I believe in giving the surge a chance to work. If it is proven that it is NOT working (I believe it already is) then and only then should talk of pullout begin. Let’s face it we simply cannot continue fighting in the streets of Iraq forever. At some point success or victory needs to be described, reached and celebrated with the parades of our heroes here at home.
DH PING
Good man.
PRESIDENT DUNCAN HUNTER ‘08
I think we SHOULD withdraw from Iraq.
.
.
.
.
.
points to tagline -——\
One of the reasons I believe that Hunter will be SECDEF or SECSTATE under a Rudy or Fred Administration. He is solid on security and not afraid to challenge the lefties in Congress or in the media. Too bad he just doesn’t add up nationally. Still, if Rudy or Fred wins, this guy would be solid in character and experience in protecting our nation.
Hunter paraprased it, even better to read the actual language of it, and pose the question - is the other party so desperate for fundraising that they are willing to have the President veto it again, and for the same reasons?
I found the text, here it is:
Message to the House of Representatives
May 1, 2007
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1591, the "U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007."
This legislation is objectionable because it would set an arbitrary date for beginning the withdrawal of American troops without regard to conditions on the ground; it would micromanage the commanders in the field by restricting their ability to direct the fight in Iraq; and it contains billions of dollars of spending and other provisions completely unrelated to the war.
Precipitous withdrawal from Iraq is not a plan to bring peace to the region or to make our people safer here at home. The mandated withdrawal in this bill could embolden our enemies -- and confirm their belief that America will not stand behind its commitments. It could lead to a safe haven in Iraq for terrorism that could be used to attack America and freedom-loving people around the world, and is likely to unleash chaos in Iraq that could spread across the region. Ultimately, a precipitous withdrawal could increase the probability that American troops would have to one day return to Iraq -- to confront an even more dangerous enemy.
The micromanagement in this legislation is unacceptable because it would create a series of requirements that do not provide the flexibility needed to conduct the war. It would constrict how and where our Armed Forces could engage the enemy and defend the national interest, and would provide confusing guidance on which of our enemies the military could engage. The result would be a marked advantage for our enemies and greater danger for our troops, as well as an unprecedented interference with the judgments of those who are charged with commanding the military.
Beyond its direction of the operation of the war, the legislation is also unacceptable for including billions of dollars in spending and other provisions that are unrelated to the war, are not an emergency, or are not justified. The Congress should not use an emergency war supplemental to add billions in spending to avoid its own rules for budget discipline and the normal budget process. War supplemental funding bills should remain focused on the war and the needs of our men and women in uniform who are risking their lives to defend our freedoms and preserve our Nation's security.
Finally, this legislation is unconstitutional because it purports to direct the conduct of the operations of the war in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the Presidency by the Constitution, including as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. For these reasons, I must veto this bill.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 1, 2007.
Duncan Hunter for President..