Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable

Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable

There are 33 comments on the Newsday story from Mar 23, 2007, titled Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable. In it, Newsday reports that:

A sharply divided House voted Friday to order President Bush to bring combat troops home from Iraq next year, a victory for Democrats in an epic war-powers struggle and Congress' boldest challenge yet to the ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#21 Mar 24, 2007
Jones wrote:
The House Dems Representatives led by Nancy Pelosi proved their loyalty to the Islamic terrorists of al Qaida that attacked US on 9/11 2001 and the Iranian evil regime of Ahmadinajad.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she is ready to bribe the Dems representatives with billions of Pork money from the American people taxes so that they will be ready to stub our US troops in the back while they are sacrificing their lives in the battlefield for the security and destiny of the American people.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she cannot care less about US troops victory and defeat of the Islamic terrorists in Iraq and that she wants to undercut their operation regardless if they win the war, and let the Islamic terrorists and Iran take control of Iraq and it oil fields, with severe consequences to US economy and security.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she is the most anti-American and Anti-US troops Speaker of the House in US history and that she is ready to betray our US troops and their families while giving great victory to the worst enemy of US on a silver platter: The Islamic terrorists and the terrorist controlled country Iran.
If those sad-sack militants are the worst enemy that faces the nation with most powerful military on the planet by miles, we're in really great shape.

Please tattoo on the inside of your eyelids the words of our president: "We have no evidence that Iraq was involved in 9-11." You need that as a constant reminder of how little sense it makes that we supposedly invaded a non-theocratic nation to combat fundamentally religious fanatic groups that operated elsewhere. Of course, NOW such terrorists have swarmed into Iraq - now that our geopoltically ambitious warmongering neocon leadership threw the region into just the sort of chaos that terrorists of every stripe thrive upon. And thrive they have: our own government's intelligence services report that terrorism and terrorists have increased considerably - worldwide - since this tragic act of aggression took place.

So think twice before calling unAmerican people who want to reverse a very bad misadventure that has only made matters worse by every measure for our nation and for the world, one that is at best HIGHLY suspect insofar as the motives of those who pushed for it to begin with, not to mention the methods they used in the pushing. When you and other right wingnuts accuse Democrats, who after all are Americans and live in America, of desiring the destruction of their own nation, you utterly lose every shred of credibility.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#22 Mar 24, 2007
Noticer wrote:
<quoted text>
Please tattoo on the inside of your eyelids the words of our president: "We have no evidence that Iraq was involved in 9-11."
Come on, N.

If he does that, how is he going to see it???

“Here we go!”

Since: Feb 07

Tampa, FL

#23 Mar 25, 2007
Noticer wrote:
<quoted text>
"Overwhelming force" against whom, exactly? "The enemy" actually consists of many different factions with a multitude of motives. The majority of them inhabitants who have turned to militant means to get us out of there. What's the point of staying, just to say "We didn't let them 'win?'"
It's no longer a war, it's a military occupation. We can't "win" that. We can only stay, or leave. It's far past time that we left, already.
All I'm saying is that if we are going to be there, we have it within our power, through the projection of power, to make the place safe. Let's not mince words. If we are going to occupy, then lets do it right or get our. I think that we disagree on the first part. But hey, what are forum friends for:)

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#24 Mar 25, 2007
I am finally capitulating to the liberal view. i think we ought to pull our armed forces out of every single country they are stationed in and start a pattern of forced isolationism. We should spend our trillions of dollars within our borders only for homeland security and social security and we should never spend a dime in aid outside of the united states. I mean, if the world thinks we ought to stay at home, why shouldn't we in ALL respects.

Let the dictators run their countries. Let the people in the middle east kill each other. it's not our fight, is it? We willthen only need a defensive posture if we ourselves are attacked on our own soil.

That's the liberal view.

The only problem with the liberal view is that they are just fine with spending money outside our borders for nicey nice stuff like humanitarian aid but do not wish to spend any money on defense (and yes, noticer, the Iraq occupation IS part of the defense effort despite how red in the face you get proclaiming otherwise).

In 2004, the United States provided some form of foreign assistance to about 150 countries. 150 countries??? why do they deserve our monies? we ought to stop.

So let's bring all the troops home now. This very instant. Let's discard any obligation we feel we may have to try and make the world a better place. it's not worth it. No one likes us. No one wants us in their business.

You know what then? I am now a liberal convert.

