Why? Why? Republicans offered Dems the Ball

[Fescue4u]

and Dems said "no thanks, you keep it".

and the war wages on.

IMO, this smacks of "not invented here syndrom". Because it was Republicans who offered to brings the troops home, it suddenly became a bad idea.

Think about it. If Nancy Pelosi proposed bringing the troops home last week, how many of us would be cheering her leadership and telling our reps to vote for it?

Opportunity lost...opportunity not likely to be presented again.

It seems that today, the lives our troops became secondary to politics.

(yes, Im disallusioned)

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Actually ran with it

played chess much? You saw a check mate move today.. just watch...

[blonndee]

4. Excellent analogy. I used the "their battleship is almost sunk" one

earlier tonight, but ALMOST used the checkmate one. Either way, they're plain old stuck.

[Fescue4u]

6. So it is just politics

Instead of saying "come home" to the troops.

We said "just watch these neat tricky moves that we are going to play. We'll get back to you later".

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. No but tell me exactly how did you expect to get the

actual discusion going? Today we had the debate we should have had before the shooting started...

[Fescue4u]

14. Discussion would go like this:

"COngress voted to bring you home. Come home".

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. WIth the GOP control of Congress, good luck

by the way... all then nam references, we brought the troops home right after congress stopped funding that mess... tell me how exactly are you going to convince Hastert to do that.

So this is not bout politics, but getting the conversation started... they did, very well thank yuo and Hastert will be kicking himself in the morning, as soon as he realizes he walked into that one

[FreedomAngel82]

15. It was all a political tool

They weren't caring about pulling out the troops. They wanted the democrats to vote for it and say "see? They don't care about you or terrorism!" They could care less.

[Blue_Roses]

2. Oh, come on...

:eyes: When have the repubs EVER offered the Dems anything?

It was a joke...get it...a joke. The Dems saw that.

[Charlie Brown]

3. Huh?

Did you actually read the text of Hunter's resolution.

Here it is:

"It is the sense of the House that deployment of U.S. forces in Iraq be terminated immediately."

That's it. No guidelines or procedures on how this is to be accomplished, or what we leave behind in Iraq.

I support a unilateral pullout, but a pullout without a plan is a receipe for chaos and disaster.

[Fescue4u]

7. figure out how later.

Its really not that complicated.

We got over there without a plan, surely we can do the same in reverse.

[w13rd0]

16. It was a non-binding resolution...

...voting for it, even if they got several republicans to vote with them, would have accomplished NOTHING. The stunt was shown for what it was, more GOP playing politics with the lives of soldiers and welfare of US citizens. And the Democratic leadership called them on it. The debate will occur, and real BINDING solutions will be offered up. This wasn't one of them. Send the troops a message? The troops don't want a message, they want to come home, and this GOP bullshit wouldn't have accomplished that.

[Charlie Brown]

19. "It's really not that complicated"

Okay, General, please tell us how we start withdrawing our units out of combat in an orderly, safe, and manageable way.

Do they return by air, by sea, or do we figure that out once we mass all 180,000 troops in the middle of Kuwait (the Kuwaitis will love having our entire army in their borders).

Do we leave body guards, advisors, and military intelligence personnel behind to protect the fledging Iraqi gov't? Is that the CIA's job?

What about our embassy? Surely we have to leave some troops behind to protect our diplomatic representatives in Iraq.

No sane person would have voted for this bill.

[Fescue4u]

25. I see. SO its to complicated to bring them home

"sorry guys, bringing you home is hard work."

Btw, there really are Generals who figure these things out. Congress says "GO do xxx" and the Generals figure out the logistics.

God help us if Congress has to vote on military logistics.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. no but congress has to vote on policy

how exactly are you going to get the GOP to vote a BINDING resolution to bring the troops home. This was not binding so even if it passed, it is not law.

[Fescue4u]

policy is not logistics

policy is the "go do xyz"

Logistics is the details of how you "do xyz"

Your point of binding is well take. See my post at the bottom of this thread.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. The military does what we tell them, they work for us

there was a reason for this theater and has brought us closer to the day the troops coem home

[Fescue4u]

39. Agreed.

Im just saying that Congress doesnt normally get down into the nity gritty.

