Is Cutting the Funding to Iraq the Answer?
It is the only thing the Democrats really have to end the slaughterhouse we call Iraq, but is it the smart thing, or even the right thing? Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi Said that there will be not cutting of the funding for the Iraq war, but instead there will be an idem by idem revue of how that money is going to be spent. Read On.>>>
I have drawn great criticism from my friends on the left when I say, that an all-out withdraw of the troops in Iraq would do more harm that good. If that plan were to be implemented it would leave thousands possibly tens of thousands of Iraqis dead upon its completion. Besides the Iraqi officials that have tried for a democratic Iraq, those who held their purple fingers for all to see would find themselves in danger of execution.
Also by pulling the troops out Iraq, under such a plan, their lives would be placed in an even graver danger. A slow methodical withdraw as the one put forth by John Murtha is one of the best ways to go.
When ask by reporters if the democratically controlled congress would cut funding for Iraq, as to pressure G.W. Bush to end the war Senator Pelosi said, according to MSNBC.
“We will not cut off funding for the troops,” Absolutely not.” “Let me remove all doubt in anyone’s mind; as long as our troops are in harm’s way, Democrats will be there to support them, but… we will have oversight over that funding,” she said.
Most look at the stance of the Democrats as “Looking ahead to the 2008 race for the White House, which may partially true. However, as I see it cutting the funding for Iraq could possibly mean that less money would find its way to other programs. Such as schools, and other social programs. It could possibly mean Social Security will find itself bankrupt by the end of Bush’s term. Let me explain.
In the first four years of his (P)Residency George W. Bush took 48 million dollars a day from Social Security to fund the Iraq war, and mainline the Tax Cuts. Agreed, that was due to the help of a Republican controlled Congress, however what is to stop him from continuing that practice? George W. Bush has already said, that if funding were cut that the money is there to continue on in Iraq.
As Pat Buchanan said on “Scarborough Country”, the only real tool the Congress has is to cut the funding to the war in Iraq. Pat feels they won’t because of political ramifications, but as I have stated I feel it goes deeper than that.
The resolutions that have been brought up in the Senate are nothing more than away to show a no confidence vote on Bush’s plan to send what he says will be 25,000 more troops to Iraq. Some of those very troops were on their way to Iraq before the announcement was ever made. And when all is said and done with, the number of troops for the so-called surge will be closer to 50 to 60 thousand the number first guessed by the MSM.
So, there will be no cutting the funding for the Iraq, and no nothing substantial will be done by the congress about the escalation in troops. What will happen is, there will be a lot of crowing on the Hill about what is wrong with how the war is being run, and that it is costing too much. This by the way will win them a, “Grasp of the Obvious Award. I doubt we will see any real divisive move by either party because, they feel that any move could be the end of their political life.