Levin: Dems won't cut off funds to Iraq troops

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
like that levin feels this way but don't like the strings attached to it...


WASHINGTON -- Michigan Senator Carl Levin said today he believes Congress will pass an emergency spending bill to guarantee funding for troops in Iraq, but that Democrats will likely try to attach language requiring President Bush to certify that Iraq's leaders reach certain political benchmarks.

Levin, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said on ABC's "This Week" that Democrats "are not going to cut off funding for the troops." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has joined some liberals in the Senate calling for a cut-off of funds, but Levin said he does not believe that is the position of many Democrats in the Senate.

"That is not going to happen," he said.

Both Houses of Congress have passed emergency supplemental spending bills that would pay for operations in Iraq, but both versions include timetables for beginning a withdrawal of U.S. combat troops. President Bush has said he will veto any such language; Congress must first iron out differences between the two bills and pass the revised legislation.

After the president's veto, Levin said, Democrats may seek to pass a new bill that includes both funding and a requirement that the Iraqi government meet political benchmarks, such as passage of a law on sharing oil revenues and passage of a revised constitution.

"There is no military solution to this problem, there is only a political solution," Levin said. The Iraqi government had committed to reaching 17 such benchmarks by early this year, but has achieved almost none of them.

Also appearing on the program, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said Iraqi leaders had made progress in some areas, such as an agreement on easing rules that bar most members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party from government. But even that effort has stalled; Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the influential spiritual leader of Iraq's Shiite Muslims, has rejected a proposed law.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
like that levin feels this way but don't like the strings attached to it...

What's wrong with these strings? There shouldn't be SOME sort of benchmark for Iraqi government progress?

I can buy the argument that we shouldn't tie a mandatory pullout date to these funds, but I think it's altogether reasonable to expect SOME sort of tangible progress.

You know, not just totally vague, bullshit comments from people like McCain, who say 'progress is being made because I walked through a market with a flak jacket and a company of troops and helicopter cover.'

Expecting some progress shouldn't be classified as 'strings.' It should be expected by every American after 49 months, for f*cks sake.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
For sure It's our money. I just don't get it. They don't want to pay higher taxes for Bush's war. So we give other things up at home for this BS. Including soldier's dieing. Make them mt some
goals or screw them. No more free lunch.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
What's wrong with these strings? There shouldn't be SOME sort of benchmark for Iraqi government progress?

I can buy the argument that we shouldn't tie a mandatory pullout date to these funds, but I think it's altogether reasonable to expect SOME sort of tangible progress.

Expecting some progress shouldn't be classified as 'strings.' It should be expected by every American after 49 months, for f*cks sake.


other than a mandatory pullout...what other strings are there ?

btw, i think that the people of iraq have been repressed for so long that they are afraid of taking things into their own hands.
 
Last edited:

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
other than a mandatory pullout...what other strings are there ?

btw, i think that the people of iraq have been repressed for so long that they are afraid of taking things into their own hands.

Below- Per Levin, per your article. I thought that's what you were talking about. The jist is that after W vetoes the bill with a pullout timetable, they would resubmit one without that, but with benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet.

After the president's veto, Levin said, Democrats may seek to pass a new bill that includes both funding and a requirement that the Iraqi government meet political benchmarks, such as passage of a law on sharing oil revenues and passage of a revised constitution.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
kosar...

i'm sorry...of course i read that.

i sometimes do too many things at the same time & it gets confusing...lol.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,587
234
63
"the bunker"
some of this makes some sense....but it shouldn`t even be discussed privately,much less publicly, until the surge has been given a fair chance....

how can you have benchmarks...before you even have the entire surge force in place?....and how can you make policy in war by broadcasting your intention to quit by a date certain to the enemy?....it`s insanity....

and even though deployment isn`t near completion,it`s obvious that it`s had an effect...the brave al sadr`s in iran....

if we can`t take care of al sadr and the mahdi army,nothing`s gonna work anyway.......

look,i agree there are things that we need to know...like,why this new surge plan(which appears to be making some difference already) wasn`t broached long before this...why rules of engagement weren`t loosened and adjusted to give our boys a fighting chance to fully pursue the bad guys....

