Murtha prepares Iraq withdrawal bill.
By on Feb 7th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Murtha prepares Iraq withdrawal bill.
Today in a speech at CSIS, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) said that he is “preparing legislation that would give President Bush the war funding he wants this year, but on the condition that troops leave Iraq by the end of the year” and deploying troops be “fully trained and equipped.” Murtha will propose that the House vote on the bill next month.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
How many times has this been tried already?
February 7th, 2008 at 4:34 pmI’m still waiting for the Democratic party to just say NO to the BushitCo veto. Pass the bill, funding with strings.
Let him veto it.
And stop.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:39 pmWhy does the Congress feel obligated to try and negotiate with a President who has a sub-30 approval rating AND has never ever shown good faith when negotiating before?
February 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pmBush is going to throw a little hissy fit, stomp his feet, hold his breath till he turns blue, throw some objects around the oval office, scold some underlings, kick the dog, threaten someone, pout, frown, give a mean look, then do what he wants to do anyway.
Spoiled little puke.
Buck Fush
February 7th, 2008 at 4:44 pmGood luck with that.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:49 pmSnowball, meet Hell.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:50 pmI honor your service and attitude, Mr. Murtha, I truly do. But trying to use logic against Neoconservatrons is like asking Bush to say something intelligent…ain’t gonna happen.
As RUC notes above, pass the bill, with strings.
Bubbleboy will veto it.
Then, leave it right there; in his outbox.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:50 pmSnowball, meet HeII.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:51 pmI am not really holding my breath but while he is at it, he can ask for a withdrawal from Afghanistan, too. Kabul has already been likened to Saigon and NATO will get into real trouble if the current strategy, if you can call it that, in Afghanistan persists.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:51 pmHaven’t we heard this before?
February 7th, 2008 at 4:52 pmLet’s just tell our soldiers that, due to an obvious lack of leadership or planning, they can come home whenever they want…
6 days
6 weeks
months
Of course, you’ll have to pay your own way, no free rides in the Bush admin, no siree.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:58 pm6 months…
February 7th, 2008 at 4:59 pmAnd you’ve enlisted to fight this great “war”,right SM? I mean c’mon put your money where your mouth is, pal.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:05 pmPlease define “winning”
February 7th, 2008 at 5:09 pmFrom NPR, this morning:
The administration seeks $515 billion for the Pentagon’s day-to-day operations. That figure alone is more than the total combined military spending by every other country in the world. But it doesn’t include supplemental requests to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!
If we are not absolutely the best protected, best defended, safest country in the world, then I’d say we should look carefully at how all this money is being spent.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:17 pmIf the chicken repubs had gone for the draft……their illegal invasion of Iraq would now be over.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:28 pmAnd if you are as smart as you think you are, you can look it up in the dictionary.
Comment by Southern Man — February 7, 2008 @ 5:32 pm
Well I wouldn’t need a dictionary then would I. Now back to the question, what will victory look like? How will it’s arrival be measured.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:36 pmWhy is he wasting his time. Bush would never be dumb enough to leave the Iraqi people to the terrorists.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:42 pmJust how is victory to be measured in Iraq? I have yet to understand what victory there would be. From what I see as long as there is no definable goal we’ll never have victory. If there is no victory measure then there is no such thing as defeat.
Was Mittens defeated in his presidential bid since he didn’t win? Or did he get tired of having to spend his money?
As far as the commander guy goes “if you don’t know where you’re going, it doesn’t matter how you get there” seems like his philosophy.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:44 pmComment by Southern Man — February 7, 2008 @ 5:46 pm
Well this sure is an odd dodge from a perfectly valid question. Anyway enjoy that Happy Hour. I myself have to head out for work. I am guessing you are largely motivated by intangibles and cliches but I could be wrong. Maybe upon return from work I might find a clearer response to my question rather than some weird attempt to paint me as less than a true supporter of my nation. If it made some sense and articulated a real vision maybe it might persuade me.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:52 pmAnother question, what happened to the Win-Win way of doing business? Bush’s policies are leading us into a Lose-Lose situation by trying to sell us on the Winner-Take-All solution.
History won’t treat this administration well, despite Bush’s feeble attemps to control his legacy.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:52 pmThe problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:52 pmDwight D. Eisenhower
Why is he wasting his time. Bush would never be dumb enough to leave the Iraqi people to the terrorists.
Comment by Roger_Roger
If by “terrorists” you mean al Qaeda in Iraq, then I think you are giving them way more power than they really have.
I’m still trying to figure out how a Shia majority-led government will let a mnior Sunni-dominant entity filled with foreigners take over their country.
Not all terrorists groups are like Cobra, you know.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:56 pmIf you want total security, go to prison. There you’re fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking… is freedom.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:01 pmDwight D. Eisenhower
How many times has this been tried already?
Comment by Poop on Republicans
Not enough. Maybe they will stick to their guns this time. But I still say they have the power to end this now. Refuse to fund anything connected to a permanent presence (the embassy and bases) and refuse to fund the contractors. Fund only the troops. Without the contractors, Bush will be forced to bring the troops home or leave them there floundering in harm’s way. It’s such a simple solution. WHY DON’T THEY GET IT?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:04 pmEvery project manager knows that the success of the project must be measurable milestones. Winning means meeting defined milestones in an acceptable timeframe.
