(I accidentally posted this in General Discussion and here, hopefully that's not an issue as I'm not sure how to delete posts)
At any rate, this is a must read, trust me!
"I supported our original mission, which was humanitarian in nature and limited in scope. I can no longer support a continued United States presence ... because the nature of the mission is now unrealistic and because the scope of our mission is now limitless. . . Mr. President, it is no small feat for a superpower to accept setback on the world stage, but a step backward is sometimes the wisest course. I believe that withdrawal is now the more prudent option."
-- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX)
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Former Representative Tom DeLay (R-TX)
Even President Bush agrees:
"I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
--George W. Bush
For the rest, click here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/republicans-vote-to-cut-o_b_72853.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
