Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, read my post. I want you to tell me when Congres ever had an opportunity to vote on the conditions that bought support
And I've shown how he bought support, it's the only way people could get in on the rebuild Iraq contract game. So these alleged allies commit 50 sacrificial troops or so and sitback and await the $$$$$ feeding frenzy while we hear tales of such strong world-wide support. EDIT: I'd just like to see the so called "coalition of the willing" labeled as the sham it is.
If there really is some great, strong coalition why is it necessary for American troops to serve 2, 3, maybe 4 tours in Iraq? It's not much of a coalition when no one's sharing the load.
Nice spin, if the Democrats pass a bill requiring a withdrawal schedule to fund the war it'll be vetoed and Bush will be crying Congress doesn't support the troops. In other other words they cannot fund the troops any other way. Claiming a veto cannot force action is HOGWASH!
EDIT: The REAL shame, on both sides of the aisle, is that our troops are being made pawns in a damn silly political match. It's time the posturing ends, the Iraqis step upto the plate, and our men & women come home.
Until you've actually proved to me that he "BOUGHT" support.. the whole argument your trying to make is mute. Please find the line of the bill where you so called even believe they were "BOUGHT".. I dont believe they were bought.. You do.. You tell me where, when, with what, how much, and what exactly we paid them to do..
Until then.. you'll be going in circles because YOU state they were bought by the Republicans.. Until such time as I see it, you'll simply making accusations that are unproven.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,351 posts, read 54,502,307 times
Reputation: 40809
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Until you've actually proved to me that he "BOUGHT" support.. the whole argument your trying to make is mute. Please find the line of the bill where you so called even believe they were "BOUGHT".. I dont believe they were bought.. You do.. You tell me where, when, with what, how much, and what exactly we paid them to do..
Until then.. you'll be going in circles because YOU state they were bought by the Republicans.. Until such time as I see it, you'll simply making accusations that are unproven.
As far as I'm concerned requiring countries to support the invasion in order to be allowed to bid on reconstruction contracts is buying support. And if it really were a serious coalition our troops wouldn't be serving multiple tours as they are, it would semm with 30+ countries allegedly supporting us there's be more replacements available. Believe whatever you like.
The only circles I see are the result of the spin from the White House.
-Clinton is elocuent. Bush is that kid with the speech disability that you knew back in fourth grade.
-
Clinton is "elocuent". . . and Bush is stupid, and Clinton is intelligent. How can you tell?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
;
