Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have voiced confidence that the panel will pass a resolution disapproving President Bush's war buildup, The Associated Press reports.
More soon.
More soon.
Senate Rejects Bush's Troop Buildup
- Thread starter I think not
- Start date
It's a real double-edged sword, this situation
IF the motions to defeat the "surge" are successful, the "support the troops" mantra will be used to rally the mouth-breathers against anyone involved- the Neo-cons have really made a solid "chinese finger-trap" with this situation, I really am curious to how this is gonna play out...
And at the end of the SOTU speech last night, bush made a REAL cryptic comment, mentioning a few members of his admin and his own personal certainty that on "inauguration day 2009" those same people would still be in charge of the mess that is ME foreign policy- did anyone else catch that??
OH and the other proposal in the SOTU, about adding 90,000 troops AND the mention of the new volunteer thing (which didn't get ANY play in the analysis following, from anyone) where you can join up and somehow NOT be in the military, but still get sent overseas to assist in "nation building" etc
THAT little concept should have frightened more folks, I'd think, since it is making a weird new level between civilian and military- my first thoughts on it were that it could be a move to build a bridge towards some kind of draft in the future. I mean, it's volunteer now, and it's supposedly NOT military, how hard would it be to ask "all folks of age" to do a little mandatory "charity work"?? The Bush admin is all about using disingenuous names for stuff (1984 style even) and that little plan sounds a LOT like a sneaky, pre-emptive re-definition... I mean, Bush is always calling on US citizens to "help out"... mandating that wouldn't be too hard, would it?? I mean, if you don't volunteer, you are turning your back on the troops DIRECTLY...
Interesting situation in the nation to the south, to be sure
IF the motions to defeat the "surge" are successful, the "support the troops" mantra will be used to rally the mouth-breathers against anyone involved- the Neo-cons have really made a solid "chinese finger-trap" with this situation, I really am curious to how this is gonna play out...
And at the end of the SOTU speech last night, bush made a REAL cryptic comment, mentioning a few members of his admin and his own personal certainty that on "inauguration day 2009" those same people would still be in charge of the mess that is ME foreign policy- did anyone else catch that??
OH and the other proposal in the SOTU, about adding 90,000 troops AND the mention of the new volunteer thing (which didn't get ANY play in the analysis following, from anyone) where you can join up and somehow NOT be in the military, but still get sent overseas to assist in "nation building" etc
THAT little concept should have frightened more folks, I'd think, since it is making a weird new level between civilian and military- my first thoughts on it were that it could be a move to build a bridge towards some kind of draft in the future. I mean, it's volunteer now, and it's supposedly NOT military, how hard would it be to ask "all folks of age" to do a little mandatory "charity work"?? The Bush admin is all about using disingenuous names for stuff (1984 style even) and that little plan sounds a LOT like a sneaky, pre-emptive re-definition... I mean, Bush is always calling on US citizens to "help out"... mandating that wouldn't be too hard, would it?? I mean, if you don't volunteer, you are turning your back on the troops DIRECTLY...
Interesting situation in the nation to the south, to be sure
LOL right, I forgot the US is a "democracy" and so the president can do whatever he likes, silly me 
LOL right, I forgot the US is a "democracy" and so the president can do whatever he likes, silly me
You're confusing your PM with the President. SIlly you.
The Chinese Finger Trap that looks like a barrel of free oil, how unscrewcutable.:wave:
I wuz reedin that thave begun to waive requirements with respect to recruits, convicts and drug users are being signed up. I would think there would be a rush from the theocratic mob to get on board and save America, what with the enhanced chance of a government paid trip to Yankee heaven, they don't get virgins though they get lambs.:laughing7:
I tried to watch the Speech from the Throne last night but I couldn't be sure I wouldn't throw a beer bottle through the screen..:love9:
Last edited:
SFRC Approved Resolution
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/24/america/US-Iraq.php
Senate committee sends to full Senate resolution disapproving Bush's Iraq war policy
The Associated Press
Published: January 24, 2007
WASHINGTON: The Democratic-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee dismissed President George W. Bush's plans to increase troop strength in Iraq on Wednesday as "not in the national interest," an unusual wartime repudiation of the commander in chief. The vote was 12-9 and largely along party lines.
"We better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder," said Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, the sole Republican to join 11 Democrats in support of the measure.
Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden, the panel's chairman, said the legislation is "not an attempt to embarrass the president. ... It's an attempt to save the president from making a significant mistake with regard to our policy in Iraq."
The full Senate is scheduled to begin debate on the measure next week, and Biden has said he is willing to negotiate changes in hopes of attracting support from more Republicans.
Democrats in the House of Representatives intend to hold a vote shortly after the Senate acts.
Even Republicans opposed to the legislation expressed unease with the revised policy involving a war that has lasted almost four years, claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis and helped Democrats win control of Congress in last November's elections.
"I am not confident that President Bush's plan will succeed," said Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, senior Republican on the committee.
But he said in advance he would vote against the measure. "It is unclear to me how passing a nonbinding resolution that the president has already said he will ignore will contribute to any improvement or modification of our Iraq policy."
"The president is deeply invested in this plan, and the deployments ... have already begun," Lugar said.
He suggested a more forceful role for Congress, and said lawmakers must ensure the administration is "planning for contingencies, including the failure of the Iraqi government to reach compromises and the persistence of violence despite U.S. and Iraqi government efforts."
It's good to see the Senate finally join with the majority of the USA population in saying no more war.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/01/24/america/US-Iraq.php
Senate committee sends to full Senate resolution disapproving Bush's Iraq war policy
The Associated Press
Published: January 24, 2007
"We better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder," said Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, the sole Republican to join 11 Democrats in support of the measure.
Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden, the panel's chairman, said the legislation is "not an attempt to embarrass the president. ... It's an attempt to save the president from making a significant mistake with regard to our policy in Iraq."
The full Senate is scheduled to begin debate on the measure next week, and Biden has said he is willing to negotiate changes in hopes of attracting support from more Republicans.
Democrats in the House of Representatives intend to hold a vote shortly after the Senate acts.
Even Republicans opposed to the legislation expressed unease with the revised policy involving a war that has lasted almost four years, claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis and helped Democrats win control of Congress in last November's elections.
"I am not confident that President Bush's plan will succeed," said Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, senior Republican on the committee.
But he said in advance he would vote against the measure. "It is unclear to me how passing a nonbinding resolution that the president has already said he will ignore will contribute to any improvement or modification of our Iraq policy."
"The president is deeply invested in this plan, and the deployments ... have already begun," Lugar said.
He suggested a more forceful role for Congress, and said lawmakers must ensure the administration is "planning for contingencies, including the failure of the Iraqi government to reach compromises and the persistence of violence despite U.S. and Iraqi government efforts."
It's good to see the Senate finally join with the majority of the USA population in saying no more war.