House, Senate both pass surrender legislation

[Dirt McGirt]

Republicans walked away from what put them in power - Ronald Reagan conservatism

But Dems overplayed their hand and misread what the voters wanted

The voters did not defeat in Iraq - that is what Dems pushed for

Defeat and surrender

I agree, the Dems have pushed for a plan to withdraw troops from Iraq since the beginning. But the fact that the middle has now turned to the Dems to get us out of there shows just how badly the Repubs and Bush have mismanaged Iraq. Sad but true.

 

[maineman]

can you explain the results of the WSJ poll that show that a majority of Americans are in favor of the democrat's funding bill and the timetable for withdrawal? It does not seem that the majority agrees with your assessment of the democrats overplaying their hand.

 

[red states rule]

I agree, the Dems have pushed for a plan to withdraw troops from Iraq since the beginning. But the fact that the middle has now turned to the Dems to get us out of there shows just how badly the Repubs and Bush have mismanaged Iraq. Sad but true.

If the Dems have so much support, why are the Dems caving and asking for help form Republicans?

 

[Dirt McGirt]

If the Dems have so much support, why are the Dems caving and asking for help form Republicans?

Because the majority of Americans believe that setting a timetable is a good idea. Putting the Repubs on the spot and forcing them to go on the record hurts them in the opinion polls and in the next election.

 

[red states rule]

Because the majority of Americans believe that setting a timetable is a good idea. Putting the Repubs on the spot and forcing them to go on the record hurts them in the opinion polls and in the next election.

The polls I listed go against you

Dems see they will not get the surrender date, they see the voters do not want to lose in Iraq, now they have to go to Republicans with hat in hand

 

[Dirt McGirt]

The polls I listed go against you

Dems see they will not get the surrender date, they see the voters do not want to lose in Iraq, now they have to go to Republicans with hat in hand

The polls you listed show that they don't want the Congress to defund the war. You can set a withdrawal date and still fund the war.

 

[red states rule]

The polls you listed show that they don't want the Congress to defund the war. You can set a withdrawal date and still fund the war.

According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable”
Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).
An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007).

 

[Care4all]

Well Red State, here is where I differ with you and maybe if you take a step back for a second and review what this "political talk" is really doing to the troops.... you might change your mind! ( hahaha, I KNOW that probably won't happen, but I challenge you to do such! )

First know that I am an Air Force brat, my father was in the Armed service for over 22 years, a "lifer" and my husband served a positive 4 year term in the Military also, so by no means am I against the Military.... I care for the Military, they are my kin, imo.

Now here's the kicker!

I see the American people, Republicans in particular, that are saying things like, "The Democrats want you to surrender...", the new term to replace the "Cut and run" talking point that was out there....are the ones that are actually hurting the troops Red.

I can understand why the Republicans in power had to "coin" such a phrase to help their own political cause, but in the mean while it is hurting the troops by telling them that they would be surrendering if they were redeployed out of the Iraqi arena.

YOU are the ones that are TELLING the troops that they would be "cowards", that THEY would be the ones flying the white flag,

When in truth, we all know that this would be a decision of the Commander in Chief or in this case a decision of Congress if it ever made it past a veto/override.

So the TROOPS should NEVER be pointed out as the ONES THAT SURRENDERED.....even if they were COMMANDED to withdraw...

YET, when you make these kind of statements like it seems that you have, (though I have not gone through all of the posts on this thread for the lack of time),.... YOU MAKE the TROOPS think that THEY are the ones that will be thought of as cowards, when they are not the ones that make the decision....

I think it is aweful that you are using the troops in this manner Red, it hurts their moral by USING them for political purpose and in this manner.

And believe me, the Democratic Party has done things to hurt them from time to time as well....

But in this case, I believe you and the party are hurting the troops by labeling them as basically cowards....when in reality they will be forced to leave through higher commands.

Care

 

[Shattered]

According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable”
Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).
An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007).

*nudge* You forgot your supporting link - those aren't your words.

 

[red states rule]

Announcing to the enemy and the world that you are going to leave innocent people unprotected as of a certain date...is not only really stupid but, when you realize what the ramifications are going to be...it's downright immoral.

The troops are speaking out against the Dems surrender plan as well

HERO REIDS DEM THE RIOT ACT
By GEOFF EARLE, Post Correspondent
HARRY REIDApril 24, 2007 -- WASHINGTON - A tough U.S. Marine stationed in one of the most hostile areas of Iraq has a message for Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid: "We need to stay here and help rebuild."

In raw and emotional language from the bloody front lines, Cpl. Tyler Rock, of the 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, skewered Reid for being far removed from the patriotism and progress in Iraq.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04242007...respondent.htm

 

[Dirt McGirt]

According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007). That same poll found a plurality of adults (45%) believe a terrorist attack against the United States is more likely if we withdraw our troops from Iraq while the “country remains unstable”

Timetable and immediate withdrawal are two different things. Next.

Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).

Geez, I'd hate to see the insurgents increase their attacks in Iraq. We just topped 100 deaths for April. But of course if US casualties are down by 60% and Fox News viewers believe that the attacks will increase with a timetable then it must be true.

An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007).

That question did not ask whether Americans were for or against setting a timetable. One can answer that a timetable hurts the troops and still be for it.

