Bush Vetoes Troop Withdrawal Bill, Kerry Says Bush Veto Ignores Will of Congress, Prolongs Misguided Iraq Policy
by Pamela LeaveyThe ‘Decider’ decided to shun the troops and veto the Iraq spending bill setting stage for “a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate.”
It was a day of high political drama, falling on the fourth anniversary of Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech declaring that major combat operations had ended in Iraq.
In only the second veto of his presidency, Bush rejected legislation pushed by Democratic leaders that would require the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by Oct. 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later.
We all knew it was coming, but it’s a damn shame that Bush acted like a petulant child and did exactly what he has accused Democrats of, creating a “prescription for chaos and confusion.”
John Kerry (D-Mass.) issued the following statement today, after President Bush vetoed the Iraq spending bill:
“By vetoing this bill, the President is ignoring the majority in both the House and Senate who voted to end the disastrous open-ended Bush policy by setting a sensible deadline for the redeployment of troops,” Kerry said. “President Bush is unwilling to recognize reality. It’s as if he still believes the version of events pedaled by Vice President Cheney. He refuses to set firm benchmarks tied to a redeployment because he is still unwilling to force the Iraqi government to make the political compromises needed to end their civil war. President Bush asks too little of Iraqi politicians while asking for the greatest sacrifice from American troops.”
“The irony of President Bush declaring “mission accomplished” in Iraq four years ago today was not lost on anyone in Congress. What the president doesn’t understand is that the only way to actually accomplish the mission is to change the strategy. More of the same won’t cut it. Congress has done what this administration has stubbornly refused to do for years – accept a new strategy, get tough with the Iraqis and bring our heroes home. No matter how many times the President vetoes this plan, we will continue to fight for a new policy.”
Bush’s veto is truly the “Last refuge of the scoundrel” and a “A Study in Weakness and Cowardice.” Even members of his own party want out… When will he get it?
UPDATED: Kerry on CNN’s The Situation Room:
Filed under: Bush Admin, Congress, Democrats, Foreign Policy, House Of Reps, In The News, Iraq, John Kerry, Politics, Republicans, Senate | Get Permalink or trackback |
While they are pushing for an end to Iraq do some oversights on why China was allowed to send tainted grain in this country and kill or sicken thousands of pets.
Now that there is confirmation that chickens who received the tainted feed have been processed for human consumption looks like we have 2 enemies that need a smack down or 2.
Also, sure up the borders and stop mexican drug cartels from selling meth to Native americans’ already drowning in poverty on many of the reservations in this country.
Oh, the dems might want to stop picking on Putin in Russia. No need to piss him off since he has the oil that for some reason can’t be pumped out of Iraq.
Yes, it time to get out of Iraq and get on to running this country again and protecting America. Let Iraq defend itself or implode I’m to the point I don’t care.
If it wasn’t for bush Iran wouldn’t have the chance to take over 1/2 of Iraq in the first place.
Business in the gulf folding because of the slow trickle of money and the price gouging by insurance companies.
And since bush has lied about Iraq from the start and clinton was tried for lying about an affair how about some impeachment hearings for bush and chenney.
War or no war its time for them to go and since they have mismanaged this war from the start congress can do little harm at this point.
by they I meant the bushies mismanaged the war. congress was of little help for the last 4 years but that’s another post
Greetings,
What is a shame is that the Democrats in Congress have learned so little for our history 35 years ago.
Then a Democratic President tried to ‘manage’ a war from Washington D.C. Now, Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi want to repeat that error – with a maginified effect on both our National Security and National Power.
Once again, Mr. Bush has stood strong and focused on defeating the evil that face us in our times.
Regards,
Mike
What a shame you republicans haven’t learned from your mistakes. Bush keeps making the same mistakes over and over again and all you Bush apologists keep propping him up. The American public is wise to BushCo now. Run along there’s still a few like minds out there you can preach to, we’re not buying it here.
Greetings,
Ah, yes, the past decisions by some people may have been incorrect. Such is the nature of war – he who commits the fewests mistakes wins.
Fortunately, Gen Abazaid is gone. Gen P is now in charge and understands this fight. As he was confirmed by a bipartisan majority of our Senate, we should let him lead this fight.
I believe he deserves a chance to win. The stakes are to high to run and hide. We must stand and defeat this evil.
