TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

WASHINGTON � A top Democratic congressman, saying Democrats "have had it with being maneuvered and jerked around" on the war in Iraq, offered a new approach Tuesday to change the course of funding for the ongoing war: A war tax.

Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said he will not allow a bill to come for debate to provide emergency supplemental funds for the war and suggested Americans should be compelled to pay for it through a "surtax."

"The president isn't going to get a supplemental this year. I am not going to report a supplemental out" if it simply is a request for funds and not a change in direction for troops in Iraq," Obey said.

Obey suggested he is flexible as to what the change in policy proposes "so long as it represents real change and not camouflage."

Obey said the annual cost for the war � $145 billion � could be paid by a tax that would range from 2 percent for low and middle income folks to 12-15 percent for higher income households.

"This war is draining the treasury dry. ... There is a huge opportunity cost that is being paid by the same younger generation that is going to be asked to pay the bill because the president is paying for this war on the cuff," Obey said. "If you don't like the cost, then shut down the war."

Obey said he has no expectation that the majority leadership in the House would embrace a tax, but wants to try to force the president's hand for this "misbegotten" war. He said that the tax would address the cost of the Iraq war, which he described as "not an intelligent use of resources," and is not related to operations in Afghanistan.

A senior Senate Democratic leadership aide told FOX News that both House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are considering their next moves on Iraq, especially as it relates to the emergency war spending bill

Obey's proposal received the expected response from Republicans, with one senior Senate GOP aide whose boss deals directly with tax policy ridiculing the surtax.

"What next? A tax on air?" the aide told FOX News. "Democrats are talking about the need to raise taxes to pay for the war while they're also trying to bully the Republicans and the president into $23 billion more in (2008 fiscal year) domestic spending � $23 billion that will balloon into $250 billion over 10 years. The problem isn't too few taxpayer dollars, its too much government spending."

Obey's remarks preceded debate on legislation that would require Bush to submit a plan for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The bill would require the administration to report to Congress on the status of redeployment plans in 60 days. Follow up reports would be required every 90 days thereafter.

Initially, Democratic leaders considered the bill too mild and instead focused on tougher measures that ordered troops home this fall. But those measures didn't pick up enough Republican support.

The latest bill doesn't set any timetable for a withdrawal and Republican leaders have said they will not oppose it.

Thwarted in efforts to bring troops home from Iraq, Senate Democrats on Monday helped pass a defense policy bill authorizing another $150 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The vote was 92-3.

The developments underscored the difficulty facing Democrats in the Iraq debate: They lack the votes to pass legislation ordering troops home and are divided on whether to cut money for combat, despite a mandate by supporters to end the war.

Hoping the political landscape changes in coming months, Democratic leaders say they will renew their fight when Congress considers the money Bush wants in war funding. But Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the defense subcommittee of the Senate appropriations panel, announced Tuesday that he will oppose any amendment to defense spending that "could jeopardize quick enactment of this bill."

Inouye is in charge of shepherding the bill to passage, and is sending a clear warning to Democrats like Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, who want to dry up funding to force limiting the mission in Iraq. Feingold released a statement late Monday announcing his intention to offer an amendment to the defense spending bill that would do just that. Feingold said Iraq is the most important issue facing the U.S. and the Senate must address it without half-measures or compromises that do nothing to end the the Iraq war.

While the Senate policy bill authorizes the money to be spent, it does not guarantee it; Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers.

"I think that's where you're going to see the next dogfight," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., of the upcoming war spending bill.

The House bill, sponsored by Democrats John Tanner of Tennessee and Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, was initially cast aside as too mild by Democratic leaders focused on tougher proposals ordering troops home this fall.

But after Democrats were unable to peel off Republican support, the Iraq debate stalled and some four dozen rank-and-file Democrats demanded a vote on the Abercrombie-Tanner bill.

"This will be the first time since the war in Iraq began that we are working together as a Congress instead of one party or another to be a constructive voice in the civilian management of operations in Iraq," Tanner said in a statement e-mailed to the Associated Press.

In February, Bush requested more than $140 billion for the war, and is expected to ask for another $42 billion to cover costs in the 2008 budget year, which began Monday. The Senate's defense policy bill authorizes Bush's initial request, plus an additional $23 billion for the purchase of bomb-resistant vehicles.

