Iraq Point

Can I have a link to an iraq war timeline? I need to find a timeline of the Iraq war with USA. Or a link to a summary, or government website, that will give me a summary of the war so far, and only points out the major parts. Needs to be UP_TO_DATE! Thanks

What is the correct timeline of the Iraq War? Can someone outline the Iraq War from the start to today? Only important dates are needed and also having the "16 words" Bush said? Thanks.

When will the iraq war end? Give a specific date and timeline? if you cannot give date and cannot give timeline then we presume that iraq war goes on FOREVER. Fair enough? I'm tired of spin where such words are used by the administration -- "We will stay until the job is done" "Not a day longer than when mission is accomplished" "we are fighting war on terror. i urge patience" "it was never going to be easy in the first place" etc etc etc Such phrases are nothing but an attempt to fool citizens. You agree?

Do the liberals get it? Senate OKs war bill with Iraq timeline? Recent headlines read "Senate OKs war bill with Iraq timeline" Do they understand what will happen if we pull out. You can’t tell the terrorist what day they can come back in and undo everything that we have accomplished. Plus a withdrawal before the war is won makes every soldier who lost their lives useless. THE WAR MUST BE FOUGHT UNTIL IRAQ CAN TAKE CONTROL OF THIER COUNTRY! Not one minute sooner.

What would be your timeline for the war in Iraq? War what is it good for.

Can anyone please provide me with a website with a timeline of happenings in the Iraq War? As unbiased as possible if thats possible.

Will the American people be happy Obama is ending the Iraq war? The government of Iraq has insisted it is committed to the timeline laid out in a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement that calls for American forces to pull back from urban areas by the summer of 09 and from the rest of the country by the end of 2011. The Iraqi Government says the war is winding down.

what are some reasons We should not have a timeline for the continued war in Iraq?

Can anyone help me to understand the just passed Iraq war spending bills by the Congress? Do the bills that passed contain timelines for withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and are these timelines binding or are there waivers attached that would allow the President to ignore the timelines?Also,when are the two bills going to be combined into one bill called a conference report,which reconciles the differences between the bill passed from the House,and the the bill passed by the Senate?When will the House and the Senate vote on the conference report and will the conference report have a name and a number so that I can find out how my Senators and Representive voted on what I believe is the conference report on a supplemental appropriations request for more money for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Where to find timeline of when Pres Bush sent troops and money to Iraq? Please direct me to a website that list all the dates when Pre Bush sent money and troops to Iraq War. Thanks.

what is the significance of the Iraq war? THis is for a timeline in American Government and I need to find things that america was or is invovled in and it has to be between the years of 1991 and 2006. So i found the Iraq war but we also need the significance of the war and i cant find it. Can anyone help? BTW I am in High School

I seriously need an iraq timeline link? I have looked all over the web, could you give me maybe a couple of websites (unless you feel like listing the events, which would be better) I do not want a timeline of the war, I need a timeline from when it very first became a country to when the present. Please dont give me like 20 different websites, its ok if you give me a few... maybe like 5. Thanks for your help!! = ))

Has mccain changed his 100 year war stance now that Iraq has said they want a U.S. timeline for withdrawal?

Are Republicans getting tired of Senator McCain flip flopping on the War in Iraq? First he says 100 years. Now he is leaning toward the propose 2011 withdrawal timeline that is very close to the timetable established by Senator Barack Obama? It appears that Senator Obama has been right on this one all along.

What is going on right now August 2007 with the war in Iraq? What are Pres. Bush's plans? A longer stay? A timeline?

Why does Obama not have a timeline for leaving Iraq? Hillary said 60 days withdrawal will begin, and the mission will change from war to rebuild....Obama on the other hand keeps saying he doesn't know...is he waiting for someone else to tell him?

Iraq timeline? What do you think about the effort to put a timeline on the war? Do you think its a ploy for the Democratic Congress to remain blameless and say, "At least we tryed." Or do you think Bush should just admit to the possibility that the war is not getting any better and we need to rap things up?

