Quotes from the article, for full text see:
Obama says Congress will fund Iraq war
By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer
12 minutes ago
If President Bush vetoes an Iraq war spending bill as promised, Congress quickly will provide the money without the withdrawal timeline the White House objects to because no lawmaker “wants to play chicken with our troops,” Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) said Sunday.
“My expectation is that we will continue to try to ratchet up the pressure on the president to change course,” the Democratic presidential candidate said in an interview with The Associated Press. “I don’t think that we will see a majority of the Senate vote to cut off funding at this stage.”
Given that Bush is determined to veto a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, Congress has little realistic choice but to approve money for the war, Obama said.
“I think that nobody wants to play chicken with our troops on the ground,” said Obama. “I do think a majority of the Senate has now expressed the belief that we need to change course in Iraq.
“Obviously we’re constrained by the fact that a commander in chief who also has veto power has the option of ignoring that position,” Obama said.
Not exactly hopeful, but certainly audacious.
I don’t understand why Obama is giving away the store.
<
p>
I’d chalk it up to the fact that Obama knows that, if the Dems try to cancel the funding for “the troops” in Iraq, the insane child that you have is pResident will leave them there, instead of withdrawing them, thereby leaving them hostages. Hostages to continued congressional funding of the war. The hostages are not going to be withdrawn until you get a sane pResident in the oval office.
<
p>
Of course, any sane pResident would withdraw them when it’s clear that there is no further funding for their presence there. But you don’t have a sane pResident. Do you understand? You don’t have a sane pResident in the White House. Bush knows that he has 140+k US military, and at least 100K US mercenaries (a/k/a “contractors”) in Iraq, and the Dems in the US congress are not going to leave them in the lurch, even though Bush would. They are hostages to Bush’s stupid Iraq policy. Bush’s Drahtzieher (wire-pullers–his handlers) know that, even if you don’t.
<
p>
You might want to harken back on the Vietnam War model, but there is no equivalence. When the Dem congress cut off funding for the Vietnam War, virtually all of the American military people had been withdrawn. Withdrawall means no American hostages in the battlefield. And that is why there was no particular problem with them withdrawing funding for the corrupt S. Vietnam regime.
in Vietnam…. the “no problem” speech which somehow forgets to mention the execution of over 3 million defenseless Vietnamese by the Kmere Rouge after we surrendered and ran.
Any guesses on how many millions of Iraqis and Kurds will be butchered by Al Qaeda after we surrender and run from this one? They’ll be taught the folly of voting in an election! Let the beheadings begin!
If we don’t stay the course with this disastrous policy.
<
p>
Al Qaeda is way outnumbered by Shiites and Kurds. When the U.S. is out of there, the foreigners left will be Al Qaeda. And they won’t be welcome either.
<
p>
So, center aisle, have you thought about enlisting?
6 years Reserve. How about you Joel?
LIAR