House rejects quick drawdown from Afg...

House rejects quick drawdown from Afghanistan

There are 24 comments on the - Morning Sentinel story from Mar 17, 2011, titled House rejects quick drawdown from Afghanistan. In it, - Morning Sentinel reports that:

The vote was 321-93 with one member voting present, a show of bipartisanship on national security and a referendum on the president's policy after last year's troop buildup.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at - Morning Sentinel.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Bronx, NY

#22 Mar 19, 2011
Here's another serious matter that has started to receive attention;

May God bless and have mercy on us.


#23 Mar 19, 2011
It must be quick withdrawing of all these occupying troops. This genocide and crime against humanity commited by war criminals from usa and nato till now is really enough and it is the only way - to get out at last.

Livonia, LA

#24 Mar 21, 2011
KMA wrote:
A politician sees his family everyday; a deployed Soldier once a year. A politician flies 1st class; a Soldier flies in a C130. A politician's pension is not reduced; a Soldier's is clawed 65%. A politician enjoys an expense account; a Soldier must justify extra rations. A politician ...vows to defend their country; A Soldier actually keeps that promise. That's all I have to say...
this is a great blog of the truth worthy of being printed in the press.unfortunately the chicken shit liberal press would never print it!soldiers go through hardship to make these,(both party congerssman)feel good about a war that is getting soldiers killed and nothing good coming from day obama or whom ever will say its over and only part of the troops will be brought back.they think the public is too stupid to know that when we leave they will go back to usual?iraq still has 47000 troops there but the msm doesent tell the public this?according to the whitehouse iraq is over!then bring the 47000 troops home!!

Copperas Cove, TX

#25 Mar 23, 2011
hal wrote:
<quoted text>according to the whitehouse iraq is over!then bring the 47000 troops home!!
Good Point! There is a huge cost to have troops stationed around the world. Local communities frequently charge organizations fees connected with more police protection. At the very least, we need to charge Iraq for our costs. If they don't have the money, they sure have the oil they can pay it with.

But our leaders support a policy where we police their country and finance it on the backs of future generations. Any way you look at it, our policy is just ridiculous.

Our constitution calls for a defense of our country, not to defend other countries.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Walter Jones Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Cherokee, Lumbee argue over recognition bill (Apr '07) Apr '17 Normandie Kent 992
News Trump to GOP: Pass health care bill or seal you... Mar '17 Lottery Traitors 176
News Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney, ... Mar '17 Chilli J 33
News 2 Republicans join Democratic effort demanding ... Mar '17 Chilli J 76
News Party Unity? Trump faces criticism from Gop ran... Feb '17 YouDidntBuildThat 6
News It's time for an independent commission on Russ... Feb '17 Cheech the Conser... 9
News Abbreviated Pundit Round-up:'Draining the swamp... (Jan '17) Jan '17 Putz Pence Swamp 1
More from around the web