Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

why can't congress just NOT fund the war?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:37 AM
Original message
why can't congress just NOT fund the war?
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 11:42 AM by maxsolomon
i admit; i'm pretty naive & underinformed in many ways, but i just don't get why congress could'nt pass a bill funding the withdrawal in advance, have it sitting on the shelf ready to send to * should he ever wake the fuck up, and then just NOT DEBATE OR VOTE ON ANY MORE FUNDING FOR IRAQ OPERATIONS?

a pre-funded withdrawal bill could counter the tired "support the troops" charge, especially if it had generous PTSD counseling funds in it.

what don't i get about just NOT funding this pointless bloodbath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's how they finally ended Vietnam
I have been lobbying for this. Fund the withdrawl, not the occupation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. and it took a long time to get there -- a while for American public to accept it was the only way.
American public still apparently not there yet w Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Defunding did and did not end the Vietnam War
The first defunding bill was Cooper-Church, which passed in early 1971 and cut off funding for operations in Cambodia, but not Vietnam.

US involvement wound down during 1972 (Nixon's "secret" plan to get reelected), to the point that at the end of 1972 there were only 24,000 US troops in Vietnam (down from over 155,000 in 1971 and over 500,000 in 1968). The paris peace treaty was signed in early 1973. The Case-Church amendment, which cut off funding for further operations in Vietnam, was passed in June 1973 after US military operations were essentially over.


So, in a sense, the defunding didn't end the US involvement in the war, although effort to defund (and the successful defunding of operations in Cambodia) helped force Nixon to pull back. And, in a sense, the defunding did end the war since it ultimately set the stage for the South Vietnamese to give up the fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #18
27. facts are stupid things
ain't they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. its one of my silly fetishes -- gets me in trouble sometimes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
2.  because the corporate owned media cartel and the WH will spin it as
"Cutting off fund for the troops" and so far congress doesn't have the spine to stand up and call bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. don't the dems believe their own polls?
even gung-ho military famlies want this over.

there doesn't seem to be any alternative to de-funding, but i don't see the groundwork being laid to frame the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. well, you would think so but it hasn't made a difference.
their fear is "Democrats cut off funds for the troops because democrats don't support the troops, see we told you."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
4. Because of Rush Limbaugh ...
... seriously.

Reid and Pelosi and the campaign consultants are deathly afraid that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly ... Richard Bruce Cheney, Newt Gingrich and Mitch McConnell will call them bad names.

If the Democrats gave-in to the wishes of 70 precent of the American people, and did not send a war funding bill to the White House, the above mentioned folks would call the Democrats "surrender monkeys", "unpatriotic", "cutters and runners", and various other names. And the Dem leadership is mortified that somebody out in America will believe what those radical Republicans say about them, too.

Apparently the Congressional Dems are not strong enough to withstand the onslaught of name calling -- if they actually tried something more than symbolic that would bring the troops home.

Seriously ... prove me wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I have not yet seen an opinion poll that says American people favor defunding the war
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 12:32 PM by emulatorloo
I don't think the American people have yet figured out that it is the only way. I would be real interested to see a poll like that if you have one. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. that's not what i was trying to say
i was trying to say 2 things: the amurkan public wants this over, and i don't see any other way to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. I agree, defunding is what it will probably take. Also going to take a while for am public to
realize it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGKrebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. All I can think is that they are concerned that Bush* will
leave the troops there anyway, with less and less support and equipment as the money dwindles. It is a horrible scenario that only a madman would even consider, but perhaps it says something, if true, about what Congress thinks of him.

But you couldn't even really have a debate about that. As soon as you start down that road, and Bush states flatly that the soldiers aren't going anywhere until "the job is done", then you have to start visualizing scenarios, none of which have a good outcome. You would have to be VERY confident you could win that debate.

On the other hand, Bush has already shown that he will use signing statements to do just about anything he wants, and perhaps he would find some way to divert funds or something.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. Why? ---- No guts, no spines, no balls, no hearts, no souls....
They are not representing us, for sure.

TC

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. 1. spun as putting troops in harms way 2. american public not behind it 3. republicans still votin
g with Bush, no matter what they say/

It is going to take a while before american public realizes defunding the only way.

Watch cspan and you will see that Dems are trying while Repugs spew coordinated talking points and pose coordinated silly parliamentary challenges/

it is going to take longer still until republican reps and senators stop covering Bush's ass.

What is my strategy?

Pressure my REPUBLICAN reps and Senator to place country before the ego of George Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. if only i had GOP reps to pressure
my senators are Murray & Cantwell, my rep is Bagdhad Jim McDermott.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Sorry, but those are sad, mealy mouthed excuses for not ending the war
You and the Dems who believe this are simply putting politics before peoples' lives. Not only that, but this "conventional wisdom" is out of touch with reality. The reality is that more people favor defunding the war than oppose it(and note that this is a Faux poll of all things<http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/030107_Bush_Iraq_Ir... >

Sorry, but most of the Dems in Congress are continuing to play politics with peoples' lives. Meanwhile the public, which elected the Dems to majority last fall specifically to end the war, are once again way out in front wanting our troops brought home by any means necessary.