In addition to war money, the Senate's defense policy bill authorizes more than a half trillion dollars in annual military programs, including such big-ticket items as $10.1 billion for missile defense.

The House passed its version of the defense authorization bill in May by a 397-27 vote. That $646 billion measure would trim hundreds of millions of dollars from some weapons modernization programs and use the money instead to aid troops in combat.

The House bill has drawn a veto threat from the White House because of provisions insisting the military rely heavily on American-made products and proposed changes to the Pentagon's personnel policies. The Senate version, which would have to be reconciled with the House bill, also faces a veto possibility because it includes hate-crimes legislation by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

If the Democrats continue with this nonsense, NO WAY THEY ARE GOING TO WIN THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS.

I mean the new house of rep and senate, dominated by the dems, has not done anything. All they continue to do is legislate defeat and creating obstacles to the president of the united states. This is obsurb! Instead of our elected officials tackling domestic problems that our country faces, our own internal war, they are out there with their silliness trying to prove a political point. Why dont we have a congress like we did during WWII? A congress united to ensure victory

Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover "This war is draining the treasury dry. ... There is a huge opportunity cost that is being paid by the same younger generation that is going to be asked to pay the bill because the president is paying for this war on the cuff," Obey said. "If you don't like the cost, then shut down the war." Obey said he has no expectation that the majority leadership in the House would embrace a tax, but wants to try to force the president's hand for this "misbegotten" war. He said that the tax would address the cost of the Iraq war, which he described as "not an intelligent use of resources," and is not related to operations in Afghanistan. Thwarted in efforts to bring troops home from Iraq, Senate Democrats on Monday helped pass a defense policy bill authorizing another $150 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The vote was 92-3. The developments underscored the difficulty facing Democrats in the Iraq debate: They lack the votes to pass legislation ordering troops home and are divided on whether to cut money for combat, despite a mandate by supporters to end the war. In addition to war money, the Senate's defense policy bill authorizes more than a half trillion dollars in annual military programs, including such big-ticket items as $10.1 billion for missile defense. The House passed its version of the defense authorization bill in May by a 397-27 vote. That $646 billion measure would trim hundreds of millions of dollars from some weapons modernization programs and use the money instead to aid troops in combat.

LatinLover, I don't know what you're talking about. I think this is a fantastic proposal - if you want to fight wars for illegitimate reasons, you should be willing to carry the burden, much as we did during WWII by the way. More than a billion dollars is being spent on the Iraq War each day... if you saved half of that money, you would incur budget surpluses, something Republicans are supposed to prefer over the horrid deficits that are the norm under Bush. And the rest of that money could go toward improving the quality of our military, healthcare system, education system, or infrastructure. I was in Minneapolis the day the bridge came down, and for the federal government to claim they don't have the 8 million dollars it would require to have ensured that bridge was safe, well I call bullshit.

Yes, raising taxes is unpopular. But so is your war. Obey is right for pointing out that there is a tremendous opportunity cost for continuing involvement in Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover This is obsurb! Instead of our elected officials tackling domestic problems that our country faces, our own internal war,

I don't know what "internal war" you are referring to, but perhaps if they had the billions of dollars being funneled into Iraq and Blackwater's coffers, they would be able to do a bit more about it. You're tying their hands and then calling them unproductive.

http://tranceaddict.com/forums/show...869#post8174869

Re: Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov LatinLover, I don't know what you're talking about. I think this is a fantastic proposal - if you want to fight wars for illegitimate reasons, you should be willing to carry the burden, much as we did during WWII by the way. More than a billion dollars is being spent on the Iraq War each day... if you saved half of that money, you would incur budget surpluses, something Republicans are supposed to prefer over the horrid deficits that are the norm under Bush. And the rest of that money could go toward improving the quality of our military, healthcare system, education system, or infrastructure. I was in Minneapolis the day the bridge came down, and for the federal government to claim they don't have the 8 million dollars it would require to have ensured that bridge was safe, well I call bullshit. Yes, raising taxes is unpopular. But so is your war. Obey is right for pointing out that there is a tremendous opportunity cost for continuing involvement in Iraq.

I just dont get the far left.... And how dare you call it my war? Im not at war... president Bush is not at war... its the United States that are at war. You see, the far left keeps disrespecting our brave soldiers. Do our soldiers feel they are fighting a "republican" or a "bush" war? NO! They are fighting an American war! Quit your silliness and get your head straighten out!

