My 2 cents on whether to cut funding.....NO

[burythehatchet]

The reason is that this administration will not hesitate to actually cut off supplies for the troops just to make some political points. I have no doubt about that.

[Monkeyman]

1. Yep he does not care about the men or women serving

[Warren Stupidity]

2. I doubt that.

And I doubt that our military would allow their forces to be treated that way. The troops would come home.

But surely you have a better way to end the war, an effective strategy that will result in a withdrawal and an end to the occupation? What is it?

[burythehatchet]

4. Take the white house. The only viable strategy

[Warren Stupidity]

5. That would do nothing to end the war until 1-20-09

I find that less than an effective strategy. Taking actual effective action, of which there is only one real choice which is to cut the funding now, of course has risks. Doing nothing is in turn always a safer alternative. Then again it is not our doors being kicked in by storm troopers, so no sense of urgency, right?

[burythehatchet]

7. Oh please give it a rest

like this criminal administration is going to let anyone alter their plans. I'm ready to shed my blood on the streets if it'll end this shit, but America just isn't ready. And if you think any troop is going to be home by the date you mentioned...

[Warren Stupidity]

9. You are ready to shed your blood but not cut off funds?

I find that passingly strange.

By the way if you do not want to discuss this topic I suggest you not start messages about it. I will not give it a rest.

[burythehatchet]

10. I think you just declared a warren yourself

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Can we debate the issues?

Or are you going to continue to tell me to give it a rest and call me stupid?

Why should we vote for another year of war? Why should our party once again fail to take a stand against this crap?

What? Bush might harm the troops by leaving them stranded in Iraq? That is your argument for voting yes for more war? Are you serious?

[burythehatchet]

17. you're just off on some self rightous tangent

We agree. My point is that more soldiers are going to get killed regardless if we vote to defund or not. But if we vote to defund - which is a meaningless vote in the context of political reality - rove will have an excuse to MORE troops in harms way and try to hang it around Nancy's neck.

[TheWraith]

12. We can't cut off the funding now.

Operations are already funded through this year. No new funding is required until next year.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. Fine but a funding bill is about to hit the floor.

The OP suggests we vote for more funds and more war. I disagree.

[dkofos]

3. They are already funded for this year.

It is next years funding we want cut off.

Or should we prolong the war another year??

[Tinksrival]

6. The military is waking up to the Republican con job.

The myth that Republicans are better for the military is disolving before our eyes. It has been a long time since Vietnam but military family perceptions handed down generation after generation takes time and an idiot like Pres Pissypants to turn around. I think the military is turning that corner and pulling the funds would be political suicide for the Dems. I am married to an Army vet who has seen the light! Thank You Jesus! :)

[burythehatchet]

8. Yeah, Nicholson, the Brownie of the VA. What a turd.

[EFerrari]

11. bury, do you understand that the actual welfare of our troops

is not a Bush priority?

There is no correlation between funding and supply.

See: Jessica Lynch.
:(

[burythehatchet]

13. yes, that's the point

bush is willing to let soldiers die just so he can score some political points. He will again use them as pawns to advance his grip on power.

[EFerrari]

14. But he will do that no matter what we do.

It is a very tough problem. I hope Nancy and Harry are eating their Wheaties. :(