Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Arrgh! (and NOT the pirate kind!)

Want to know what the Democrats will do if they take over Congress and the President doesn't bow to their demands and pull our troops out of Iraq?


I know, not a big surprise, we've known that was their thinking, but now they are actually saying it- Anxious Dems eye power of the purse on Iraq (It takes FOREVER to load...be patient, go get a drink, play a game of Alchemy, fix a snack...that should be long enough!)

Charlie Rangel at least is being up front about it-

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) will chair the powerful Ways and Means Committee if Democrats win control of the House next year, but his main goal in 2007 does not fall within his panel’s jurisdiction.

“I can’t stop this war,” a frustrated Rangel said in a recent interview, reiterating his vow to retire from Congress if Democrats fall short of a majority in the House.

But when pressed on how he could stop the war even if Democrats control the House during the last years of President Bush’s second term, Rangel paused before saying, “You’ve got to be able to pay for the war, don’t you?”

And Woolsey is willing to do to Iraq what was done to Vietnam-

“Personally, I wouldn’t spend another dime [on the war,]” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.).

Woolsey is among the Democrats in Congress who are hoping to control the power of the purse in 2007 to force an end to the war. Woolsey and some of her colleagues note that Congress helped force the end of Vietnam War by refusing to pay for it.

Make no mistake, even the Dems in Congress who don't want to cut ALL spending are willing to sacrifice our men and women and the Iraqi people to make their point-

Some Democratic legislators want to halt funding for the war immediately, while others say they would allocate money for activities such as reconstruction, setting up international security forces, and the ultimate withdrawal of U.S. troops.

How about funding for body armor, vehicles, ammo, and such? Somehow, I don't think such things are covered under the umbrella of 'reconstruction'. If this atrocity occurs, will my liberal friends be screaming as loudly as they did when they thought the Republicans weren't funding body armor to their satisfaction? (Never mind the fact that many of the TROOPS didn't want more armor, it just slowed them down!)

Then there's this gem-

Having lost the last two elections in part because of national security issues, Democratic leaders have been reluctant to spell out their exact Iraq war funding strategy.

“I don’t think the Democratic leadership should put that out at the moment,” Woolsey said.

Because they STILL don't HAVE a strategy! Good frickin' grief people!

As a military spouse, this bit absolutely terrifies me-

Abercrombie stressed that Democrats are not going to sever funding for the troops. Cutting off funding is “easy to say and another thing to do,” according to Abercrombie.

What’s more like likely, he said, is to fund the conflict in a way that will end the war by reallocating money to new initiatives.

End the war by allocating the money elsewhere? What is that other than taking money meant for the things soldiers need and spending it on something else?

Let me be clear about this. If the Democrats win the House this fall, they WILL take money OUR TROOPS NEED and spend it somewhere else. That's money for vehicles, equipment, guns, ammunition, helmets, body armor, computers, communications equipment, and so on. Cutting spending on the War means cutting spending on our troops.

This means that MORE MEN WILL DIE. Men, like those in my husband's unit who have VOLUNTEERED to go to Iraq, WILL DIE. Make no mistake about that.

I haven't even covered what will happen to the Iraqi people were this to occur. Terrorists will be all the more emboldened and scores more Iraqis will die as a result.

Yeah, this one has me riled. When people do things that put my husband's LIFE in danger, it tenda to make me angry.



At September 28, 2006 8:59 AM, Blogger Alicia said...

Hi! Alicia here, from the hotel computer in Greencastle, PA. It's kind of funny, because I'd just asked my family what they thought of the war, and they were absolutely in favor of it, saying that we did the right thing all along. I read this article and your commentary on it. It strikes me as a dumb "power-over" technique to try to cut the funding--no matter what happened in the past, we are there, and cutting funding will, as you said, endanger the soldiers and the Iraqi people. More than that, it was like saying "if we can't win the argument by the ordinary means, we'll force everyone to stop," and that's weakening their own intellectual position (besides having devastating consequences in the real world). I'll pray that all of us are able to use our influence for more honest responses to the war!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home