 

[red states rule]

I see the voters are against the Dems surrender bill - as they should

 

[Dirt McGirt]

I see the voters are against the Dems surrender bill - as they should

I see you know nothing about polls. You used a source that selectively took polling data and butchered it to reflect what it didn't. That same LA Times Poll that you cited:

"Asked whether Bush should accept or veto a bill that included a timetable, 48% said he should sign such a measure while 43% said he should reject it. A significant majority of Democrats — 74% — backed signing the bill; an even bigger majority of Republicans, 80%, supported a veto."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-ex-poll10apr10,1,412833.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

Clearly 48% > 43%.

 

[Care4all]

Perhaps staying there in Iraq is what has kept Al Qaeda there and brought even more members in to Iraq and if we did withdraw to surrounding regions, not just oneregion but regions, it would divide alqaeda and give us a better chance of conquering them Red?


Right now, it seems that Alqaeda in Iraq is dead set on making sure this Civil war continues, keeping us there in Iraq....that appears to be Alqaeda's plan...they have increased their suicide bombings and are trying to cause havoc...TO KEEP US THERE....

So why should we oblidge is how I look at it?

We are giving alqaeda what they want...

Us... tied up in Iraq while they continue building training camps in South Africa, the Sudan, and Afghanistan and could very well be planning their next attack....

Personally, I think we need to regroup, back off of Iraq, then go at them with a vengence where they are building training camps.

I think Alqaeda left in Iraq will return to afghanistan or they will follow us... I don't think they will STAY in Iraq without us there in force....no reason to...imo.

And lets say that they did decide to stay in Iraq...I think the Iraqis would squash them, themselves....without our help, because it is not in their best interest to NOT have peace and negotiations and compromise.

Care

 

[Dirt McGirt]

I just checked out every poll you used. In EVERY SINGLE POLL you cited, public opinion supports setting a timetable for withdrawal. Once again, your links are blown out the water.

According to a recent Pew Research survey, only 17% of Americans want an immediate withdrawal of troops (4/18-22, 2007).

Q.51 Do you think the U.S. should or should not set a timetable for when troops will be withdrawn from Iraq?
Should set a timetable 56%
Should not set a timetable 38%
Should get out now 1%
http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/323.pdf

Should a date for withdrawal be set, 70% of American believe it is likely that “insurgents will increase their attacks in Iraq” starting on that day. This is supported by 85% of Republicans, 71% of Independents and 60% of Democrats. (FOX News/Opinion Dynamics, 4/17-18, 2007).

FOX NEWS/OPINION DYNAMICS POLL:
32. Do you approve or disapprove of Congress setting a deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq?
Approve 54%
Disapprove 42%
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/041907_poll.pdf

An LA Times/Bloomberg polls reveals that 50% of Americans say setting a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq “hurts” the troops, while only 27% believe it “helps” the troops (4/5-9, 2007).

Q49. As you may know, Democrats in both houses of Congress passed legislation that ties further funding of the war in Iraq to targeted dates for withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. Bush says he will veto any measure that sets such a timetable because he believes it would tie the hands of battlefield commanders and make defeat in Iraq more likely. Do you think that Bush should sign a funding authorization that includes a timetable for withdrawal, or should he veto that legislation?
Pass legislation 48%
Veto it 43%
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2007-04/28957478.pdf

 

[Superlative]

I see the voters are against the Dems surrender bill - as they should

I see you are for the "Kill our troops and innocent civillians bill."

 

[Dirt McGirt]

I see you are for the "Kill our troops and innocent civillians bill."

No need to play the over the top, partisan rhetoric card. You'll just be considered in the same dramatic vain as Red States Rule. Not even his fellow conservatives like him.

 

[Superlative]

No need to play the over the top, partisan rhetoric card. You'll just be considered in the same dramatic vain as Red States Rule. Not even his fellow conservatives like him.

Dammit yer right.

I guess Ill save it for RSR then.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

Dammit yer right.

I guess Ill save it for RSR then.

RSR has tried to spin the polls to show that the public supports Bush vetoing this latest bit of legislation. I've provided links showing that it isn't true. Quite frankly, the bill in March should have been vetoed because it had so much pork. I still don't think it should be up to Congress to set the timetable- my issue with RSR was his intellectual dishonesty in using polls that don't reflect what he was arguing. Personally, if the Dems want to say that the war is lost and we should withdraw troops then they should send a bill with only enough funds to carry us through August or just defund the war entirely.

 

[Superlative]

RSR has tried to spin the polls to show that the public supports Bush vetoing this latest bit of legislation. I've provided links showing that it isn't true. Quite frankly, the bill in March should have been vetoed because it had so much pork. I still don't think it should be up to Congress to set the timetable- my issue with RSR was his intellectual dishonesty in using polls that don't reflect what he was arguing. Personally, if the Dems want to say that the war is lost and we should withdraw troops then they should send a bill with only enough funds to carry us through August or just defund the war entirely.

The war was won a long time ago, the US military executed their goals perfectly.

We are stuck in an occupation.

We are stuck in a mess, and people are dying.

It would be wrong for the US to just leave immediately.

We simply cannot.

I believe the US can begin withdrawl when there are fully functional public services, Government, Police, and it would be nice of there were utilities, funtioning hospitals and city services.

But first and foremost, functioning government and Police force.

then and only then should the US "surrender" Iraq to its people.