Regards,
Mike, as with every thing else in his life, your president is a loser and a failure of the n’th degree! The evil to be defeated, is the right wing nuts that still support this war of choice. A war based on lies. A war for revenge! A war that has been botched from the get go, by a draft dodger and his fellow draft dodging chickenhawks. May GOD have mercy of your souls, because I have no sympathy to spare. I only give the same compassion to the bastards, that they continue to give to my state. Rot in hell GOP! I will celebrate your defeat for days after!
Mike writes: “I believe he deserves a chance to win.”
Because it’s all about him, isn’t it?
“The stakes are to high to run and hide. We must stand and defeat this evil.”
So why did the president veto funding for the troops?
Mike,
There is no way a military solution will result in any kind of a peaceful solution.
This is not WWII where we the enemy is visible.
This kind of war demands a non-military solution.
When you lie to go to war.
When you torture people.
When you kill citizens going about their business..
Because this war was fought for immoral purposes, it can never be won. We lost before the first shot was fired.
Educate yourselve and read Lind, Richards, Van Crevald at http://www.d-n-i.net/
So you think Bush always hated timetables eh?
A little flip-flopping maybe?
http://thinkprogress.org/bush-in-1999/
[snip]
Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton’s administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough response. “Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is,” Bush said.
Mike. Dude. Take a step back and think about where you are. Thirty five years ago was 1972. The President ws Nixon. And he made the same mistake of trying to force freedom and democracy on people who were thinking about something else.
When you get on the same calendar and planet as the rest of us, drop on by again.
Darrell
LOL! I thought something was fishy about Mike’s math and history skills.
Greetings,
Vietnam was Mr. Kennedy’s and Mr. Johnson’s war. Mr. Johnson was a micromanager and attempted to run the war from Washington D.C.
Mr. Nixon got elected on a promise to get us out of SE Asia. Unfortunately, Mr. Nixon did understand the impact on a nation of losing a war and didn’t move fast enought to suit the doves of the times. The Democratic Congress forced a retreat from Vietnam in 1973. In 1975, N Vietnam attacked (for the second time after the ‘Peace Treaty’) and occupied S Vietnam.
My history is fine, I just need to explain it a bit better.
The military aspect of this campaign is a part of the solution. There are other aspects that must be taken into account; economic, political and social. However, the military strength provides the basis for the remaining functions to work.
This is the basis for GEN P’s philosophy and current doctrine. Establish local security, empower the local community, leverage the intel the locals can provide, empower the local government and stand up the local economy to give people a vested interest in the success of their government. And, most importantly, demonstrate that the bad guys have nothing to offer.
That, in a nutshell, is GEN P’s plan. The new strategy if you will and he does deserve the chance to win. We Ds and Rs appointed him and sent him and his men/women to war.
Regards,
Why don’t we go back to 1958 then. That’s when I first started reading the paper as a kid, and seeing stories about U.S. military involvement in Viet Nam. “Military advisors” Eisenhower called them. Kennedy inherited this from him, Johnson from Kennedy, and Nixon from Johnson. When Nixon was elected in 1968, he made no bones about his intention to continue that war, and escalated it far beyond anything previous. In 72 he was up against McGovern and lied about being willing to try to wind it down. It was only after Watergate broke and weakened him that he actually gave in.
The central point is, though, that the majority of Vietnamese didn’t want anything that we were selling, and the majority of Iraqi’s feel exactly the same. Are some of them willing to let us continue to shed blood for reasons that make sense to them? Of course. Will we be continuing to shed blood for any reason that can be justified on the basis of our national value system? Not just no, but hell no!
“The bad guys have nothing to offer”. You’ve got three ethnic groups, none of which have clean hands or good intentions. And what all of them have to offer is a far larger cut of the Iraqi oil fortune than any that we are prepared to pay. At least the big boys with the most paid killers get far more, and that’s why we need to leave and just let them fight it out.
Bush took a country that was an awful mess, and turned it into a country that is a bloody awful mess.
Mike,
You are forgetting the most important part…
The local folks must want us there.
Gen P sounds like a plan that could only be implemented as the Sadaam statue was falling to the ground; not years later.
There are not enough troops in the world to obtain this objective if the locals hate us.
After killing innocent civilians, torturing them..we are toast.
Read about what 4GW experts say.
[...] s a pay raise. Go figure… Democrats gave Bush a war funding bill once already… It wasn’t good enough. What makes anyone think this one will be. For all we know the “Comm [...]