F*** everyone else. Let's take care of our own.
Jones

Bergenfield, NJ

#25 Mar 25, 2007
Noticer wrote:
<quoted text>
If those sad-sack militants are the worst enemy that faces the nation with most powerful military on the planet by miles, we're in really great shape.
Please tattoo on the inside of your eyelids the words of our president: "We have no evidence that Iraq was involved in 9-11." You need that as a constant reminder of how little sense it makes that we supposedly invaded a non-theocratic nation to combat fundamentally religious fanatic groups that operated elsewhere. Of course, NOW such terrorists have swarmed into Iraq - now that our geopoltically ambitious warmongering neocon leadership threw the region into just the sort of chaos that terrorists of every stripe thrive upon. And thrive they have: our own government's intelligence services report that terrorism and terrorists have increased considerably - worldwide - since this tragic act of aggression took place.
So think twice before calling unAmerican people who want to reverse a very bad misadventure that has only made matters worse by every measure for our nation and for the world, one that is at best HIGHLY suspect insofar as the motives of those who pushed for it to begin with, not to mention the methods they used in the pushing. When you and other right wingnuts accuse Democrats, who after all are Americans and live in America, of desiring the destruction of their own nation, you utterly lose every shred of credibility.
You are wrong. Hillary and Bill Clinton and all the documentation that was found after removal of Saddam in 2003 and confirmed by NYT on 11-3-2006 confirmed that Saddam was ready to use atomic bomb against Iraq’s neighbors in The Middle East in 2003.Our US troops literally saved the Middle East from a nuclear and chemical WMDs disaster.
Innocent Iraqi people are killed by the Islamic terrorists of al Qaida that are supported and emboldened by no other than wicked "Boss" Nancy Pelosi and the "Drunken Sailors" spenders Dems of the US House.
What a “wonderful” cooperation and partnership of the most Anti-American Speaker in US History and the al Qaida that attacked US on 9/11 and calling for US demise and Ahmadinajad against our US troops.
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#26 Mar 25, 2007
Just GUNS-n-AMMO wrote:
<quoted text>
You are without a doubt, a complete and utter baffoon.
1) Iraq finance terrorism for many years, Sadam specifically, not to mention the fact that he was murdering hundreds of thousands of his people with a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" ( MUSTARD GAS ), and plowed them into mass graves.
2) In case you hadnt noticed you "non-vet" liar baffoon, We got our asses kicked by terrorists with the bombings of our embassy's killing hundreds, Marine Barracks some years ago, USS Cole ship attack, our Pentagon and NEW YORK CITY.
3) Only Cowards turn a YELLOW BACK to their enemy upon confrontation. Is that how you happend to survive Nam ? That is, if you even served.
4) It is always in the best interest to take the fight to the grounds of the opposing enemy rather than drawing the front line here, baffoon.
5) I served, and did so with honor, integrity, and took a oath. We all knew the risks, as they know now. We had a job to do, just as they have one to do now. Maybe you should do your part here instead of critisizing and ridicule, and being part of the problem, be part of the solution in ridding this world of those who's sole purpose in life is to kill you and your family. For that is EXACTLY what Islamic Radical Fascists want.
Um, the guy said we shouldn't have gone into Iraq. The "Islamic Radical Fascists" you mention were not in Iraq, which was one of the few non-theocracies in the Mideast, and which - according to George W. Bush himself - had no connection with 9-11.

It was clearly a pretext for establishing our current military occupation, with motives and goals that this administration has never been straight with us about and are not to this day.

I think if were invaded and occupied by a foreign nation, you'd consider it cowardly if many of us didn't continue to fight the occupiers even after they'd defeated our forces and taken over.
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#27 Mar 25, 2007
holysmokes wrote:
<quoted text>Come on, N.
If he does that, how is he going to see it???
Well...you have a point. He's enough in the dark, as it is.
Grumpy

AOL

#28 Mar 25, 2007
Hmmmmmmmm!!!! The dems are up to their armpits in pork. Take a look at the bill and you will see that Pelosi added alot of pork provisions on it to be voted on.
boobTube

