The impending Veto

[TheMercenary]

I wish the process would move faster. Bush is going to veto it and there are not enough votes to over turn it, which puts the process squarely back into the lap of Congress to fit. If I were Bush, who we all know is going to veto it, I would be waiting at the door of the White House with a pen in hand. When they broght it to the door, I would not even let them in, sign it and send it right back so I could have my weekend off. This is like watching grass grow.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

[elSicomoro]

It's all about the drama...both sides are doing great right now.

I see Bush getting hurt worse by this than the Dems and Congress. The general sentiment seems to be drastic action on Iraq, which the president seems unwilling to do. And I don't consider a troop surge to be drastic.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by sycamore

It's all about the drama...both sides are doing great right now.

Thats what we get for voting in lawyers...

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

This is like watching grass grow.

Which is also what you said when dead soldiers were arriving in Dover AFB.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Which is also what you said when dead soldiers were arriving in Dover AFB.

Ha. Really? Did you get a hard-on when you said that?

[glatt]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I wish the process would move faster.

And that is precisely why it is moving as slowly as it is. It's more effective this way. It's all about having the issue in the news cycle for as long as possible.

[Griff]

It is nice to see Congress deliberate instead of prostrating before the executive, looks a little like a Republic.

[Spexxvet]

If Bush vetos this bill, it just proves that he doesn't support our troops.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

If Bush vetos this bill, it just proves that he doesn't support our troops.

That would be bullshit. It proves that he is going to do what he said he would do. Not something that I really support. But for my friends who are there it sends the wrong message IMHO. Either pull out completely now or fund the troops. But don't tell them how to do their job.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

But don't tell them how to do their job.

That would be bullshit. Nothing in the bill says how they should do their jobs.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

That would be bullshit. Nothing in the bill says how they should do their jobs.

Bullshit to that. When you order a withdrawl that is telling people who have no business to do so, how to conduct a military operation. That is telling them how to do their job any way you care to spin it.

[xoxoxoBruce]

You assume the military is doing it now, the way they would without political interference .... that is bullshit.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Bullshit to that. When you order a withdrawl that is telling people who have no business to do so, how to conduct a military operation.

No, they can and should withdraw by whatever means they see fit. But it is not up to the military how long it stays in any particular war. Either Congress or the President can end it whenever they want. Of course, it's harder for Congress to do it.

That is telling them how to do their job any way you care to spin it.

No, it's telling them what job to do. The military doesn't pick its jobs.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Bullshit to that. When you order a withdrawl that is telling people who have no business to do so, how to conduct a military operation.

Who will decide when America is defeated? Do we keep sacrifice another 57,000 because we cannot admit to reality - to only protect a president's legacy? TheMercenary has just posted sacrifice more rather than admit reality. That is what Nixon would do.

Those who support a mental midget president will not even answer basic Military Science 101 questions.

What is the smoking gun that justifies "Mission Accomplished"?

What is the strategic objective?

What is the exit strategy defined by that strategic objective?

Those with contempt of American soldiers must avoid such questions. George Jr's political agenda and legacy are more important than providing troops what is necessary - such as armor - such as a viable strategy - sufficient numbers - answers to basic MS 101 questions. Those with contempt for the soldiers will not even acknowledge those questions exist. Those with contempt for the American soldier do not demand benchmarks - just like in Nam. No benchmarks imposed on a lying president simply massacred another 30,000 American soldiers. That is blunt contempt for the soldier, for the victimized nation of Iraq, and for anyone who considered Stalin, Milosevic, Saddam, and Hitler evil.

Good people should let George Jr massacre millions only for his glory and legacy? Imposing no benchmarks is to be an accessory to that massacre. Benchmarks will protect the American soldier from George Jr. Neither George Jr nor others with contempt for everything American will even touch three simple questions.

TheMercenary is right about one thing. Democrats are being too civil with a satanic president who would massacre good Americans to only protect his legacy. Posted is so accurate that George Jr supporters - those with contempt for humanity - cannot even answer three simple Military Science 101 questions. What color is my gauntlet? It's only three simple questions. George Jr cannot even pass a pop quiz - three simple questions. We cannot restrict him enough to protect the American soldier.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I wish the process would move faster. Bush is going to veto it and there are not enough votes to over turn it, which puts the process squarely back into the lap of Congress to fit.

Isn't this a comparable situation to the Clinton Impeachment? Everybody new that there wouldn't be enough votes to impeach, but the repubicans just kept pushing it through.