The milestones were initially, duck the flowers and candy to avoid injury for six months, tops.
Failing that, the goalposts have been moved from Los Angeles Coliseum to Bumfu(k, Timbuktu, and the moronic trolls still talk about defeat.
Your precious BushitCo has defeated itself.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:05 pmI have never seen a lame duck president throw this much muscle around and get away with it. My only other conclusion can be, is that elected democrats are begining to undestand that we cannot just end the war today and leave millions of Iraqis there to die. That maybe winning in Iraq is the right alternative to losing.
Comment by Southern Man
S & M seems to think that it is the Democrats who are not standing up to Bush that is the problem. I guess he misses the fact that every time they stand up to the President the Republiscums filibuster and obstruct. S & M couldn’t possibly see that there is blame on both sides of the fence for the mess this country is in.
S & M is also still pushing the fantasy that we are involved in a “war” that we can “win”. We are not in a war in Iraq, we are occupying Iraq. S & M thinks he’s so smart, perhaps he can tell us how you can “win” an occupation.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:07 pmIt has been explained to you many times before. It’s a straw argument. And if you are as smart as you think you are, you can look it up in the dictionary.
Comment by Southern Man — February 7, 2008 @ 5:32 pm
No answer? just say so, southern moron. There is no winning an occupation. Especially when led by idiots like Bush and the few suckers that have remained to clean up after him. We have already lost in Iraq, now we’re just sending targets over there. Too bad you haven’t had the courage to enlist.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:15 pmWhat does defeat look like d? Very ugly and not good for the U.S. But that’s what you want, right d? Winning and losing are the same to you? Thank God it’s happy hour.
Comment by Southern Man
S & M seems to be confused here. If we leave Iraq, we will be defeated in his eyes. The only “defeat” we will suffer is the fact that we were unable to steal Iraq’s oil. This is not a game. It is a real life situation where people are dying. We have invaded an unarmed country, killed millions of their citizens, driven another million or so out of the country, destroyed their infrastructure and left them defenseless. And now we are occupying that country. And what is the end result? Two bankrupt countries (USA and Iraq), countless dead or dying, the cost of oil tripled, the USA’s reputation in tatters. And, don’t forget the thousands of new “terrorists” we have created by killing their innocent family members.
I find it telling that when S & M is asked to define what a “win” would be in Iraq, how you can “win” an occupation, his answer is to ask what defeat looks like. A typical answer from a neoCON with an IQ of 75 or so. Has no ability to think logically and come up with an honest answer to an honest question.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:17 pmPlease define “winningâ€
Comment by dbadass — February 7, 2008 @ 5:09 pm
It has been explained to you many times before. It’s a straw argument. And if you are as smart as you think you are, you can look it up in the dictionary.
Comment by Southern Man
S & M makes me laugh. He calls asking him to define “winning” a straw man argument. There is nothing straw man about it. It is a direct question, so I’ll try it again. He can pretend that I never heard the “many times” it has been answered.
How do you “win” an occupation?
Now, if S & M doesn’t come up with an answer to that question the only conclusion we can come to is that he can’t answer it.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:23 pma neoCON with an IQ of 75 or so.
You were being very generous there bilbobaggins, 75 might be a tad high for that cretin.
Buck Fush
February 7th, 2008 at 6:28 pmBig Phuckin Deal.
Bush kept the troops in Iraq and Got HOW MANY MORE PEOPLE KILLED and borrowed and wasted how much more of our money in the last two years.
And Democrats, you too Murtha, you allowed this to happen through your incompetence and cowardice. All the people that have been injured and died, and, all of the $$ wasted down this rat hole are on your backs too
I cheered for this sort of crap two years ago – I”ll believe it when I see it.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:37 pmTroops fully trained and equipt? Obviously Murtha hates the troops and America!
Only Bush/Cheney (who were too scared to serve) love our country and the soldiers that they throw at the IEDs. Well, really, you have to admit that it’s worth it. Otherwise their pals would have to work for a living!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! There could NEVER be too many lives sacrificed at the alter of the oil barons (and Blackwater).
February 7th, 2008 at 8:42 pm.
The times of ploys and tactics to persuade are over.
BRING THE TROOPS HOME!
Noble wars deserve Just causes.
What WMD’s?
What ties to al-CIA-duh?
What Yellow Cake Uranium?
What mobile Bio-Chemical weapons labs?
What imminent threat?
What mushroom clouds?
What suitcases?
What truth?
935 LIES do not make a Just cause…
.
February 8th, 2008 at 3:21 amListen, it’s understood. High crimes? Check. Lying their way into a resource war? Check. Treason? Implicit. Displaying all the delicate moral rectitude of pit vipers? Check check check.
The only thing I ask you all to consider in this, is that logistically speaking, it’s gonna take longer than Murtha’s time frame to actually physically withdraw, and transport troops, support personnel, equipment, etc.. I think we should bring them home too, but let’s throw our weight behind something that demands ‘All due haste’, or a realistic logistical timeline.
February 8th, 2008 at 7:08 am