When do Democrats refuse this bipartisan compromise on a timeline for withdrawal in Iraq? "The proposal, by Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, would require that Bush change the mission of U.S. troops from combat to primarily support roles, such as training Iraqi security forces and protecting U.S. infrastructure in Iraq. His legislation would set a goal of completing such a mission transition within 15 months." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070928/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_18 http://voinovich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsCenter.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1ab7ebc8-802a-23ad-4d83-5b9261e1add1&Region_id=&Issue_id= It might be the best compromise they can get. If the Democrats don't take it, then there's probably no chance of a compromise for a long time. Have they decided to go with Hillary's plan to stay in the war indefinitely?

are those who are against waiting for alternative fuels the same who insist a timeline in iraq is wrong? how come they can wait and allow a war to drag on for years and years and years.........but investing in alternative fuels is unacceptable? im guessing they dont have family dying in iraq. poop 4 brains

Lie By Lie ---- The Bush White house and Iraq? Friends, Please read this time line laying out and proving all the lies told to get us into the Iraq war. Then answer; What do you think we should do about the lies and the Republican party who did not expose their own president, but chose instead to help cover up? http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/archives/2008/08/bush_war_timeli.html

Anyone remember Wolfowitz saying Iraqi oil assetes will pay for war? This is a really interesting timeline of the war in Iraq! http://www.nicolaibrown.com/iraq/timeline.html Very bipartisan--FACTS are FACTS! They hold ALL accountable!

Iraq demands 'very clear timeline' for departure of U.S. troops Iraq does have a right to ask for timeline, right? But the war supporters say that this is ridiculous demand. Why?

If you could adjust our Iraq/Afganistan War strategy? Think in terms of the financing, timeline, negotiations, using allies and more/less troops. What's the most important adjustments needed in you opinion?

What do you think Obama will realistically accomplish by 2010 mid-term elections? So far... - Obama has set a withdrawl timeline for the Iraq War. - Obama has expanded the war in Afghanistan. - With one entire year left, there is no doubt that the Democrats will pass some kind of Healthcare Reform. What else has Obama accomplished so far? What will he realistically accomplish by the 2010 mid-term elections? For example, I'm sure one of the talking point of Democrats is that they have accomplishing the impossible by reforming Healthcare.

Have the democrat party seen the light on funding the war on terror? WASHINGTON - Flinching in the face of a veto threat, Democratic congressional leaders neared agreement with the Bush administration Tuesday on legislation to pay for the Iraq war without setting a timeline for troop withdrawal. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070522/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq_44;_ylt=Ark23GA_IitEEeoQkDmkAcEE1vAI rabel- your comments are offensive and trying to generalize feelings about peoples you havent a clue about American Indians are conservatives, liberals middle of the roaders, ethnicity des not form one's political views, you forget too we have fought, not protested but fought in all of America's wars, proudly John Doe, there you go again equating political views upon race, that is very narrow minded of you for those whos own bias prevents them from seeing the light, Ben Night Horse Campbell, first American Indian Senator (Republican Co.) BTW I am an independent with conservative leanings, however lately ( past 20 years) I seen nothing but bs and pork form the democrat party

Is the war with Iraq over? BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The United States must provide a "very clear timeline" to withdraw its troops from Iraq as part of an agreement allowing them to stay beyond this year, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari said on Sunday. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080810/ts_nm/iraq_dc

Why are the Republicans playing politics with this war, refusing the Democrats timeline then endorsing thiers? WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House confirmed on Monday that the top U.S. military commander in Iraq has drafted a plan for withdrawing American troops.

Why don't Democrats want to end the war? In June Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting's Extra! Magazine wrote: "If the Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to force the Bush administration to accept a bill with a withdrawal timeline, it didn't have to pass the bill over Bush's veto--it just had to make clear that no Iraq War spending bill without a timeline would be forthcoming." Democratic leaders know that. And here's how I know they know: days after taking control of Congress, on January 30, they invited five constitutional law experts to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask them how they could end the war. Four out of five of the experts swore that the Democrats could stop the Iraq War just...like...that. "Today we've heard convincing testimony and analysis that Congress has the power to stop the war if it wants to," said Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI). Yet eight months later, there's still no end in sight. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucru/20070913/cm_ucru/thewarparty Who? It wasn't me who gave you thumbs down. Congress, however, was under Republican control in 1998. you_been_schooled - I am opposed to the war. It just seems that Dems aren't relly trying to stop it like they promised (and continue to promise) From the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ. It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime. SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize or otherwise speak to the use of United States Armed Forces (except as provided in section 4(a)(2)) in carrying out this Act.