I am sick and tired of all these bs by the far left, which is clearly seen in this board, quit seeing things through a liberal point of view and see it from an American point of view. Think whats best for this country. I just laugh at those individuals that call me a bush supporter and so on... I mean with all due respect to all those people, but that is the reason why I dont take you seriously.

Re: Re: Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover I just dont get the far left.... And how dare you call it my war? Im not at war... president Bush is not at war... its the United States that are at war. You see, the far left keeps disrespecting our brave soldiers. Do our soldiers feel they are fighting a "republican" or a "bush" war? NO! They are fighting an American war! Quit your silliness and get your head straighten out! I am sick and tired of all these bs by the far left, which is clearly seen in this board, quit seeing things through a liberal point of view and see it from an American point of view. Think whats best for this country. I just laugh at those individuals that call me a bush supporter and so on... I mean with all due respect to all those people, but that is the reason why I dont take you seriously.

Congratulations! You've completely mislabled me.


You know how I support the troops? By keeping them alive, so that they can be with their families until we actually need them to protect American security. How do you support your troops? By supporting their being sent off to fight and die for no bloody purpose. Don't you dare insinuate that I don't support our men and women in the military when it is YOU who is supportive of the mismanaged, ill-advised mess that is ending their lives.

So opposition to an illegal war makes us "far left"? Essentially calling communists does nothing for your argument...

Your war.

Re: Re: Re: Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Ir

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Congratulations! You've completely mislabled me. You know how I support the troops? By keeping them alive, so that they can be with their families until we actually need them to protect American security. How do you support your troops? By supporting their being sent off to fight and die for no bloody purpose. Don't you dare insinuate that I don't support our men and women in the military when it is YOU who is supportive of the mismanaged, ill-advised mess that is ending their lives.

Quit lying you dont support them! You denounce their bravery and their work by promoting failure! So dont come up to me with this shit that you support them by wanting them here in our country.... you know whats the duty of a soldier? whenever they are called upon to serve this nation they go and do it. I have good friends of mines in the military, when they come back it fills me with joy when they talk about the battles and how happy they are doing their work every time, they are so optimistic and they believe in the cause for what they are fighting for. They believe in the leadership of their military. Do I want them back with their families and friends? Ofcourse I do! but as they tell me and everyone they must first obly with their duty that they were called upon and when they are victorious they can come home as winners and with all these stories to tell to us and how their efforts werent in vain.

How do i support them? Making sure that they get all the equipment they need for their missions, and by reminding all these politicians their commitment they have to them. Presenting or legislating withdrawal dosent mean anything! Does our soldiers and military personnel want to retreat? Hell no! So you better stop living in this political world and leave our military to fight this war. Is sad that our congress is no united in these type of times. They are not doing any good to our brave men and women, they are going against their will with this retreat failed policy.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Ir

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover Quit lying you dont support them! You denounce their bravery and their work by promoting failure!

Promoting failure? Denouncing bravery? I defy you to point out a single instance where this can be reasonably construed from what I have written or said ever in my life. Even Rumsfeld and Gates have admitted that this war was perhaps best not fought. Which begs the question: why the hell are our troops, our friends, brothers, sisters, and children, fighting in the first place? Yes, it is their duty to fight when called upon. And they have done that valiantly. But you are completely missing the point. They never should have been called upon in the first place. THAT is the issue at debate here, not whether or not I think the individual soldiers are good people. To misconstrue that argument like you do is to live in fantasyland.

quote:

you know whats the duty of a soldier? whenever they are called upon to serve this nation they go and do it.

Agreed. Which is why I'm sure you'll agree that it's so tragic that we're compromising their trust by sending them to fight an illegitimate war. They swear to serve and protect this country - not serve a political purpose for a White House that refuses to admit that it made a mistake.

quote:

I have good friends of mines in the military, when they come back it fills me with joy when they talk about the battles and how happy they are doing their work every time, they are so optimistic and they believe in the cause for what they are fighting for. They believe in the leadership of their military. Do I want them back with their families and friends? Ofcourse I do! but as they tell me and everyone they must first obly with their duty that they were called upon and when they are victorious they can come home as winners and with all these stories to tell to us and how their efforts werent in vain.