To use an extreme example, congress doesnt vote on whats for breakfast tomorrow morning...that is delegated of course.

Most logistics of how to execute an action is delegated to the military.

To expect that Democrats must publish a detailed plan of what airplanes to use and what ships to use in order to pull out is not realistic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. Time Table

that they can do... they did in the last days of Nam

They also DO GET into the nitty gritty, if you ever read any spending bill.. granted that is the staffers, but they do...

No they don't or should not tell the military what unit to pull first, but they do get into the nitty gritty on a REGULAR basis.

[lumpy]

57. Guess you could say the Dems

called the Repubs bluff on this one.

[Charlie Brown]

35. the whole point of Murtha's position was to have a plan for withdrawal

Any "Get out now" bill places an enormous burden on the military to improvise a plan as quickly as possible.

I want assurances that troops will return safely and that the Iraqi Gov't will have the resources it needs to stay alive.

I want A PLAN. Not a politically-motivated joke.

[Arianrhod]

5. I don't see that anything was offered.

The wording of the Rep resolution says it all. A laconic "Let's get out today" moronity. While Murtha's proposal was thoughtful, reasonable, and--above all--doable.

No, I think the Reps just showed the entire country what they are really made of.

[Fescue4u]

10. And the war continues.

But hey, its just politics.

Surely the troops will understand that its worthwhile to stay longer, if we can score a few political points!

[w13rd0]

20. Even if the measure had passed...

..it was a non-binding resolution. It would not have brought them home, or ended the war, or accomplished ANYTHING.

[tkmorris]

30. Do you really believe

that anything the Dems did tonight would have brought the troops home? You seem to believe that if only the Dems had voted for this abhomination the troops would be on C-10's right now.

I'm not sure you will understand this but believe me, what the Dems did in the House tonight actually brought us closer to that day when the troops will be brought home. You may call it "playing politics" but it isn't. It's winning the support of the public, which ultimately WILL be what brings them home.

[Arianrhod]

60. Your response applies to my post in only the vaguest of ways.

I didn't say anything about wishing to "score political points". The fact is, even if every Democrat had voted Yes, the measure still would have failed--and the Reps would have used that to show how weak the Dems are, wishing to pull the troops out "before the job is done". As it was, the Dems actually understood that what the Reps were doing was nothing but another vindictive political stunt. The wording of the resolution was obviously deliberate. And the fact that the Reps personally attacked Murtha for his stance is proof enough of what was really going on. The No vote was a means of getting the resolution out of the way quickly, so that focus could be placed on the Reps' motivation instead.

Meanwhile, the war would have gone on, regardless. This administration never intended for the troops to leave Iraq. Why do you think they built 14 military bases there? Under *, we will not ever leave.

Or rather, if we do leave, it will be only to send the troops to the next country to be conquered.

[FreedomAngel82]

23. And you can't trust the republicans either

[leftstreet]

8. The whole thing makes me wanna get schmidt-faced. n/t

[kster]

11. Simply put

the majority of Americans want Iraq war over, the Dems in every speech tonight agreed with the majority of Americans.

The vote was not important, the speeches were important,the Repubs want to stay the course against the will of the people.

Dems look good no matter which way the vote goes. CHECK MATE.

[Fescue4u]

12. """ ""Dems look good no matter which way the vote goes""

And thats the most important thing I guess.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. This political theater was about getting the discusion going

which was not going to happen unless the GOP willingly walked into it. They control all the means in Congress, and they don't allow the dems to have their say. Guess what? Today they did... and the converstion started.

If you thought they could have passed any bill to bring the troops home today... you really need to re-read how the congress works.

[kster]

38. For the troops,Yes...nt

[Fescue4u]

43. unless of course you get killed while admiring how good they look

[kster]

47. What would "Fescue4u" have done to

bring the troops home in a safe timely fashion?

[Rainscents]

13. You are thinking dangeruosly... playing right into republicans hands!

The bill was all about games "trick", get it? Dems didn't buy into their shit.

[Fescue4u]

18. If getting "tricked" means bringing them home.

Then please, please trick me.

[w13rd0]

22. Well, consider yourself tricked...

...a non-binding resolution of the "sense of Congress" would NOT have brought them home.