a violent weekend for iraq? why is it that people want bush to set a timeline in iraq? wouldnt that disrupt bush's plan to leave office with the iraq war still in place for the next guy. now its no longer bush's responsibility, but the next guys. Do we feel george bush is actually helping iraq. i mean sure he got saddam out, i mean sure he killed lots of people in iraq. but hasnt there also been many many many deaths in iraq since we "liberated" the nation? We havent really changed anything in iraq except for get the enemies riled up. You can say anything you want about iraq, but i would like to hear what some of you people think. with facts and your opinions of those facts of course. are we doing a good job in iraq? a bad job? i dunno what do you think?

ending the war and bringing the democrats and Republicans together? If you were in charge of the war in Iraq, what kind of exit stratagy would you use to end the war in Iraq AND unite the democrats and the rebublicans. Please take into consideration we can't change the past and we are already there. I feel that the terrorists have suceeded in dividing our country and we need a stratagy that can make all sides happy, if that is even possible. Putting more troops in and having a very quick sweep of Iraq then rounding up all suspected terrorists. These people need to be handed over to the Iraqi government. We need to make some serious military moves followed by giving the Iraqi's a timeline of three months, and then seriously beefing up our national security by redeploying troops around the United States might help. I feel it is imperative that all politicians back the president on a quick, swift plan. Though it would never happen lol.

does anyone know any thing abt the war in iraq? i have to write a 2 page report on it and i cant even fill up 1 page and i also have to make a timeline i have 2 have 3 primary sources and 2 secondary so if u know a website that can help me or u know anything abt it plz write it down plz include source

since iraq has asked for a timeline to leave "their" country? dont you guys/gals think this is the best way to go out, since ppl are worried americans would be seen as losers and submitters on our useless war on terror?

Do you think that USA will win the war in Iraq soon? What about the timeline if the president continues as planned

War in Iraq? FOR OR AGAINST, WHY?? who is winning, what is the goal, can we stay the course, should we either have a timeline, go in bench mark events, or get out of there??

where can i compare vietnam/iraq month to month, troop levels and casualty rates, especially wounded? iraq war hasn't gone on nearly as long so timeline seems fairest comparison