This war, unfortunately, is out of their hands at this point. They can fight to the best of their ability, but when the war is being fought for ill-conceived reasons, what do we stand to gain? The fact of the matter is nothing. I say we should bring them home before they end up dead, instead of leave them hanging in a desert with no possible positive outcome.

quote:

So you better stop living in this political world and leave our military to fight this war. Is sad that our congress is no united in these type of times. They are not doing any good to our brave men and women, they are going against their will with this retreat failed policy.

This logic makes no sense! So politicians can decide when our military should go to battle, and then they should just leave them there to fight forever and ever and ever? Who decides victory or defeat? We haven't won and we haven't lost anything. But the longer we stay in Iraq, fighting for a purpose that doesn't make any sense, the more we risk losing in every sense of the word.

Re: Re: Re: House Appropriations Chairman to Introduce War Tax Bill to Pay for Iraq

Latin,

Before I post. Two things:

1. Why did you stop posting in the previous threads on Iran and such? You had some direct questions posed to you but yet you seemingly ran away without answering (again). Why's that?

2. Are you willing to actually read everything below and answer directly, or will you continue with your well-known pattern of "I didn't read the whole post" ignorance?

On to your post:

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover I just dont get the far left....

Strange how easily we get you.

quote:

And how dare you call it my war? Im not at war...

Why aren't you? You ARE of age, are you not? Why aren't you signing up for the cause you so fervently support? Do you really think the best way to support your president and his war cause is to sit here and make posts about it?

Pick up a gun and start fighting. You aren't that Yellow, are you?

quote:

president Bush is not at war... its the United States that are at war.

Which is why we've paid the bill in full on it, among other things.

Oh wait......

quote:

You see, the far left keeps disrespecting our brave soldiers.

Indeed, such an exclusive club that only the "far left" is in. Well, except this:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/new...e_to_the_a.html

and this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298203,00.html

and this:

http://www.workingforchange.com/art...fm?ItemID=16458

and this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2004Aug21.html

But hey, it's alright. We're all fully aware of your selective memory......

quote:

Do our soldiers feel they are fighting a "republican" or a "bush" war? NO! They are fighting an American war!

And what do the Americans who are supporting them with equipment, funding, family, and moral support feel who's war this is and what we should do about it?:

quote:

Most Americans continue to want troops to start coming home from Iraq, and most say the plan President Bush announced last week for troop reductions doesn't go far enough, according to a CBS News poll released Monday. . . . Sixty-eight percent of Americans say that U.S. troop levels in Iraq should either be reduced or that all troops should be removed - similar numbers to those before Mr. Bush's speech. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007...in3268663.shtml

and what about continuing to fund this fiasco of a war?:

quote:

Most Americans oppose fully funding U.S. President George W. Bush's $190 billion request to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan... Only about 25 percent of Americans support the administration's $190 billion war funding request; 70 percent want the proposed allocation reduced, the Post said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071002...3Rt8Kc8M.Ss0NUE

and who makes up these sentiments? Only about 70% of Independents, 90% of Democrats, and almost half of Republican voters:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ml?hpid=topnews[/QUOTE]

But what about the military members themselves? Huh, funny I should ask. Seems a bit strange how donations have shifted from 23% in 2002 to 40% today towards DEMOCRATS by military donors, and the top donation for Republican candidates just so happens to be an ANTI-WAR candidate, Ron Paul:

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=300

Strange that, huh?

quote:

I am sick and tired of all these bs by the far left, which is clearly seen in this board, quit seeing things through a liberal point of view and see it from an American point of view.

And I'm sick and tired of your continual incessant bullshit as if you actually speak for the majority of Americans when time and again YOUR point of view is clearly in the minority. Name me ONE FUCKING ISSUE on this Iraq war that the majority of Americans support YOUR view of things. Do they support continual funding until "victory"? Do they support troops staying until "victory"? Do they support this president in his efforts in Iraq? Give me some fucking evidence NOW. No more bullshit from you. Cite one issue on Iraq that the MAJORITY American public doesn't side with the "far left" and instead supports your "far right" bullshit fringe views with Iraq, and we'll be happy as fucking clams.

Otherwise you are once again wasting everyone's fucking time posting incessantly YOUR views and claiming to be everyone else's. Enough with the bullshit already, please.

quote:

Think whats best for this country.