[FreedomAngel82]

24. And you trust the republicans to do this?

Ha!!

[tkmorris]

33. IT WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN THEM HOME

For the love of Pete, can you not grasp that?

[Fescue4u]

41. see post below nt

.

[Purveyor]

17. The insults hurled at Rep. Murtha this afternoon...

will pay hefty dividends for the Democrats if the news coverage of todays proceedings continue as I've heard them so far this evening.

I've been driving home for the last 4 hours and every radio stations top/bottom of the hour news report highlighted Schmidt's "cowards cut and run, Marines never do," comment in an unflattering context.

I've heard that Murtha is scheduled to do Meet the Press Sunday so this should continue to be a weekend event highlighting the charade the Repukes attempted this afternoon.

If nothing else, this finally planted the seed in the feeble publics mind, "why not bring them home" and if not now, when?

[FreedomAngel82]

26. Exactly

Now hopefully more of the country will see how the republicans are. They only care about politics and not about the truth and bringing them home.
Their resoultion wasn't about that. Someone else (on the debate), I can't remember who, asked if they were serious why weren't they voting on Murtha's resolution?

[Fescue4u]

28. OK. So Im told that this was Non binding. **

Thats a pretty big difference.

Still, wouldnt it be nice if the public could then pressure Congress to actually do what they voted to do?

[FreedomAngel82]

31. And you trust the republicans to do this?

*snort* Please! Their purpose was to accuse the democrats to be soft on terrorism, unpatriotic, etc. You honestly think they will bring them home? :rofl: Keep in mind how they kept using the troops and hiding behind them. Remember that? Did you see any of it? All they did was hide behind the troops and "patriotism".

[Fescue4u]

36. Never said I trust them with anything

But if we don't even use the legislative system that we have, then there is no point in even discussing politics because that means we have lost all control of democracy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Give the boy a cigar, if the pubies have their way

that is exactly what they desire... why do you think we right them letters and keep following this as closely as we do?

[Fescue4u]

44. We're pretty much agreeing here

I guess im just impatient

:)

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Then you need to be patient

I would love to get the troops out yesterday... but I know it will take tiem... but tonight's political theater has gotten us closer to that goal. Now much closer only time will tell... but it has

[Fescue4u]

46. fair enough.

good chatting with you.

(id like to do more, but I gotta some sleep)

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Why do you think we had this discusion to begin with

even if the pubbies walked into it.. Murtha said it clear as day, the American people are ahead of us, and football fields ahead of the President

[Tamyrlin79]

48. Thus we arrive at the other flaw in your reasoning.

Still, wouldnt it be nice if the public could then pressure Congress to actually do what they voted to do?

You seem to have some crazy idea that the Republicans would have let the bill actually pass. There was no "win" possible here. The Republicans set it up for us to lose. Let's pretend that every Dem in the House did as you advocate and voted "Yes". What would have Republicans done? A few might have defected, but you can bet the leadership would have held the vote open long enough to twist whatever arms needed twisting. Thus, the measure was doomed to failure in the Republican-majority house the moment it was proposed. The votes on the procedural questions right before the actual vote tell you the basic outlines of what the "yes vs. no" votes would have been on the actual resolution for withdrawal had the dems decided to vote yes as a block. And, it would not have passed.

You have forgotten rule number one in any fight: never do what your enemy has planned for you. It is the most certain route to defeat. In today's vote, the Republicans had two outcomes planned: either we spurned Murtha or we voted "not to support the troops" and our vote was used against us in the 2006 elections. Jean Schmidt forestalled option #1 by giving us a chance to defend Murtha's honor and force them into the awkward position of defending his honor, too, and then the actual vote against the resolution forestalled option #2 by not voting for the silly resolution.

A true withdrawal was NOT their goal. And they would have NEVER let that happen. The vote was rigged. It was a noose for Democrats crafted by Republicans, and we would have been foolish to hang ourselves with it. Repugs may be shirking the president in some ways, but they are still defending him from the level and kind of political damage that would result from the House actually passing a resolution demanding an end to the Iraq Debacle. It wasn't gonna happen. Ever.

There were few ways for us to win here, but somehow, we managed to pull it off.

