cutting funding for the war?

The plan isn't like that. They won't cut funding in a way that would endanger troops. I don't think they have that power. The defense department decides how the money is spent congress just gives the Defense Department the money. More likely the Dems will use this threat as some kind of leverage, and when push comes to shove not approve the next request for how ever many billions to continue the escalation of this war.

The better questions would be:

Why do radicals say that the Democrats are the ones killing American troops when bush was advised not to send them there, on nothing but a pack of lies, in the first place?

The funds are already there to bring our troops home.

Why doesn't the president want to do the right thing, and use that money to bring them home, instead of leaving them there, to fight and die, in the middle of another country's civil war, instead of soaking us tax payers, with no end in sight, only to fatten up his & cheney's pocket books?

When will the republicans finally be satisfied with their lust for blood money?

.

Yes the international troops can also be withdrew and taken residence with honour if the similar international governments permit the persons of Iraq to examine their possess destiny after Sadam generation democratically.The congress can reduce the struggle investment if the vast majority of its individuals short of this fund for the prosperity of the American persons.A susceptible persons cannot be suppressed cruelly like an ant if trampled down or overwhelmed down he's going to chew.It is larger for American persons if the fund would be used for wellbeing,coaching and schooling and for lowering unemployment than for killing blameless persons of different nations.

The present bill is an appeasement bill, Palosi and the Democrats are un-united, so it is being loaded with Pork to appease Democrats in the middle to vote for it, since the far left has pressured Palosi and split the Democratic party. It will most likely be delayed as it runs it purely political course for votes. The the next bill will get pass for then the far left Democrat's will have there election year sound bite. "I voted against it before I voted for it"

The only people it will hurt is the troops in the field for money will be delayed.

I think the thought process here is similar when lawmakers went after the mafia. To hinder their illegal activities you had to hit them in the wallet. Since most people already know that this war was constructed on a false premise and for the safety of our troops they look to cut funding and bring them home. I live in a military town and from the many I have spoken with this seems fine to them. STOP THE INVASION NOW!

P.S. I know this is not what you wanted to hear.

Try not to hold onto such fake rage.

Clearly, the potential consequences of their actions are of no importance to these lawmakers.

I am not a Republican.

However I am deeply troubled by a congress that is obviously more interested in damaging this president than they are in ensuring victory for our troops and our country.

This is no longer about expressing irrational hatred for GW Bush...we get it, Dems...you literally hate the man.

But I see a complete lack of conscience when it comes to doing the right thing regarding our young people in the field.

You Dem supporters, urge your representitives to do the right thing and fully fund our brave troops.

Put aside your mindless hatred of Mr Bush and remember...you are Americans first...Democrats second.

If this baffoon of a President realizes that the money tree has been cut down

He will have no other choise than to bring home the troops

Once funding has been cut ----the plan to withdraw will come and our troops will come home

Greeting the anti-war crowd as

"their Liberators throwing flowers to us as we pass down the streets"

An alternate option from bringing the boys home, would be Senor Bush's plan.

Do nothing, absolutely nothing, but run around in circles waiting for the next president to be elected. Then it'll be his (or her) problem. Great plan.

Almost as good as taking a country that ain't a terror threat and turning it into one.

Freedom is on the march! Over what cliff?

It is a misnomer that cutting funding will kill troops. Know what kills troops? Suicide bombers.

Cutting funding means we don't have the money to keep them there, not that we're going to let them languish and die there.

Cutting funding also means that the Iraqis might - God forbid - have to come up with some of their own money to support their own defense.

What a radical concept that is.

It won't. I've written my Democratic Congressman, whom I've voted for in every election since I've lived here, and told him I will never vote for another Democrat as long as I live if they cut funding for the troops.

Side note - isn't it ironic when someone calls someone else a buffoon and misspells it?