Are you belittling what the majority of Americans think and want, which just so happens to be the same sentiment as the "far left" with Iraq?

And if you're wanting us to think about what's best - don't you think it's best for you to show true support for this cause you so fervently support by enlisting now? If not, why not?

quote:

I just laugh at those individuals that call me a bush supporter and so on... I mean with all due respect to all those people, but that is the reason why I dont take you seriously.

With the exception of the most recent Afghanistan post you've just thrown up, name one thread you've created that is not in total alignment with a Bush policy. Just one will do.

Enough with your bullshit, Latin. Answer direct questions and points posed to you, support your arguments or else quit wasting our fucking time.

Speaking of chickenshit, chickenhawk, draft-dodging, warmongering Limbaugh, his comments are pretty interesting especially when confronted by actual soldiers such as this one:



Rush's response:

quote:

"This is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said and then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media and a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into. This man will always be a hero to this country with everyone. Whoever pumped him full of these lies about what I said and embarrassed him with this ad has betrayed him, they aren't hurting me they are betraying this soldier," Limbaugh said. http://www.myfoxkc.com/myfox/pages/...Y&pageId=3.11.1

And Brian, the soldier's response to Rush:

quote:

So, Rush Limbaugh called me a "suicide bomber." More slander from the high and mighty sitting in his chair nursing the boils on his ass. I can assure you that I am no suicide bomber and that I can think for myself. Rush, your phony soldier comments pissed me off. The audacity of someone like you who never had the courage to stand and fight for what you believe in makes my head spin. That is what made me stand up and state my convictions in front of a camera. I wanted to point out that you are wrong. I am not a phony soldier. I believe that we are not doing the right thing for national security by staying in Iraq. We are putting too much strain on our military by extending tours and not giving people enough time at home to rest. We have taken our eye off of the real Al-Qaeda and let them regroup to their pre-9/11 strength. We have not developed a political system in Iraq that would enable the country to stand on its own. I stood in the sand, snow, dirt, mud and dust of both Afghanistan and Iraq. I spent over a week on a side of a mountain in Afghanistan during Operation Anaconda. I received The Bronze Star medal for my actions during that battle. I crossed the border into Iraq with the first wave of the 101st Airborne. I sustained an open head injury on the streets of Mosul after a vehicle borne IED exploded next to the vehicle I was riding in. I have seen the aftermath of a real suicide bomber. I had loved ones who died in the 9/11 attacks. I have friends and colleagues who returned from the war in body bags. How dare you call someone like me a phony soldier and a suicide bomber? In the commercial I just taped, I told you unless you had the guts to say something to my face, stop telling lies about my service. Well you haven�t had the guts to say it to my face, but I am waiting and the offer is still on the table.

How proud you must be, Latin, to have chickenshit warmongers like Rush lead battle charges for you and then smear those soldiers who fucking fought in the war and disagree with him and Bush's war. You seem to be in good company with the mouthpieces of your cause. Surely you want to separate yourself from these chicken littles and actually fight for the cause you so eagerly support, right?

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Speaking of chickenshit, chickenhawk, draft-dodging, warmongering Limbaugh, his comments are pretty interesting especially when confronted by actual soldiers such as this one: Rush's response: And Brian, the soldier's response to Rush: How proud you must be, Latin, to have chickenshit warmongers like Rush lead battle charges for you and then smear those soldiers who fucking fought in the war and disagree with him and Bush's war. You seem to be in good company with the mouthpieces of your cause. Surely you want to separate yourself from these chicken littles and actually fight for the cause you so eagerly support, right?

MisterOcotopus1,

I am sick and tired of your propaganda in here.

In regards of those statement by the soldier. I respect it, I respect the fact that he served in our military and answered to do his duty when he was called upon by his country.

He may have these sentiments towards the war, but THEY ARE NOT THE SENTIMENTS OF OUR MILITARY IN GENERAL. Only because he feels that way, dosent mean everyone on the battlefield feels the same. and I gave the example of those of my friends. Every time I have had the opportunity to talk to soldiers I hear hope, desire, bravery, and most importantly that they believe that what they are doing in Iraq is for a good cause. I thank them for their service and I pray to god that our military never loses heart to continue.

