Friday, September 14, 2007

Stop Funding for the Iraq War

Stop Funding for the Iraq War
By Jerome Grossman

After defying the expressed will of the American people, President George W. Bush has laid out a plan for withdrawal of some U.S. troops from Iraq - maybe. Perhaps some by Christmas, perhaps more next spring, perhaps another group by the November election, depending on conditions on the ground. Bush is stealing from the Democrats an idea that will not work. At least 130,000 troops will remain indefinitely to implement what Bush calls an “enduring “role in Iraq, an open-ended commitment there. This is a perversion of the popular demand and continues the series of mistakes committed by the administration. However, Bush and the Democrats in Congress seem to have arrived at the same point. While the Democrats demand “withdrawal”, every piece of legislation they pass on Iraq includes provisions for a residual U.S. military force to remain in Iraq without a time limit to protect U.S. installations, to train Iraqi troops and to fight Al Qaeda and the insurgents. The residual force would require between 100,000 and 160,000 troops. The leading Democratic candidates for president, Clinton, Obama and Edwards also say that they will retain that residual force when elected. It's time for the Democrats to stop playing political games that perpetuate the war. The only way to stop the war is for the Democratic Congress to not appropriate funds for the war. Just don't vote on it because if the funding bill is passed, Bush would veto and be upheld. However, a failure to appropriate will work legally and constitutionally. The U.S. now has 737 military bases in 130 countries. Do we need another in Iraq when the American and Iraqi people have so clearly indicated their disapproval?


Odiogo allows end-users to listen to content either on their PCs or on portable devices such as iPods, MP3 players or cellular phones.