Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Republicans Seek Quick Veto of One Democrat's Proposal to End Troops' Deployment in Iraq
Associated Press ^ | November 18, 2005 | Liz Sidoti

Posted on 11/18/2005 3:09:30 PM PST by Gordongekko909

House Republicans maneuvered for swift and overwhelming rejection Friday of a Democratic lawmaker's call for U.S. troops to be pulled out of Iraq.

Furious, Democrats accused the GOP of orchestrating a political stunt by leaving little time for debate and by taking the heart out of the resolution offered by Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania.

For those reasons, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sent word to the rank-and-file to vote - with the Republicans - against immediate withdrawal of American troops.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; murtha; pelosi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last
To: Sols
The "earliest practicable date" does not neccessarily mean "immediate." Oh man, I hate when Congress plays lame politics. That must make a Democrat from DU! You sure pinned me, boss. (Registered Indie, if you're curious). This is not the Murtha proposal. IT is a strawman. This is not a victory for anyone, it's just sad.

Lets look at the bigger picture. Anything that sets a time line for a US withdraw encourages our enemies to continue their fight. We are saying: If you fight on you may yet be able to regain power. It is completely irrelevant whether we pull out this week or a few years from now. The message we should be united in sending is that there is no hope for our enemies; that there is zero probability of their regaining power, and that only a fool would continue to sacrifice their lives in such a futile effort.

Murtha is either treasonous or incredibly stupid. Consider that before posting your reply.
61 posted on 11/18/2005 4:04:25 PM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sols
The Republicans presented a resolution that essentially says "We want to leave Irag right this second." No one is going to vote yes to that. That isn't brave, it's just a blatant misstatement of Murtha's proposal.

I understand that the Dems are backtracking as fast as they can and saying that the Murtha "meant" for withdrawal in 6 months or that he "meant" for a repositioning in Kuwait. It is still surrender, it is still retreat, and it is still a betrayal to our troops and to the Iragis.

Murtha said over a year ago that we could never win in Iraq (I guess this is what is considered hawkish by the Left). He was wrong then and he is still wrong.
62 posted on 11/18/2005 4:06:37 PM PST by etradervic (Able Danger, Peter Paul Campaign Fraud, Travelgate, Whitewater, Sandy Berger...demand answers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

RINOS who voted with the Democrats to block a recorded vote ...

(see http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll606.xml )

Member Name DC Phone DC FAX Email
Representative Mike Simpson (R - ID02)
202-225-5531 202-225-8216 http://www.house.gov/simpson/emailme.shtml

Representative James A. Leach (R - IA02)
202-225-6576 202-226-1278 http://www.house.gov/leach/email.htm

Representative Walter B. Jones, Jr. (R - NC03)
202-225-3415 202-225-3286 http://jones.house.gov/html/contact_form_email.cfm

Representative John N. Hostettler (R - IN08)
202-225-4636 202-225-3284 John.Hostettler@mail.house.gov

Representative Roscoe G. Bartlett (R - MD06)
202-225-2721 202-225-2193 http://www.bartlett.house.gov/emailissues.asp

Representative Wayne T. Gilchrest (R - MD01)
202-225-5311 202-225-0254 http://gilchrest.house.gov/contact.asp?ContactType=Form


63 posted on 11/18/2005 4:09:47 PM PST by Nobel_1 (energy security 4 economic security)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Andy00

I heard that Democrap spin about moving our forces to "redeploy". Huh?

That would mean I suppose, a brigade to Marthas Vineyard to guard against drunks in Oldsmobiles.

Or maybe a division to Bermuda to protect Congressional junkets.

Anywhere but where our fine troops are needed to protect the nation.


64 posted on 11/18/2005 4:10:07 PM PST by tarepeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sols
"earliest practicable date"

Murtha did say, and these are his words, "It is time to bring them home". That sounds like 'now'. When I told my kids, "It is time to go to bed", I meant NOW, not at the 'earliest practicable time'.

Isn't everyone in favor of bringing them home at the earliest practicable date? Practicable means feasible. I think a lot of Dems want 'earliest practicable date' to mean before it is feasible. President Bush does not think it is feasible now. Does Mr. Murtha think it is feasible now? The Dems seem to be claiming he doesn't. Therefore, Mr. Murtha, you will have to wait until he thinks it IS feasible.

65 posted on 11/18/2005 4:20:06 PM PST by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: evolved_rage

Yep. I just sent my senator a nastygram on this. Vietnam was disgusting the first time. There is NO EXCUSE for trying to re-create it. Especially since we're 6 inches from wrapping this phase up. Too many people sacrificed too much to try to snatch defeat from the hands of victory just to embarass a president who's NOT FREAKIN UP FOR RE-ELECTION.


66 posted on 11/18/2005 4:21:42 PM PST by ark_girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sols

Kind of like putting a bill out to re-instate the draft right before a Presidential election so the media can do a blitz to state that there's a threat that the draft might be re-instated?

Hmmmm.


67 posted on 11/18/2005 4:24:36 PM PST by ark_girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sols

Murtha said in his speech that we should leave now. He also said that we couldn't win any more, and that nothing we did there would help anymore. He didn't say that after 6 more months we would have accomplished all we could do, he said the boys are dying now in vain.

The only reason he mentioned 6 months was that he thought it would take that long to get all the troops out.

The house resolution tonight says "as quick as is practical", and it turns out that to get 160,000 troops and all the equipment out will take about 6 months.