YOU ARE ONE SICK MAN! How dare you say that this is Bushs war... tell me are our soldiers fighting and representing bush or the united states? What flag do our soldiers wave? Dont ever disrespect our soldiers by saying that they are fighting for Bush. Our brave men and women would be disgusted if they here such thing.

To answer your question, which you also posed in another thread, why am i not in the military? just to give you a hint. I am the type of person that questions authority, i am not very good at following orders. That is one of the qualities a soldier must posses when in battle, since im not good at following orders why join? why be a pain in the ass to my commander? there you have it.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover MisterOcotopus1, I am sick and tired of your propaganda in here.

What have I posted that you consider "propaganda"? Be specific and support your answers, please.

quote:

In regards of those statement by the soldier. I respect it, I respect the fact that he served in our military and answered to do his duty when he was called upon by his country. He may have these sentiments towards the war, but THEY ARE NOT THE SENTIMENTS OF OUR MILITARY IN GENERAL. Only because he feels that way, dosent mean everyone on the battlefield feels the same.

Nor does he have to be, but he does represent a growing number of the military, just like an ever growing majority of Americans.

What's your point, exactly?

quote:

and I gave the example of those of my friends. Every time I have had the opportunity to talk to soldiers I hear hope, desire, bravery, and most importantly that they believe that what they are doing in Iraq is for a good cause. I thank them for their service and I pray to god that our military never loses heart to continue.

And I just got done leaping over the Sears Tower in Chicago. I did it blindfolded, and on one leg. Backwards even, with two flips at the top.

Anecdotal stories are fun and all, but they give little credence to points made by anyone, let alone yourself in this instance.

quote:

YOU ARE ONE SICK MAN! How dare you say that this is Bushs war... tell me are our soldiers fighting and representing bush or the united states? What flag do our soldiers wave? Dont ever disrespect our soldiers by saying that they are fighting for Bush.

I don't recall ever saying it's "Bush's war", and not the U.S. war. Can you point to where I said that exactly?

quote:

Our brave men and women would be disgusted if they here such thing.

Because your bestest buddies said that to a civilian like you?

quote:

To answer your question, which you also posed in another thread, why am i not in the military? just to give you a hint. I am the type of person that questions authority, i am not very good at following orders. That is one of the qualities a soldier must posses when in battle, since im not good at following orders why join? why be a pain in the ass to my commander? there you have it.

So you'd rather stay here and fight for their cause with your fire-breathing keyboard instead of actually fight there for the cause you so ardently support because, ummm, you don't like following orders?

That's a rather pathetic excuse to sit behind your keyboard and support this war cause while pitifully branding everyone else (i.e. the majority of Americans) as "far leftists" for not supporting the same cause as you. Don't you think the best means of supporting the cause you so ardently support is to actually fight for it yourself?

Or do you think that's best served for someone else like these boys and girls?:

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover MisterOcotopus1,

lol

quote:

I am sick and tired of your propaganda in here. In regards of those statement by the soldier. I respect it, I respect the fact that he served in our military and answered to do his duty when he was called upon by his country. He may have these sentiments towards the war, but THEY ARE NOT THE SENTIMENTS OF OUR MILITARY IN GENERAL. Only because he feels that way, dosent mean everyone on the battlefield feels the same. and I gave the example of those of my friends. Every time I have had the opportunity to talk to soldiers I hear hope, desire, bravery, and most importantly that they believe that what they are doing in Iraq is for a good cause. I thank them for their service and I pray to god that our military never loses heart to continue.

You are using anecdotal evidence to refute anecdotal evidence. That doesn't prove anything. Suffice it to say, there are a substantial number of soldiers on both sides of the debate.

Also, I don't think anyone on here is criticizing the decision of the troops to go to Iraq. After all, they are just following orders as you've pointed out. However, we ARE criticizing the decision made by POLITICIANS to send them into battle in the first place! We are sorely abusing our soldiers by calling upon them unwisely. Yes, they have served well and with honor, but the fact of the matter is that they never should have had to bear such a burden in the first place. And THAT is something worth criticizing this administration over; or at the very least, asking some extremely tough questions of this administration and the proponents of a continued war in Iraq.

You note that you pray that the military never loses heart to continue to serve. However, think for a moment as if you are a soldier. Would you continue to blindly support a war once you realize that it is not being fought in the national interest, and may in fact have created more security concerns for your country than it endeavored to solve? I pray that the men and women in the armed forces never lose faith in their mission either - but I worry very deeply that by taking advantage of their faith, and sending them in to do battle unnecessarily, they will never trust us again.

