Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
As far as suggesting something without a withdrawel timeline, read that bill Bush just vetoed ATG. Its pretty damn good. Im pretty sure he didn't read it before he vetoed it.
Like a little kid, he already promised a long time ago to veto it, so he didn't need to read it nor would he care too. By the time he got it, it was a little late to say "hey, this is actually pretty good, lemme get my pen!"
Few people also understand what the bill actually funds. I even had to correct some Democrats on another board about it. It does not provide food, paycheck, or basic supplies to the soldiers. These things are covered by the normal annual military spending budget.
What it does provide for is timely payment of KBR, Blackwater, and other mercenary contracts, money hole contracts to Iraqis, as well as spending on accelerated programs the Republican congress failed to provide for 5 years like SOTA body armor, an accelerated program for re-armoring the HMMVV's, etc, as well as transportation funding for rotations of armor and such on a massive scale.
Again, soldiers will get their paychecks, bullets, and meals as needed and expected, bill or no bill.
What else does the bill do?
Well, first its just loaded with domestic pork that has nothing to do with Iraq. Both parties have a nearly equal share of the extra appropriations in there. How they can max out a credit card and just keep on spending is beyond me, but if Bush gets a pet war, then I quess everyone else can have their little pet projects too.
And, Cheney's wet dream, forces Iraq to turn over its nationalized oil to private companies to exploit. "Some" of the profits will go into a profit-sharing scheme, but the language in the bill allows the companies to withhold these shares until the Iraqi government passes some ridiculous hydrocarbon law. This same law, which specificly isn't detailed, is also used by our President to withhold money from other programs (Iraqi narcotics enforcement, the "Economic Support Fund', etc.) and use the money elsewhere until the Iraqi's can come into compliance. Basically, Iraqi's need to pay to go green or our oil companies keep the oil profits and our President re-directs law enforcement and economic aid to something more useful, like playing real life GI Joe somewhere else on the planet.
The repugs wrote in that part, and the Democrats let it slide so long as the timetables are there. I think it was Bush's party members trying to put something nice in there so Bush would just sign the damn thing, its actually quite a deal. He loses his worthless occupation, but his contractor buddies get richer, and the Democrats can say "Hey look, oil profit sharing, very populist...and green!"
ATG wrote:
The democrats claim victory because Bush vetoed the bill, while every tax payer claims to hate the pork that was associated with this bill, so...who wins again?
If the bill is dead and stays dead, everyone wins
Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2007-05-02 15:25:34)