What are the issues related to a pullout of U.S. forces in IRAQ? The Iraq Debate That Wasn't By MASSIMO CALABRESI/WASHINGTON Fri Jul 13, 12:20 PM ET Americans would be forgiven for thinking there's a major debate underway in Washington over whether or not the U.S. should leave Iraq. The Senate is halfway through two weeks of fierce fighting over setting timelines, enforcing benchmarks and generally trying to pressure the White House to reduce the number of American troops there. President Bush held a lengthy press conference, Thursday, in which he hinted he might change course on the war after his generals report to him in September. Once they've done so, he said, "We'll use that data... to, you know, make another decision, if need be." ADVERTISEMENT Whether or not Bush finds it necessary to "make another decision" probably won't be known until September. But ask senior White House staffers involved in Iraq planning what they imagine such a course shift would mean for troop levels, and you get a range just under 100,000. And what would these troops be doing? Bush himself laid it out today. "There's a lot of discussion about a scenario in which our troop posture would be to guard the territorial integrity of - of the country of Iraq, to embed and train, to help the Iraqi security forces deal with violent elements in their society, as well as keep enough Special Forces there to chase down al-Qaeda. As a matter of fact, that is something that I've spoken publicly about, so that's - that's the position I would like to see us in." The prospect of 100,000 troops doing all of that in the middle of sectarian fighting, and under continued attack from suicide bombers, doesn't sound much like what most Americans would imagine as the end of the war in Iraq. True, it would mean removing the combat forces that go head-to-head with insurgents on the ground because they are patrolling to provide security - a responsibility that would pass to Iraqi forces, such as they are. That, in turn, would mean a drop in casualties. But short of the outbreak of peace in Iraq - not likely - White House planners don't foresee even a majority of American forces coming out anytime soon. So what's with all the end-the-war talk? The impression being created by the debate in Washington is more about politics than anything else. For starters, Democrats are playing to their base: Though most Senate Democrats support a redeployment along the lines that Bush is describing, they are keen to give voters the impression that they are all for getting the U.S. out of Iraq. And they are, but not yet. They, too, recognize a need for a strong, interim force in country to offset the threat of mass killing, secure the borders, chase al-Qaeda and deter Iranian meddling in the country. As for the Republicans, they too are playing to core supporters. They know that, in theory at least, Bush wants a smaller role for U.S. troops; he's been trying to get there for years, now. But their interest is to cast the political battle with Democrats as one of strength vs. defeatism. So, even if the Democrats' position is not in fact that far from where the President claims to be headed, both sides are portraying the gap between them as unbridgeable. Which, in turn, leaves the impression that the debate is between those who want to escalate the war and those who want to withdraw U.S. forces entirely. One way or another, something along the lines the President is describing will likely occur in 2008, if not sooner. And then, regardless of the situation on the ground, Bush will say he moved the right number of troops at the right time. The Democrats will say they forced him to do so, and will find new ways to keep the mess in Iraq front and center in the national debate - without necessarily pushing to bring all the troops home right away. If you're looking for someone who will lead a speedy withdrawal from Iraq, you'll have to go to the extreme left or right of the parties. Nobody in the mainstream is looking to get out soon. View this article on Time.com

Creative Timeline Ideas? I need to create a creative timeline with the events leading up to the Iraq war in 2003. We aren’t supposed to do a typical construction paper time line and I don’t know what to do? Any ideas???

Are Democrats weak for drafting Iraq funding resolution with NO TIMELINE??? To me they are caving in to Bush's demands. Why they fear him I have no idea. Bush is the most unpopular man on the planet. They need to stick to their guns. If Bush will not accept a funding bill with a timeline to withdraw then he wont get money for his war..thats it..then let him decide. If he's stubborn then the war ends now due to lack of funding. Its funny that Wolf says Dems hate the US when Bush has killed the most Americans, has destroyed the most American families..and could care less when American homes were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. .He also said he no longer cares about Osama Bin Laden the murdurer of 3000 Americans..but inspite of all this its Democrats who he thinks hate the US. I thik thats hilarious when you consider the fact the Bush has caused Americans far more harm than any enemy.

Bringing home our troops before the war is finished. What does this tell our troops? My brother spent 2006 in Iraq laying his life on the line daily for our mission there. I know the costs our soldiers and their families are paying to complete this mission. The timeline you are fighting for is telling them that it does not matter what they sacrifice today nor what they have sacrificed and endured the past years of this war. It says that no matter what happens, we're calling it quits on x date! Help me understand: How does this support our troops? How does this support what they are fighting and dying for? Why are the requests of our military commanders ignored regarding this timeline? If winning this war is not important, why not bring all our troops home today? This timeline tells me that all my brother fought for and experienced the horrors of war for was for nothing. If we (America)are going to quit on a timeline rather than a victory line, don't spend another life. Bring them all home now! To those of you who say I should be asshamed for wanting them there... I am not saying that at all. I think it's stupid to make a time line and wait. Did you not read the whole question?