Friedman in tomorrow morning's NYTimes:

quote:

Charge It to My Kids By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN Published: October 7, 2007 Every so often a quote comes out of the Bush administration that leaves you asking: Am I crazy or are they? I had one of those moments last week when Dana Perino, the White House press secretary, was asked about a proposal by some Congressional Democrats to levy a surtax to pay for the Iraq war, and she responded, �We�ve always known that Democrats seem to revert to type, and they are willing to raise taxes on just about anything.� Yes, those silly Democrats. They�ll raise taxes for anything, even � get this � to pay for a war! And if we did raise taxes to pay for our war to bring a measure of democracy to the Arab world, �does anyone seriously believe that the Democrats are going to end these new taxes that they�re asking the American people to pay at a time when it�s not necessary to pay them?� added Ms. Perino. �I just think it�s completely fiscally irresponsible.� Friends, we are through the looking glass. It is now �fiscally irresponsible� to want to pay for a war with a tax. These democrats just don�t understand: the tooth fairy pays for wars. Of course she does � the tooth fairy leaves the money at the end of every month under Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson�s pillow. And what a big pillow it is! My God, what will the Democrats come up with next? Taxes to rebuild bridges or schools or high-speed rail or our lagging broadband networks? No, no, the tooth fairy covers all that. She borrows the money from China and leaves it under Paulson�s pillow. Of course, we can pay for the Iraq war without a tax increase. The question is, can we pay for it and be making the investments in infrastructure, science and education needed to propel our country into the 21st century? Visit Singapore, Japan, Korea, China or parts of Europe today and you�ll discover that the infrastructure in our country is not keeping pace with our peers�. We can pay for anything today if we want to stop investing in tomorrow. The president has already slashed the National Institutes of Health research funding the past two years. His 2008 budget wants us to cut money for vocational training, infrastructure and many student aid programs. Does the Bush team really believe that if we had a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax � which could reduce our dependence on Middle East oil dictators, and reduce payroll taxes for low-income workers, pay down the deficit and fund the development of renewable energy � we would be worse off as a country? Excuse me, Ms. Perino, but I wish Republicans would revert to type. I thought they were, well, conservatives � the kind of people who saved for rainy days, who invested in tomorrow for their kids, folks who didn�t believe in free lunches or free wars. No wonder The Wall Street Journal had a story Tuesday headlined, �G.O.P. Is Losing Grip on Core Business Vote.� It noted that traditional fiscal conservatives were defecting from the G.O.P. �angered by the growth of government spending during the six years that Republicans controlled both the White House and Congress.� And no wonder Alan Greenspan told The Journal: �The Republican Party, which ruled the House, the Senate and the presidency, I no longer recognize.� Of course, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, the Democrat David Obey, in proposing an Iraq war tax to help balance the budget was expressing his displeasure with the war. But he was also making a very important point when he said, �If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for.� The struggle against radical Islam is the fight of our generation. We all need to pitch in � not charge it on our children�s Visa cards. Previous American generations connected with our troops by making sacrifices at home � we�ve never passed on the entire cost of a war to the next generation, said Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, who has written a history � �The Price of Liberty� � about how America has paid for its wars since 1776. �In every major war we have fought in the 19th and 20th centuries,� said Mr. Hormats, �Americans have been asked to pay higher taxes � and nonessential programs have been cut � to support the military effort. Yet during this Iraq war, taxes have been lowered and domestic spending has climbed. In contrast to World War I, World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam, for most Americans this conflict has entailed no economic sacrifice. The only people really sacrificing for this war are the troops and their families.� In his celebrated Farewell Address, Mr. Hormats noted, George Washington warned against �ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burdens we ourselves ought to bear.�

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/o...tml?ref=opinion

I still don't see how this is supposedly such a bad idea. The opportunity cost of the financial burden for this war is enormous.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Friedman in tomorrow morning's NYTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/o...tml?ref=opinion I still don't see how this is supposedly such a bad idea. The opportunity cost of the financial burden for this war is enormous.

Which makes it even more perplexing considering it was Pelosi who squashed the idea flat.

Conventional Beltway wisdom - so unfortunate how they still control so much in Washington.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.