Getting Iraq War Funding Wrong Again

Very true.

They voted to give Bush the power to ignore the constitution, then became hysterical when he did. Seems like they are equally guilty of sending us to war on poor intelligence.

We should remove ourselves, take our funding away, and never have anything further to do with the U.N.

The safest manner would not include minimum wage hikes & money for pickle makers in the funding bills. Give them the funding, finish what we started, no matter if we should have started it or not. Unless people are more interested in blame & power than the troops.

 

We already did. Our troops deposed Saddam Hussein and gave the Iraqi people a representative form of government. Stopping the civil war is up to the Iraqi people.

It is time to bring our troops home or send them to Afghanistan(where they should have been sent).

 

Your wish is granted. Bush is on the phone now as we speak...

 

Ken, the sky must be falling, because I agree with you on this one issue. We did what we could, handed them democracy and freedom from a tyrant on a literal silver platter - now we need to get out and leave the rest to the Iraqi people to deal with.

 

This is why I don't trust Ron Paul right now. This kind of thinking seems extremely naive. Al Qaeda is fighting there, and that is better than them fighting here. That seems so obvious, which makes one wonder why Paul doesn't see it, and why those who support Paul cannot see how short-sighted he is on this.

 

They have taken away the freedom of 3000 people to live. They have, to some degree, taken away our freedom to travel in peace. I don't get on an airplane anymore without looking around to see who is there and imagining various scenarios. I know that kind of imagination puts me right there with Poncho (just kidding, my friend), but I don't have the freedom to rest easy.

The Patriot Act, MCA, or anything else did not take away any freedoms of mine. Al Qaeda and its radicalism is a threat to our way of life and our freedom. You can imagine living in Baghdad or Israel and looking at every car or bus stop wondering which will be the next one to blow up. That could happen here in America and you are kidding yourself if you don't think Al Qaeda would like it to.

 

Invading Iraq did nothing to stop al Qaeda from doing so.

It is foolish to think that by keeping our troops in the quagmire in Iraq is stopping al Qaeda from attacking within our borders. It only took 19 men to pull off the attacks on 9/11/2001. It is foolish to think that al Qaeda would feel compelled to keep a similar number of 19 men in Iraq because we have our troops there.

 

Congressman Ron Paul is the only GOP presidential candidate who is worthy of the trust of the American people. He is the only candidate who has any sense of advocating - across the board - what is in the best interest of the United States and of restoring limited, constitutional government to this nation.

 

I don't think you know that.

If you are correct, then we are in serious trouble. These short-sighted statements give me no confidence at all. I agree with limited, constitutional government. I disagree with losing a war for self-interest. As I have said before, the question of whether or not we should have gone in is moot. But now that we are there, we must win. And Ron Paul does not seem to have the will to win.

 

We have already won. The president said so on this very day four years ago.

We deposed Saddam Hussein and gave the Iraqi people a representative form of government - as we set out to do.

Stopping the Iraqi civil war is the responsibility of the Iraqis.

It is foolish to tie the withdrawal of our troops to the actions of the Iraqis in stopping a civil war that they started and only they can end.

 

I think four years ago, no one anticipated what happened. We can say they were short-sighted (and they probably were). But again, we have to live in reality. I think what we need to do is provide a stable country so the government can get on its feet. That is how the civil war will be stopped.

I undersatnd where you are coming from. There is obviously no easy way to do this. But we have to make the best of it, IMO.

 

Otherwise we might as well just turn it over to Iran.

 

There seems to be another kind of short citedness about Iraq. If Iraq becomes a terrorist state then Israel gets involved because the primary focus of the terrorists is the destruction of Israel. We then will be right back over there with less control than we have now.

 

Yeah, they'll clean it up, allright.

Kind of a flippant statement for someone so willing to drag someone else over the coals for saying something like that.

 

Well, since the Shiites will control Iraq south of the Kurdish area, and since Iran is controlled by Shiites, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who will become allies in that region of the Middle East.

Saddam Hussein was an evil man but he did keep a lid on the influence of Iran(since Hussein was a secularist). We removed that lid and it can't be put back into place.

By the way, al Qaeda is composed of Sunnis. That is why Iran was willing to help us after the 9/11/2001 attacks. But the Bush administration foolishly turned its back on their help.

 

We can't. Only the Iraqis can stabilize their country.

But if we could, which side do you want us to support, Pastor Larry? The Shiites who are the natural allies of Iran? Or the Sunnis who are the natural allies of al Qaeda?