Florence, OR

#29 Mar 25, 2007
holysmokes wrote:
I am finally capitulating to the liberal view. i think we ought to pull our armed forces out of every single country they are stationed in and start a pattern of forced isolationism. We should spend our trillions of dollars within our borders only for homeland security and social security and we should never spend a dime in aid outside of the united states. I mean, if the world thinks we ought to stay at home, why shouldn't we in ALL respects.
Let the dictators run their countries. Let the people in the middle east kill each other. it's not our fight, is it? We willthen only need a defensive posture if we ourselves are attacked on our own soil.
That's the liberal view.
The only problem with the liberal view is that they are just fine with spending money outside our borders for nicey nice stuff like humanitarian aid but do not wish to spend any money on defense (and yes, noticer, the Iraq occupation IS part of the defense effort despite how red in the face you get proclaiming otherwise).
In 2004, the United States provided some form of foreign assistance to about 150 countries. 150 countries??? why do they deserve our monies? we ought to stop.
So let's bring all the troops home now. This very instant. Let's discard any obligation we feel we may have to try and make the world a better place. it's not worth it. No one likes us. No one wants us in their business.
You know what then? I am now a liberal convert.
F*** everyone else. Let's take care of our own.
What would happen to the dollar if we were to isolate and let the Yen dominate?

(or any other contender)
Snakelady

Dayton, OH

#30 Mar 25, 2007
holysmokes wrote:
I am finally capitulating to the liberal view. i think we ought to pull our armed forces out of every single country they are stationed in and start a pattern of forced isolationism. We should spend our trillions of dollars within our borders only for homeland security and social security and we should never spend a dime in aid outside of the united states. I mean, if the world thinks we ought to stay at home, why shouldn't we in ALL respects.
Let the dictators run their countries. Let the people in the middle east kill each other. it's not our fight, is it? We willthen only need a defensive posture if we ourselves are attacked on our own soil.
That's the liberal view.
The only problem with the liberal view is that they are just fine with spending money outside our borders for nicey nice stuff like humanitarian aid but do not wish to spend any money on defense (and yes, noticer, the Iraq occupation IS part of the defense effort despite how red in the face you get proclaiming otherwise).
In 2004, the United States provided some form of foreign assistance to about 150 countries. 150 countries??? why do they deserve our monies? we ought to stop.
So let's bring all the troops home now. This very instant. Let's discard any obligation we feel we may have to try and make the world a better place. it's not worth it. No one likes us. No one wants us in their business.
You know what then? I am now a liberal convert.
F*** everyone else. Let's take care of our own.
Most Americans only know one side of the story. See the way we get so rich is by ripping off other countries. Really, look into it, you'll be amazed. After our business corporations and politicians rip off the countries they then offer services to compensate. That sounds fair right? Except instead of taking a share of the profit they received they extend their hand to our broke asses.
Our politicians are the real problem.
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#31 Mar 25, 2007
Jones wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. Hillary and Bill Clinton and all the documentation that was found after removal of Saddam in 2003 and confirmed by NYT on 11-3-2006 confirmed that Saddam was ready to use atomic bomb against Iraq’s neighbors in The Middle East in 2003.Our US troops literally saved the Middle East from a nuclear and chemical WMDs disaster.
Innocent Iraqi people are killed by the Islamic terrorists of al Qaida that are supported and emboldened by no other than wicked "Boss" Nancy Pelosi and the "Drunken Sailors" spenders Dems of the US House.
What a “wonderful” cooperation and partnership of the most Anti-American Speaker in US History and the al Qaida that attacked US on 9/11 and calling for US demise and Ahmadinajad against our US troops.
Really? Saddam was "ready" to use nuclear and chemical weapons in 2003 that he didn't have?? You don't say. Our troops may have "saved" the Middle East from a fantasy disaster with those nonexistent weapons, but it was those troops who caused the chaos in the first place that emboldened the al Queda terrorists to come in and kill innocent Iraqi people (those not blown to pieces by our initial "shock and awe" bombing of Bagdhad). Many of those Iraqi people have themselves taken up arms against our troops, I guess out of sheer gratitude for that.

The only ones in our government calling for Ahmadinajad to take military action against our troops are the same ones planning for an invasion of Iran. Whoever they are (hint: it ain't Pelosi and the Democrats).

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#32 Mar 25, 2007
Snakelady wrote:
<quoted text>
Our politicians are the real problem.
Snakes,

You've said the truest thing of all.

Smokes.
boobTube

Florence, OR

#33 Mar 25, 2007
I bet other countries are cozy havens to live in too. How can I emmigrate and get free groceries and a kid to cut my firwood?

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 Putz Pence Swamp 1
More from around the web