[mmonk]

42. Some think the dems aren't really an opposition party

and won't end this war.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/jscahill.php?articleid=8084

[sofa king]

49. Congress 101.

This was a red herring specifically designed to deceive you.

First of all, this isn't a binding Act of Congress at all. It's a "Sense of the House" resolution which conveys no authority whatsoever.

A "sense of" resolution is an opinion. It is often used as a threat, as in "it is the sense of the House of Representatives that you had better fix this problem here, or we'll fix it for you." It's not a law. It's merely a warning that it could be a law... maybe, sometime in the future.

Even had the entire House of Representatives voted in favor of the resolution, it wouldn't bring the troops home. It might make the troops over there think they were going home, until someone like me were to come along and crush their hopes.

The Republicans were willing to risk that, and that is reprehensible, if you ask me.

That's just the first part of the deception. The second part of the deception is going to be the way they try to conflate Rep. Murtha's bill, which if passed would require the troops to come home, with this bullshit resolution which was introduced by the Republicans, and which would have done nothing.

I hate to say it, but that part of the deception has already worked on some of you. Don't be embarassed. Congress is a pain in the ass to understand and most of you don't have to do that for a living.

But you have to know this, and you have to make sure that everyone else you know knows this. The Republicans are trying to take advantage of what you don't know. We can beat them by informing each other.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. You don't even know what you're talking about, do you?....

...It's all very simple, if you're outnumbered, you get outvoted.

Here's the way everyone should be looking at this...the GOP voted to continue our presence in Iraq. Think about that.

People are turning against the war with increasing numbers, and the GOP is still clinging to "Saddam had WMDs", and "our troops are in Iraq to protect our freedoms".

[Fescue4u]

52. Wow, you are so persuading

Since you know it all, and are so polite about it, why don't you fix it?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

53. I'm sure the poster is doing all they can to help us fix it

As are the majority of us here. Course, I'm on the side of thinking that voting yes on a sham bill introduced with the only intent of undermining our efforts and undercutting a war hero in Murtha, would be dangerous, foolish and just all around plain Stupid.

[Fescue4u]

54. Proably so

I just get annoyed with people who get nasty during a what should be a civil conversation.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. Hmmmm. Ok. But I just tend to get annoyed at people who

get nasty at the dems at the drop of a pin when in fact they acted valiantly and appropriately.

:hi:

[Fescue4u]

56. I didnt think I was nasty. Just dissapointed

But I hear what your saying.

[Mutley]

51. They had to vote against it.

The repubs never intended to follow through on this, even in the highly unlikely event that it passed. It was a non-binding resolution. That should make it obvious for anyone that the Repubs never intended to actually pull out.

It's good news that the repubs voted against their own resolution. That shows that this whole thing was just a juvenile political ploy -- something mainstream middle America isn't going to appreciate. They want the troops home, and I'll bet they are not going to like having that desire used by the Repubs for their own political purposes.

I would rather that the Dems had walked out last night, or voted present, but I still think they did the right thing. And so far, it doesn't look like the media is slanting this to make the Dems look like they voted against a withdrawal. And the http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/index.html">military has already submitted an exit plan. Now, the Dems just need to stay strong and keep talking about what happened last night, and keep pushing the proper exit plan.

[goodhue]

58. I agree

[AuntPatsy]

59. I believe you honestly do not have a grasp on what played out

yesterday nor do you realize in your effort to blame the dems for the troops not coming home that the reality of the situation is that they do not have that kind of power and the republicans who do will NOT go against this president who wants to continue this war..

Its on the table now, now it is the people's voice on the republican side of the aisle who have the ability to enforce their repub representitives aid in bringing the troops home...

your not dillusional though, the lives of the troops are secondary to political games, sad but true, and that practice must stop, and the only way to stop it is if we the people demand it be so, and like it or not, you need those on the other side of the aisle to stand up to this principal which I don't think they will, not enough of them, they crave thier edge they now have to give it up no matter the cost..

I think that should pretty much tell you that the troops lives do not matter as much to the Republicans as winning and retaining power, sick bunch.

[jsamuel]

61. Then you are as stupid as the Republicans think you are.

Your reaction is exactly why they did what they did yesterday.

It was a farse and you are too blind to see that you are playing into their hands.