DU, should we continue to fund the Iraq war?

[mb7588a]

It's been said the reason Vietnam finally ended was the souring of politicians on spending more money there, rather than the mounting death toll. There may not be any other viable option for ending our military involvement in Iraq.

Should the funds for this war be cut or limited? Should Democrats block sections of the next supplement spending request that are not aimed at redeploying troops?

[whistle]

1. Not with contingency funds that have no accountability, that was

...the Bush administration's, Rumsfeld's and Cheney's license to steal.

[Initech]

2. I think I've figured out the solution to ending the war:

And it just came to me - and it's so fucking simple I cant believe I didn't think of it before.

And the solution is this:

Let the companies who are profiting handsomely off of the war pay for it (like Halliburton, MCI, Boeing, and so on).

Once they realize how much money they're losing on a daily basis, it'll be over before you could type the information onto that little CNN scroller.

[Auntie Bush]

5. Great minds think alike.

I posted almost the same thing on another post. (All those that made money off this war should pay for it...big time.)

[Initech]

10. Yup, it would be over pretty quickly.

[cally]

3. I think there is a way to fund our soldiers but not this war

I have no desire to deny food, ammunition, protection and all the rest for our soldiers in Iraq. I absolutely think we should deny funding for this war. I think the disconnect is all about politics. I want finances for our soldiers but not for the crazies that are in power.

[napi21]

7. I'm not sure there's any way to do that.

I've been thinking about the same thing. The problem, as I see it, is that Halliburton was hired to feed the troops, some civilian company is drivingfuel to the different encampments, some other civilian company is doing the wash for the troops. You see what I mean? It's totally different today than it was years ago when the military did all of these things for themselves. Wht exactly would you defund?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Make it about the money.

Republicans don't give a shit about the troops.

Mention how much that downed F-16 cost. Or how much wrecked humvees cost.

They only care about the money.

[LonelyLRLiberal]

6. They only care about the cost of hardware if funds to build more are cut off.

And you are so right, they care nothing about the lives lost and the wounded.

The Democratic Congress does need to call the war profiteers to account, and stop funding anything but direct safety needs of the troops.

Bush is crazy as hell, totally out of touch with reality and stubborn beyond any reason.

[pinto]

8. I'd like to see the House and Senate use their money leverage

to hold Bushco accountable and pry some coherent response, in real terms, from the Administration. That's a nuts and bolts tactic.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Here's what you do: cut funding to Halliburton.

Immediately revoke all of their contracts, open them up to bidders. Open up criminal investigations into war profiteering. Do the same to KBR, Carlyle Group, etc.

War will be over by Christmas.

[FtWayneBlue]

11. Yes, new "emergency supplemental" funding should be cut off

with the stated acknowledgment that there are enough funds "in the pipeline" to safely bring the soldiers home.

[mike_c]

12. congress should strangle the funds....

It is not just "the war." It is a crime against humanity. We are paying for it. Doesn't that make you ashamed?

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. ONLY money to pay the troops.

Give them no option but to BRING THEM HOME...ASAP.