Republican calls for a New Iraqi War Vote in Congress

C

Care4all

Junior Member
Contributor
In an Armed Forces Senate Hearing last thursday, Senator Warner (R) said that if Iraq is now a civil war, that this means Congress has to take another vote as to whether to support troops in iraq with a civil war.

He said that the initial resolution was to remove saddam and remove wmd threat....

and if the war is now Civil war in Iraq, then Congress, by Law has to take another vote on whether to stay or leave....

WOW!

Wouldn't that hold the kettle to the fire with all of Congress..leave or stay and fight a civil war by picking a side...

NO WONDER this administration WON'T LET THIS WAR BE CALLED A CIVIL WAR...

hmmmmmmmmmmm......
 
I wonder if the Republicans will put up a right wing challenger to him, as they've done to Lincoln Chafee, the lone Republican to vote against authorizing bush to go to war in Iraq? Chafee is in a tough fight and might not make it.

And the Republican venom machine, and their cohorts in the "liberal media" (ROTFLMAO) are doing their jobs very well. Their jobs? Point at the Lieberman primary and scream "IS THERE NO ROOM FOR MODERATES WITH THE MOONBATS RUNNING THE DEM SHOW?" You know, like Klaatu's posts...and this way no one notices what the repukes are up to.

I wonder, if the Republicans attempt to take Warner out for this, as they are attempting to take out Chafee, how many threads Klaatu will start over it. More than he has started about Chafee? How many has he started about Chafee?

Oh, that's right, none. Huh. Oh well. Interesting to see that there are still some republicans left who aren't afraid of the gang that Rove has put together.
 
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
 
Brent said:
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...

as opposed to staying there longer, having MORE Americans die in vain and then leaving? Do you really expect us to accomplish anything in Iraq now that it's open season between sects other than flushing more lives and dollars down the shitter?
 
Brent said:
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...


bdw,


Why is it that they DIED for nothing? They succeeded with their goal of removing saddam and securing any WMD's if they had them....?

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! no?


also, I must say that this attitude that those that died, died in vain, if we return our soldiers back home is nothing less than intellectually DISHONEST, imo....

In fact, if they did die in VAIN, they died in vain because OUR MISSION was never defined accurately and because of president bush's LIES and DECEITFULNESS......that brought us in to this occupation and war in the first place.....blood is on his hands imo....
 
Last edited:
Brent said:
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...

as opposed to keeping us there so MORE people can die for nothing... good strategy brent. LOL.
 
Brent said:
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...
They've already died for nothing, Brent. That's what you lot simply refuse to admit. You'd rather tell yourselves fairy tales than face up to what you've done.

You're cowards to the core.
 
.

Republican calls for a New Iraqi War Vote in Congress

Its all part of the strategy to put distance between themselves and the failed bush presidency.
 
Brent said:
Yeah, I say remove all the troops now. That way everyone who has already died will have died in vain.... for absolutely nothing, when the government in Iraq falls to the wacko Islamic terrorists.
Click to expand...

They already did their job. And they did it incredibly well. They rolled over the iraqi army, removed Saddam from power, and provided security for three Iraqi elections. We're proud of that.

They are not trained for, nor should they be subjected to, being in the middle of a civil war.
 
Cypress said:
Republican calls for a New Iraqi War Vote in Congress

Its all part of the strategy to put distance between themselves and the failed bush presidency.
Click to expand...


Yeah I agree .. just like Hillary ...

Thats why Gore would be the Democrats Presidential Candidate of Integrity .... if only he would run ....
 
Darla said:
I wonder if the Republicans will put up a right wing challenger to him, as they've done to Lincoln Chafee, the lone Republican to vote against authorizing bush to go to war in Iraq? Chafee is in a tough fight and might not make it.

And the Republican venom machine, and their cohorts in the "liberal media" (ROTFLMAO) are doing their jobs very well. Their jobs? Point at the Lieberman primary and scream "IS THERE NO ROOM FOR MODERATES WITH THE MOONBATS RUNNING THE DEM SHOW?" You know, like Klaatu's posts...and this way no one notices what the repukes are up to.

I wonder, if the Republicans attempt to take Warner out for this, as they are attempting to take out Chafee, how many threads Klaatu will start over it. More than he has started about Chafee? How many has he started about Chafee?

Oh, that's right, none. Huh. Oh well. Interesting to see that there are still some republicans left who aren't afraid of the gang that Rove has put together.
Click to expand...


A) I think it is extremely dumb of the Dems in CT to remove Lieberman .. but thats just me .. Lieberman is Conservative on some issues, moderate on others and liberal on many. So ..from a tactical point of view .. if the Democrats were to win the majority .. having Lieberman around would be of great benefit to the party ... so if it is your wish to punish him for being behind Bush in regards to the Iraqi Invasion .. go right ahead .. be my guest ... and I will venture to say its going to turn around and bite you square in the ass....

B) As far Chafee is concerned ... he is a one term Senator .. not a 3 termer and former VP candidate like Lieberman ... and I am not a republican as I have told you on several occasions ... so if the republicans remove him ...which is not in stone.. no skin off my nose.
Maybe that is something that you cant seem to comprehend ... politics are not as black and white as you seem to think .. an individual can have several views across the spectrum and not be committed to one ideology ....
 
.

Lieberman's getting punished, because he's delusional on the Iraq War - not becasue he's a centrist Democrat. John Murtha is a conservative democrat, and the base loves him.

And the repugs and Fox News have been trying the old "Democrats are trending extreme left, and soft on Defense" schtick for months - years - now, and it ain't working:

Poll: Democrats Now Preferred On Terrorism

"Deep in the guts of that big Washington Post poll today is a startling number that didn't make it into the Post's accompanying article. It reads: Which political party, the (Democrats) or the (Republicans), do you trust to do a better job handling the U.S. campaign against terrorism?"

The answer: Democrats 46%, Republicans 38% That's right: this poll's respondents preferred Dems not just on Iraq, but on the broader war on terror.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_080606.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top