And Bush Smacks It With A Veto

Posted on May 2, 2007
Filed Under Iraq, Donkeys (D), Elephants (R), America |

The inevitable happened. Me support.

First, the bill would mandate a rigid and artificial deadline for American troops to begin withdrawing from Iraq. That withdrawal could start as early as July 1, and it would have to start no later than Oct. 1, regardless of the situation on the ground.

It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing. All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars and gather their strength and begin plotting how to overthrow the government and take control of the country of Iraq.

Why don’t the Donkeys get that? There could be dire consquences for both the region and America.

Comments

12 Responses to “And Bush Smacks It With A Veto”

  1. The Raccoon on May 2nd, 2007 9:12 am

    I don’t think they care, Drima. Why bother considering the fate of America or the world when you can gain some perks right now by betraying both?

    This has proven to me that the Democrats are totally and completely corrupt, to the point of suicide.

  2. Drima on May 2nd, 2007 9:35 am

    How Nancy Pelosi can chatter happily about the bill is beyond me. Bush is gonna have a major headache for sure.

    Imagine the power vacuum that would be left if US troops withdraw. We’ll most probably witness Iran and Saudi Arabia salivating on each side. Iraq will be up for grabs and the message America will send out will be loud and clear. We’re defeatable come and kick our ass please. We could probably hold a memorial for the Kurds in advance too you know. Jeeez.

  3. Andrew Brehm on May 2nd, 2007 10:01 am

    “We could probably hold a memorial for the Kurds in advance too you know. ”

    You realise, of course, that should America abandon the Kurds, they will have to turn to Israel for help?

    The Kurds will not want to give up what they have now.

    Turkey will be a problem. But maybe Turkey fears Arab nationalism and Iran more than the Kurds?

  4. nominally challenged on May 2nd, 2007 10:14 am

    “Some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them” (Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene 5).

    The current generation in the US has had that country’s greatness thrust upon it, and by the way it is reacting, it would seem that this is almost against its will.

    The Democrats, like politicians everywhere, are merely trying to read the will of the people who will put them into power. It seems to me, from the reactions they’re getting, that they’re doing a pretty good job of reading the will of their voters. That their voters display little or no concern for, or understanding of the long-term outcomes of the policies of the people they are voting in, ought to come as no surprise.

    What is more, I would hazard a guess that Republican voters probably have an equal lack of real concern for the outcome of the foreign policy of their party. Voters everywhere vote first for what is best for them in their own suburb, town, city, state … then country, and only after that will they turn their gaze at the larger picture. Show me a society where that is not the case.

  5. The Raccoon on May 2nd, 2007 10:16 am

    NC -

    You’re right, of course. But so much hangs in the balance in this case, they simply cannot afford to be narrow-minded imbeciles incapable of seeing further than their own nose.

  6. Craig on May 2nd, 2007 10:17 am

    Drima, I’ve been following politics for a long time now, here in the US, and my feeling is that the democrats would have been shocked and dismayed if Bush had actually SIGNED that bill. I think they deliberately wrote it so as to be completely unacceptable to the Bush Administration. You see, if Bush had signed it and complete disaster followed (re: Iran and Iraq) - as it likely would - then the Democrats would pay a heavy price in the 08 elections. The status quo is much better for them, politically. That way, they can complain as loudly and as often as they want, without actually taking any risks. As long as everything they put forward gets rejected by the Bush Administration, they get to keep putting 100% of the blame for all that goes wrong on Bush, and by extension on Republicans. It sucks, but that’s how the game is played.

    As far as Iraq…. I hate to say it, but I think if the US pulls out of Iraq leaving it in the state it’s in now, there will be no civil war. I don’t think Iran would be foolish enough to try and rule Iraq by proxy as they do Lebanon, via the militias. It’s too close and too big and has too much oil for them to rely on somebody as unstable as Al Sadr and his ragtag irregulars. I think they’d annex Iraq, and make it an Iranian province. Iraq really couldn’t do much about it. And neither could Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are no match for the Iranian military. And the icing on the cake is that teh Iranians already KNOW who all the insurgents are in Iraq, as they already know who all the militia leaders are, in Iraq. They know who they are, they know where they live, and they even know who there friends and family are. The Pasdaran has been hosting Al Qaeda leaders on teh Iranian side of teh border for years, and they’ve been recruiting and funding both Sunni and Shia fighters to attack the US and to generally cause chaos and misery. If and when they take over Iraq, they can close down all of the militias and all of the insurgent groups in a matter of days. There won’t be any resistance left for the Saudis to pour money into. Very well played by Iran. Or very badly played by the US. Or both.

    I just hope somebody pulls their head out of their ass and takes a look at the writing on the wall, before it’s too late.

    The Kurds… I don’t think the US will abandon the Kurds. No matter what happens. I certainly hope not, anyway. That would be unforgivable.

  7. nominally challenged on May 2nd, 2007 10:26 am

    Raccoon - they simply cannot afford to be narrow-minded imbeciles incapable of seeing further than their own nose

    But they’re hunams. Why should we have greater expectations of them, just because they’re American?

  8. Roman Kalik on May 2nd, 2007 10:48 am

    The Democrats live a dream-world, in which their actions today somehow prevent a war that ended years ago. Oh, and where “we’re not Bush” is enough to win the elections.

  9. Not Your Mama on May 2nd, 2007 11:01 am

    Craig speaks some truth there…everyone fully expected this veto.

    The problem is regardless of what anyone thinks is best for the long term: we are not going to stay in Iraq. Period, end of story. Is not going to happen much beyond the ‘08 election which is not nearly enough time to stabilize anything. Blame dems, blame whoever but the truth is republican voters are squealing at equal or greater volume as dems.

    Another unfortunate truth is that even assuming we wanted to stay for the long haul: we don’t have the manpower to do it and we darned sure are not able to meet even our old recruitment goals much less the numbers we actually need now. We’re squeezing every last bit out of the military we have and hoping something gives before we lose it completely. What, you thought we had an unlimited supply of willing new bodies to ship overseas? Sorry, not happening. America’s young people are not enlisting and a draft would guarentee an even speedier and more complete withdrawal.

    What is more suicidal, leaving Iraq as bad as that is or completely destroying what’s left of your country’s military and leaving no safety net for national defense should something else arise?

  10. Roman Kalik on May 2nd, 2007 11:18 am

    Um, leaving Iraq now just about guarantees that “something else” and very soon.

  11. Drima on May 2nd, 2007 12:51 pm

    Craig, that’s about one of the best damn comments I’ve read in a while.

  12. Craig on May 2nd, 2007 9:01 pm

    Thanks, Drima :)

Leave a Reply