House passes bill to bring the troops home in 2008
 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/...ote/index.html

The House of Representatives voted 223-201 Thursday to require most U.S. troops to leave Iraq by April 1, 2008.

Then they'll be like, APRIL FOOLS, THEY'RE NOT COMING HOME LOL.

Don't ask.

Muthafuckin VETO'D!

psycheyomind! even.

cant stay cant go.

Yeah, Bush will do that, it seems he is using that power now, more than before.

ahh hahahahahahahahahah

There was a quote on the TV news the other night that said that Bush's attitude was that even if his wife and dog were the only ones that agreed with him he would carry on vetoing any attempt at ending the war in Iraq before he's good and ready.

That quote alone, if true, should be enough to get him thrown out of office.

what I like is that Bush readily admits that Al-CIAda has taken over Iraq (although I doubt that)...in other words, Bush is responsible because he removed Saddam. There was no Al-CIAda in Iraq before the US invaded.

sounds like it's time to crack open the new-clear weapons!

Yeah, and then Bush will be all like, "Oh, no you don't! Veto!"

It's time to impeach Bush.

What I like about Bush is that he is such a liar and that he knows it, and he knows everybody knows it. Yet he just brazenly keeps on lying.

You have to admire that kind of devotion to deception.

Looks like April 1st 2008 will be a great day for political islam. Islamic Republic of Iraq, here we come. Clit-cutting, head-choppin' and queer-hanging included. Excellent! Go, dhimmicrats, go, if we'll be just nice to the terrorists and surrender, they will leave us alone and slaughter only their bretheren in the middle east. Isolationism it is. Fuck all those iraqis who believed in iraqi democracy. Their own fault they trusted the US and colaborated with the Great Satan, risking their lifes voting and shit. *sigh*

The old saying is true: America, harmless as an enemy, dangerous as a friend.

Thanks p-rk Bush can still veto this insanity. But for how long?
My only hope is that the democrats are only pressuring for withdrawl to win the 2008 elections and after that will still support Iraq's government in the struggle against Jihadism. We'll see..

That's strange, because I would think that a deadline for removing troops would encourage actual, real development in Iraq. Have a contractor build a house at an hourly wage without a deadline to finish, he's going to milk it for as long as he can (unless he's an idiot).

Just goes to show how the conservatives in power have become so far removed for conservativism. Bastian's fear-mongering logic won't last much longer as an excuse to fleece Iraq.

All politicians are far removed from reality. If their sons and daughters were over there in Iraq, you can be damned sure we would have been out of there two years ago. As long as the poor continue to fight the rich politicians' battles, there will be no real sense of urgency in bringing our troops home.

I'm in favor of reinstating the draft. Then we'll see how long it takes people to take to the streets over this senseless war.

And if the sons and daughters of those who want the withdrawl would have to live in Iraq, the troops would stay there for as long as it takes.

http://www.wadinet.de/wadiev/presse/...ntic-times.pdf
An article about the german NGO Wadi e.V., which helps people in northern iraq rebuild their country and reform their society by running campaigns against FGM and creating the first independent kurdish radio station in northern iraq.

so you're proposing the establishment of an American colony in Iraq? because that's what it would take-- permanent policing, a permanent American force to oversee the country for ever & ever. another Puerto Rico? it just wouldn't work.

you know last time we discussed this in a thread i heard out your arguments against the withdrawal, and they are good ones... but the error was already committed, namely, invading iraq. perpetuating the error will not make it better. it will make it worse, as it is happening.

now i think your concern with islamism taking over may arise from the situation in your own country. if that is the case, U.S. troops staying in Iraq protecting a lost cause won't save Europe. this is something that will have to be worked out inside Europe's borders, and I don't have an answer for that.

I support Bush vetoing the withdrawal. I'm with Bastian on this one. It's a no win either way but that's the price paid for the conflict. Morally and practically, the coalition simply can't withdraw until its sure that some form of order is in place. They can't leave a job half done. Iraq is now a breeding ground for Islamic extremism so, in a lot of ways, the initial coalition invasion was but a preface to the real conflict that they now find themselves in the middle of. It's going to take years, maybe even decades, to come to some resolution but until that happens, the troops can't withdraw.

yes, that's because the u.s. is there.

the longer the troops are there, the longer it "breeds".

--

now london is also a breeding ground for islamic extremist. should the u.s. invade london? :eek::confused: