Well I saw this earlier today in a headline on yahoo, congress whats a pull out of us troops out of Iraq (Most likely on the 5 year anniversary). Congress says they want a pullout reguardless of the veto threats Bush is saying he will do. I find that amusing that they want to do this, even though most of them got their money for that oil they are trying to get. Reguardless though I don't think it will happen so what does everyone else think, is it a bunch of hot air or do they really mean it this time.

This post has been edited by Saint_Michael: Mar 28 2007, 03:36 AM

Give Nancy Pelosi her do for architecting this bill. She did a fine job of delivering on her promise to her electorate, which was to push for a speedy withdrawal of all troops from Iraq. She did so with the full backing of her party and she even got a couple of Republicans to defect and go to the Dark Side. Unfortunately, it all means squat when the day is done.

The Senate is gleefully forwarding the bill, as is, to our beloved retarded monkey President so he can promptly VETO it and send it back to the house to be reworked. In the end, no one wants to be left holding the bag when service men and women are half a world away, in desperate need of food, water, ammunition, fuel and all the other things a growing armed force needs - so some kind of compromise will be reached post haste so that a sign-able bill can reach the President's desk and provide the funds our folks so desperately need over there.

So, the Democrats get an A for effort, but an F for execution. They needed to do MORE with this bill so that it would go through both chambers of Congress and be veto-proof, and it should have been done the FIRST TIME. Now, the clock is ticking and they'll likely have to skip that language altogether and just get the money out there before something bad happens.

Mind you, Bush is abundantly aware that this is his last veto-able bill to be sent his way with regards to the war in the Middle East. 70 people died today in an extraordinarily violent day in Iraq and he's got NOTHING to show for his "troop surge" and his policy of "beat them till they submit". He'll get his money to get him by the next few months but by August, if he doesn't have something of substance to give to the people and Congress, his own party WILL defect and add new voices to the cry for withdrawal.

See, he just doesn't get it and probably never will. This isn't just LIKE Vietnam...it IS Vietnam all over again. The policy has failed, we're directly responsible for the most unstable region on the planet right now and smack dab in the middle of that firestorm is our Petroleum Reserve for the next century. His next, best hope is to just leave...let them duke it out, then validate the winner and give them just enough to start rebuilding by themselves. Anything more will result in an all out war between the Middle East and the remainder of NATO. Sad, but true.

So enjoy your sack of money, George...but know this, the next bag will have a VERY large tag on it, reading "Troop withdrawals to begin immediately" and you won't be able to afford the ink needed to try and veto it.

1. That why we said that Iraq is another Vietnam. People argued that it is not for the geographical and supported neighbors difference. It is an Vietnam in the sense you cannot end it and will be worth if you continue. Now it is bad the pullout but it is worth to continue since there are no light at the end of tunnel. You encouraged the Kurds and Shite to separate either my wrong aimed phrases or by resolving the army and banned the Bath party.or to call the Resistance a terrorists. You who destabilized the country, called the terrorists to came and train and they taught the Telepan in Afghanistan to do the same.

2. Remember that you by yourself was in Civil war and your country was established on the balance of power. The Russian Federation and Italy was also established after civil war. Old Ancients Egypt also unified by war etc etc.

3. Hope that US learn another lesson and not repeat using force to intervene in the affair of other country by false reasons.

4. Whatever Bush veto it or not, in March next year he will be in the last months to him. And the chance for another republican president are small.

5. By the way, I am against this war but against the pullout after distbelized the country and the region. I am as well against these terrorism. I was enjoying traveling everywhere by plane, train and ships without any restriction and fear. I am not comfortable now to travel and living in luxuries hotels. Thanks to the Internet, I do the communication and visits in verbal matter.

6. Be Just in your policy and don't depress the right of the others. Don't deny the other right to live and fight between them until settlement as you did. Don't critic the other. Don't deny other to prepare their defense and make the balance with your power. This will kill the terrorism not the force. No court procedure or punishment can stop this sick idea. The solution in justice which will protect you. The world was safer when there were two power in the world watching each other , competing and not acting lest the response.

7. I think Democrats want to do it before taking the presedincy as well because then they can not pullout by themselves because it will be disaster to US, the region and the world.

I doubt they mean it this time. I'm betting we'll be at war for 15-20 years or until we get a better president. I wonder why they keep saying things about pulling the troops out? What use is it to lie to US citizens and the world?