There is no good excuse for not defunding the war and bringing our troops home, and frankly if the Dems fail to do so they will pay a heavy price come election time.

The Dems have the power to bring this war to an end, it is past time for them to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. question:
what price will the dems "pay" next election for not de-funding? its not like we have a viable party on the left of the dems to vote for. they have us over a barrel.

i'm infuriated & exasperated with the dems' inability to end the war or impeach, but i will only register my anger in the primaries - i'll vote straight democratic in the general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. The price is that of not getting elected
Sorry, but if the Dems are going to continue to enable the war like they're 'Pugs, why in the hell should I vote for them? In fact how, in good conscience, could any committed anti-war person vote for them? Hell, Hillary's already stated that she'll essentially keep the war going. Pelosi preemptively took defunding the war off the table, even though the Dems were elected to a majority with the specfic task of ending the war by any means necessary. Yet, instead they continue to fund it, enable it, support it.

We the people are supposed to set the agenda for this nation through the reps that we elect. And when those reps fail to fulfill their duty, we have every right to kick them out of office. At this point it apparently doesn't matter whether it is a Dem or 'Pug in office, both are going to continue the war. Therefore it is our right, our duty to vote for those who best represent us. Anything else is giving tacit approval of these pro-war positions, something that I cannot do.

Sure, if people abandon the Dems in droves, they will lose. But perhaps a party will rise in their place that actually listens to the people rather than to the politicos and the corporations. It has happened before in this country, seems like it is about time for it to happen again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #20
26. Watch CSPAN-- Dems put forth decent legislation, REPUGS put forth TALKING POINTS
The last thing we need are more republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. Look at the current Congress' record
The Dems have put forth non-binding resolutions and bills that don't get signed, followed by a continued funding of the war. And the killing goes on. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. they aren't excuses -- those are the FACTS we have to deal with: A call for action
We have to:

1. convince people the spin of "leaving troops hanging" is bullshit

2. Convince Republicans to put party before country/Bush and vote with the DEMS

I write my Repub reps and Senator every week. How about you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. No, the facts are, as I've shown,
That the American people overwhelmingly want the Dems to end the war, using any means necessary(see the poll I linked to upthread). We don't need to cultivate bipartisan support, all the Dems need is the collective spine to hold up each and every supplemental war funding bill in committee forever. Hold back the funds and bring the troops home. That is the fact of the matter.

Defunding is an idea(again as I showed upthread) that more Americans support than oppose. Thus the Dems have the will of the people behind them, they have the power of the purse in Congress, again, all they need is a spine.

And if you really want to sit down and have a little tete a tete about who's the more responsible citizen and who has been more active in regards to the government and our country over the past thirty five years, PM me and we can get into it. Otherwise it is not fair to the OP to get into a pissing contest here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. I am trying to find your link re American public support of Defunding and I can't
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 04:17 PM by emulatorloo
Can you tell me what post it is in?

Because that is great news. (I agree w you that defunding is the way to get out of this mess)

All of the polls I have seen suggest that the American people have not wrapped their heads around defunding yet and still oppose it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. It is upthread
Post number fifteen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. If "us" means DU, then no.
But they ARE representing the American people as a whole, whom consistently poll around 60% opposing cutting off all funding for the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. vash, my suggestion is to GENEROUSLY fund WITHDRAWAL
and just in iraq - not afganistan.

that's not "cutting off all funding for the war". its cutting off the funding of offensive operations.

perhaps waiting as the pointless meat grinder or iraq kills more & more of the military is the only way to bring the public around - eventually the public will wake up. but it is so S L O W. over 50% of MILITARY families want this over, per the NYT sunday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. They already passed a bill with a timetable for withdrawal.
It was vetoed. We could not override it. I highly doubt your option would be any more veto-proof than the one that was previously sent.

That said, the September debate will have a decidedly different tone than the previous ones had, as more and more Republicans are coming over to the anti-war side. It will be much more difficult for a veto to be sustained this time around, and I'd rather have the timetables we already passed once. Oh, and there is already expected to be much better funding for PTSD in the mil-con approps bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. Because the public STILL does not support that. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmosh42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Congress Dems want to play politics with this also....
They can write any type conditions they want in an appropriations bill. But they keep telling us, the troops would be left in a trap with no funding. Such BS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sampsonblk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Very few are making the case for our side
The public can be convinced of this if a little effort was put forth. But since the public isn't already there, few are willing to go out and promote the idea.

We won't get anywhere if we wait for the public to decide what we believe in. We have to make the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
21. cuz the other kids would call them wussies.
and that is unacceptable!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC