Democrats embrace Republican resolution on Iraq

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#1
Republicrats.


With their endorsement Wednesday of a Republican-drafted resolution pledging to continue funding for the Iraq war, Congressional Democratic leaders have exposed their supposed opposition to the Bush administration’s troop “surge” as a rebellion on their knees.


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, announced the decision by party leaders to abandon their own toothless nonbinding resolution in favor of an even more innocuous measure introduced by Senator John Warner, a Virginia Republican and former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

On Thursday, Senators Joseph Biden, a Delaware Democrat and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican from Nebraska, declared that they too would back Warner’s measure. The two were sponsors of another resolution more sharply critical of the administration’s decision to send 21,500 more US troops to Iraq, The third sponsor of that resolution, Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee, had joined Warner’s camp the day before.

Warner revised his resolution to include specific language foreswearing any cutoff of funding for the Iraq war, ostensibly with the aim of attracting more Republican backing. At the same time, the measure does not include language incorporated into the Biden-Levin-Hagel resolution describing the escalation as against US national interests.

The clause inserted into the new proposal reads, “Congress should not take any action that will endanger the United States military forces in the field, including the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the field.”

[...]

There is a an air of unreality about the political machinations in Congress, unfolding as they are against the backdrop of steadily escalating violence in Iraq, the “surge” of troops already being implemented and growing indications that the administration is preparing to launch yet another war against Iran.

What they make clear, however, is that there is no way to advance the struggle against war through the US Congress and America’s two big business parties. The mass opposition to war that exists must find its expression in the emergence of a new mass independent political movement of working people challenging the entire political establishment and the financial elite that it represents.

Full Article Here
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#6
In a further betrayal of the working classes, Democrats show their true colors by giving Bush more for war, more funding than he even asked for...

WASHINGTON, March 1 (Reuters) - U.S. House of Representatives Democrats will more than fully fund President George W. Bush's request for money to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year, but are still debating conditions that could be attached, senior lawmakers said on Thursday.

"There will be $98 billion for the military part," about $5 billion above the Bush administration's request, said Rep. John Murtha, chairman of a defense spending panel overseeing war funds.
source
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#9
Anyone who thinks Democrats and Republicans are different at the core, should be shot in the fucking face right now.

This country isn't going to just leave Iraq. No matter what Liberals/Democrats say, it's NOT going to happen. And regardless of what Bush and his administration says, we'll probably still be there in another 5 years, unless we've moved on to Iran....but that'll be way sooner than 5 years....
 

Hemp

Sicc OG
Sep 5, 2005
1,248
2
0
#10
the truth about shit will come out soon speeding up the departure of iraq
and yeah, its obvious that the democrats and republicans are but two sides of the same coin. Those who dont know that are fools.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#11
there's not going to be a departure from iraq buddy, bush just got more money to stay there and in afghanistan...
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#16
2-0-Sixx said:
You said "you guys" so I thought you were referring to someone (or everyone) in this thread.
That's what I thought, but I knew I wasn't one of the dumb asses, so I didn't bother asking...and no, I'm not calling you a dumb ass.

I'm sure there are people in here that didn't forsee any of this shit, while several of us have been saying it for damn near 5-6 years now.
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
42
#17
yeah, the 2 party system iz a masquerade bundled up as choice.. the same agenda getz carried out while one party wagz its proverbial finger like it would a child while not seriously taking the neccisary moves to roll back the actions taken.. good cop, bad cop.
 

Hemp

Sicc OG
Sep 5, 2005
1,248
2
0
#19
yes but for now we still benefit little as denying the troop surge.
of course its all for show but if it was the republicans 40000 more troops would have been shipped



i dont see obama havin do as bush did and still attempt to defend it.
but of course hed just be assasinated .

guess only time will tell