Murtha's "plan" involved putting all a reactionary marine force "nearby", that could be sent back in if needed. That is just a few thousand troops, and would have nothing to do with the removal of the majority of the troops.

In fact, Murtha's "plan" was not much of a plan, and now he has to pretend this WASN'T his plan. If we asked to vote on HIS plan tonight, he would say his plan isn't ready, but they would have it in early 2006, just like all their other "plans".

The "redeployment" was just for the expeditionary force, and he didn't even say where they would be.

Here's the fact. If we "redeployed" like Murtha wanted, the terrorists would simply run up to Afghanistan and attack us there. And then they'd run down to Kuwait and attack us there. And they'd come after the reaction force wherever IT was.

When they got tired of that, they'd run over to Israel and take them out.

Murtha's plan essentially was that he thinks 1000 deaths a year is too high a price to pay fight the terrorists.


68 posted on 11/18/2005 4:24:53 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: HardStarboard

...."Evidently Hastert has found the courage to stand up against the raving beech Pelosi......waiting for Frist!!"

Don't even -- hold your breath. Frist is thinking of running for pres in '08.


69 posted on 11/18/2005 4:27:20 PM PST by onyx eyes (.... I'd give at least .50 cents to know why ....oh, never mind....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sols
Sols
Since Oct 17, 2005

70 posted on 11/18/2005 4:27:22 PM PST by 1stMarylandRegiment (Conserve Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Sols

I just watched a rerun of Murtha's speech on CSPAN. He's convinced we need to leave and the earlier the better. Why would he want to wait? It would take a few months before the last American would board a helicopter from the roof of the American embassy. It will take a little while to construct some towers so the MSM will have a place to film from while thousands of Iraqi's are left to be hunted down and killed.

Murtha said we should "redeploy." He suggested to Kuwait. He went on to say something like if it gets too bad the Marines can just run up the road and straighten it out.

He sounded pretty tired and hysterical to me. I'll just say that he feels genuine pain for the wounded and talked a lot about battle fatigue. He's been a point man on veterans issues for a long time. But, he seems and sounded like a PTSD victim who has just had enough. I saw a hint of 'losing it' about him.

He referred to his visits to Anbar province and the casualty rate increasing. The casualty rate is increasing because we are carrying the fight to the enemy and killing them where we find them. We are not merely patrolling the roads like ducks in a shooting gallery and providing targets to the terrorists.

During the last year of the Civil war the Union army under U.S. Grant suffered nearly daily battles with horrific casualties once the Army of the Potomac and headed south in pursuit of the Confederate army. Battles included the meat grinders of the Wilderness, Spottsylvania, Cold Harbor, and Petersburg before finishing up at Appomattox.

There were a lot of Copperheads who couldn't face it, called Grant a butcher, and wanted to negotiate a peace even while Grant was standing on the throat of the Confederacy.

It appears the Democrats are terrified that we might win. Why? We are in no military jeopardy, the casualty rate is barely above the normal accident rate, and we spank the enemy in every encounter.

I believe the Iraqi army can be trained to defend their country. It takes time and I think the conditions are such that we should wait awhile longer and see what happens.


71 posted on 11/18/2005 4:36:00 PM PST by Belasarius (Yet man is born unto trouble, as the sparks fly upward. Job 5:2-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

Jean Schmidt could replace De Wine in the senate in my book. Sure was funny to hear the PC gasps from the Dems. I knew that they don't believe in democracy. I guess they don't like free speech either.


72 posted on 11/18/2005 4:37:49 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Belasarius

This has all been so transparent, so organized.

The demands that we get out RIGHT NOW, IMMEDIATELY etc.

Is it OK if we at least wait until after the parlimentary election next month before we cut and run? /s

Aside from abandoning the Iraqi people, proving to terrorists that we can be rolled, and guaranteeing that the war effort was for nothing, could we at least wait until the completion of the election timetable if nothing else?

Do these dim traitors even know there is an election scheduled and that both the Bush WH and our own common sense tell us that violence will increase during the run up?

Or are they afraid that this election, like the others before it, will be a huge success so are keeping those waters as muddied as possible?


73 posted on 11/18/2005 4:39:12 PM PST by Let's Roll ( "Congressmen who ... undermine the military ... should be arrested, exiled or hanged" - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: ark_girl

Hey y'all I'm a newbie. I too sent my senator an e-mail today regarding this. Listening to the dems constantly whine irritates me but the thought of just surrendering enrages me. The dems and rinos are real courageous spewing their garbage from the capitol. Not a one of them would have the stones to go face to face with one of our fine and brave service men or women and explain how they're losing to terrorist thugs and its time to leave. I swear you must have to agree to be neutered to enter politics.


74 posted on 11/18/2005 4:54:12 PM PST by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: panthermom

You sure are! Happy first day. Welcome!


75 posted on 11/18/2005 5:15:42 PM PST by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909

John Murtha, Jr. - Democrat - U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania. Implicated in the Abscam sting, in which FBI agents impersonating Arab businessmen offered bribes to political figures; Murtha was cited as an unindicted co-conspirator


76 posted on 11/18/2005 5:35:32 PM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gordongekko909

Well the vote is over

The Democrats and liberals have no spine.

Vote 403 to 3


77 posted on 11/18/2005 8:36:02 PM PST by CHICAGOFARMER (Right to Carry (RTC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson