Afghanistan war protested by GOP, Dems to start debate on DOD spending bill

[rug]

By Pete Kasperowicz - 07/18/12 03:39 PM ET

Several House Democrats and Republicans started debate on a 2013 Department of Defense spending bill by protesting the ongoing war in Afghanistan, and calling on members to support amendments over the next several days aimed at reducing funding for the war.

The bill, H.R. 5872, already cuts spending on Afghanistan and Iraq by about $27 billion, which reflects reduced operations in those countries. But the United States is still set to have troops in Afghanistan in 2014, and several members said Congress should speed up that process.

"Enough is enough," Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said. "I urge my colleagues to support amendments over the next 3 days to reduce the funding for this war, bring it to an end and honor the sacrifice of our troops by bringing them and our tax dollars back home."

Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) said he supports most of the bill, but has to oppose it for its continued spending in Afghanistan.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/238749-afghanistan-war-protested-by-gop-dems-to-start-debate-on-dod-spending-bill

I like Jim McGovern.

[Odetion]

1. Do you agree the US should fund Afghanistan until 2017?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-07-08/obama-congress-afghanistan-aid/56088538/1

me seriously doubt that here we're indeed speaking about "civilian Afghan aid"... doubt we're even to call it "aid" as little civilians in fact will see it. So are we just continuing to pay off our troops' presence within the Afghan territories or what?? At least, as far as I can remember it, not long ago Karzai already have stated that he wants the US to pay $2 billion per year to stay. So... govs agree, but hide the bow behind "civilian aid"? Guess, that was predictable enough. ... ties with Taliban... drugs illegal pushing... - rumors are rumors but my son, who has just returned from his duty trip to Northern Afghanistan, says here we don't know even a half of all the profitable businesses the US commands hold there and will hardly step so easily aside.
So should taxpayers in this country continue fund Afghanistan until 2017?

[rug]

2. No.