of Iraq. So let's hear from our ardent critics (some of whom are perpetual America bashers) as to what they propose to do to prevent further bloodshed and ensure Iraqi freedom.

 

[OtterJoq]

I could go on but time for the 80% to ..................

Zzzzzzzzzz...

SSDD

 

[OtterJoq]

it's called the u.s. govt

it's worked well

thanks

No thanks to Richard Milhouse Bush's assault on our Constitution.

 

[lancelva]

it's called the u.s. govt

it's worked well

thanks

So what do you call the Congressional power of oversight and of the purse that you have been so critical of? An inconvenient truth?

 

[JayHawk]

pork pork porky bill.....why would the dems take the high road and then hand a easy target like all the pork in the bill? Money for visiting the capitol and to replace farm animals. Definately emergent. Jackasses....wait thats right, Jackasses.

 

[playwithmemonkey]

LOL !!!! here piggy piggy piggy

 

[unclaimedblessing]

Pork on the bill?.
Simply outrageous!
By the way I have a bridge to nowhere in Alaska that I'll sell you.
The new white meat.

 

[slobone]

The effect of the timeline would be to "snatch defeat from the jaws of progress in Iraq," agreed Lieberman, who won a new term last fall in a three-way race after losing the Democratic nomination to an anti-war candidate.

Umm, Joe? The expression is "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory". I guess he didn't have enough nerve to suggest that an actual victory is a possibility. What a pest this guy is.

 

[CO Bob]

I am especially concerned as to what happens to the Kurdish part of Iraq and others in the rest of the country that showed any inclination toward the idea of liking democracy and helping the Americans and the British during these past few years.

You are right to be concerned! After the anti-war crowd motivated our withdrawal from Vietnam, hundred of thousands were killed by the communists that overran that country.

The same will happen. Iran? Al-Qaeda? Whoever......Sectarian violence will explode, and the region will become more volatile than ever. You think the body count is high now?

It is so foreign to me that some people miss this point. They can quickly declare the situation as a civil war, but have no follow-through of thought to see that a vacuum of power would be created, and the consequences that would occur?

I shake my head again. And also remember that some on this forum are just a mystery to me. A sad mystery.

 

[smelter]

The dems are heading for a train wreck, just get out of the way and let 'em go!

No Jack, the dems are gathering to watch a train wreck. The Senate and House Republicans have been loaded into cattle cars and coupled to the White House Steam Locomotive. Engineer George Bush (with Karl Rove shoveling in the coal) are headed toward the railroad bridge that was washed out back in November 2006. The Senators and House Pubs are screaming at George to stop, but for some reason, he doesn't hear a word they're saying. LOOK OUT BELOW!!