and before you jump me...this is not a defense of bush...i`m just thinking of our long term best interests....economically and security-wise ...bin laden himself said that this is al qaeda`s primary front in the war with the west....

but,i`ve had it with bush....i`ve given it some long, hard thought and i`m done with him...

i have concluded that the entire anti-american self-hating climate in this country,can be attributed to bush's reticence to take on the liberal 5th column.... failure to go after the spies and leakers that infest his government........and his inarticulate defense of america and american culture....

he has already dismantled the g.o.p.,turned and run in the face of clueless democrats that imo,would burn this country to the ground rather than see it achieve any success....any success that can in any way be attributed to him.....

he seems perfectly willing to deconstruct america in favor of cheap labor and drugs and international criminals who apparently know they can break the law with impunity and need pay no taxes...........

ain favor of big business...and those that send american dollars back to a corrupt mexico and points south.......giving them no rational reason to reform............

he condones it....

he says theres no amnesty..that they still go to the back of the line......yet they stay here in the country.....taking advantage of our welfare system,our health care system....

he allows them(along with the democratic congress) to bring unchecked disease,filth and 3/4`s of a corrupt country`s uneducated underclass across our borders....creating yet another dependent underclass....

instead of putting that damn fence up....instead of allowing this country to choose the best and brightest from around the world to become citizens....

we have almost no control over who comes and goes....what they bring in....and we give them the wherewithal to bring scores of poverty stricken relatives in on their heels....

f-ck him...impeach him....i welcome it...
 
Last edited:

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
Bush won't leave Iraq no matter what happens

Bush won't leave Iraq no matter what happens

Bush does not care about Iraqis, sh#t he does not care about Americans. He just can't not walk away from all that oil. Bush was a failure as a oil businessman and somehow feels that to secure Iraqi oil for the west somehow makes up for it. Troops are needed to protect contractors, if you pull the troops out, contractors will lose money. Blackwater is too small right now. Bush is like a guy in Las Vegas sitting at a slot machine dumping money in, already loss his @ss but keeps playing. The house keeps giving him credit so he keeps pulling the arm hoping on the next pull he'll hit the jackpot. The only thing is besides playing with money he is also playing with lives. I say pull out the troops yesterday. I heard 10 Americans died this past weekend, it's too late for them, maybe we can save the rest.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,587
234
63
"the bunker"
Bush does not care about Iraqis, sh#t he does not care about Americans. He just can't not walk away from all that oil. Bush was a failure as a oil businessman and somehow feels that to secure Iraqi oil for the west somehow makes up for it. Troops are needed to protect contractors, if you pull the troops out, contractors will lose money. Blackwater is too small right now. Bush is like a guy in Las Vegas sitting at a slot machine dumping money in, already loss his @ss but keeps playing. The house keeps giving him credit so he keeps pulling the arm hoping on the next pull he'll hit the jackpot. The only thing is besides playing with money he is also playing with lives. I say pull out the troops yesterday. I heard 10 Americans died this past weekend, it's too late for them, maybe we can save the rest.

the bush family has more money than god...ditto cheney.....and i`m sure that rove`s doing just fine....

you are right about one thing...oil is the linchpin of the iraqi issue.....it ties in with iran`s nuclear ambitions...and the radical islamist agenda....

throw in the irrationality of ahmadinajhad(and bringing forth the hidden imam) and his threat to our ally israel....and you see why n. korea,as an issue,is nothing more than a boil on the mideast`s arse.... l

if you don`t think that it`s very important that radical islamists and/or despots don`t gain control of the 3rd largest oil resource in the world..and have the wherewithal to(with a nuclear capability)contol even more of our life`s blood....contol our economy.... ..then,you`re just not thinking....

that puts us much closer to a world war that could change our lives forever....

democrats=denial...

broaden your horizons....
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
if you don`t think that it`s very important that radical islamists and/or despots don`t gain control of the 3rd largest oil resource in the world

Didn't a 'despot' used to have control of this oil in Iraq? WTF was the problem?

Don't 'radical islamists' currently have control of a large amount of oil in Iran?

Doesn't a nutcase in Venezuela currently control a ton of oil? We are his biggest customer.

Stop trying to create imaginary 'problems' when there weren't any, and still aren't any except potentially in Iraq, which would be our own creation.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top