Can the Democrats Stop the U.S. Occupation of Iraq? Americans don’t know how their government works. Democrats, in control of Congress, are taking advantage of our ignorance to continue the Iraq War. Which brings up two questions: Why won’t the “antiwar” Democrats act to stop the carnage? And why aren’t reporters calling them on it?” Democrats,” writes Charles Babington in an Associated Press item that appeared in hundreds of newspapers, “control both chambers [of Congress] but lack the numbers to override President Bush’s vetoes of bids to mandate troop withdrawals from Iraq.” It’s a half-truth at best: the Democrats’ narrow majority is less than the two-thirds majority they’d need to override a presidential veto. Here’s the full truth: it doesn’t matter. In June Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s Extra! Magazine wrote: “If the Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to force the Bush administration to accept a bill with a withdrawal timeline, it didn’t have to pass the bill over Bush’s veto– ...it just had to make clear that no Iraq War spending bill without a timeline would be forthcoming.” Democratic leaders know that. And here’s how I know they know: days after taking control of Congress, on January 30, they invited five constitutional law experts to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask them how they could end the war. Four out of five of the experts swore that the Democrats could stop the Iraq War just…like…that. “Today we’ve heard convincing testimony and analysis that Congress has the power to stop the war if it wants to,” said Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI). Yet eight months later, there’s still no end in sight. I Don't Buy the assertion that the Democrats have to wait until 2008 because "they don't have the votes"! Congress does not have to pass legislation to bring an end to the war in Iraq--it simply has to block passage of any bill that would continue to fund the war. This requires not 67 or 60 Senate votes, or even 51, but just 41--the number of senators needed to maintain a filibuster and prevent a bill from coming up for a vote. In other words, the Democrats have more than enough votes to end the Iraq War--if they choose to do so. The Power of the Purse... Bring All the Troops Home Now! captain harl...I felt like I was reading from the Orwelian Ari Fleisher & Scott McClellan press conferences...the only part I agreed with was your facts about Hillary...being apart of the Anti-War Left on Iraq since the propaganda started in 2002: we can't stand Pro-Corporate Imperialist Hillary-the most conservative of the Democrats on war and economics.

Does McCain discredit himself when he says he now supports Barack Obama's timeline for troop withdrawal? It's well known that McCain not only wants to stay for decades in Iraq, but that he also wants to start a new war with Iran. So when he now says he supports Barack Obama's 16-month timeline for troop withdrawal, who does he think he's fooling? What does he think he's convincing people of other than the fact that he's just your typical pandering politician who will say the most convenient thing at the time just to get elected.

Why is Obama changing his timeline for troop pull out of Iraq? Is Obama flip flopping? First it was by the end of 2008. http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/obama_delivers_his_iraq_speech.html CLINTON, Iowa – Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama this afternoon called for an immediate start to the withdrawal of all U.S. combat forces from Iraq -- with a goal of full removal by the end of 2008 -- as he suggested the nation has lost its way because of the war. Now it is maybe in two or three years. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/12/15/519023.aspx Guttenberg, Iowa -- Obama said the withdrawal of all troops from Iraq could take two and half to three years. Is Obama flip flopping or showing inexperience, what say you?

If the supplemental funding bill for Iraq contained tax cuts for the rich instead of funds for (cont)? Hurricane Katrina and emergency farm relief, would Bush still threatened to veto it? Bush has asked Congress for more than $100 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan this year. The House and Senate have approved the money, but their bills aim to wind down the war by including timelines for troops to come home -- something Bush won't accept. (CNN)

can I have opinions please on the senate loading the war funding bill with domestic programs? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080520/ap_on_go_co/congress_iraq_funding Senate loads war funding bill with domestic programs By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 1 minute ago WASHINGTON - Despite numerous veto threats, senators in both parties have loaded up President Bush's war funding bill with a grab bag of domestic programs, including work permits for immigrant farm labor and heating subsidies for the poor. ADVERTISEMENT The Senate was scheduled to begin debate on the measure Tuesday, just days after a key panel added more about $28 billion to Bush's budget request for this year and next, with almost $50 billion more for a big expansion of veterans benefits under the GI Bill over 2010-2018. The new GI Bill and Democratic priorities like extending unemployment benefits are simply the big-ticket add-ons, both of which have drawn veto threats. There's also $50 million to track down child predators, $400 million to help rural schools and $350 million fight western wildfires, just for starters. Senators are acting as if the war funding bill coming to the floor Tuesday is the last train leaving the station, and, as a result, have added billions of dollars for pet programs and hitched on several policy "riders" as well. Few if any other spending bills are likely to come before the Senate this election year, which makes the supplemental measure an even more attractive vehicle for carrying spending proposals that would stall otherwise. The White House is fighting the add-ons much more vigorously than it did during last year's bruising war funding debate. Then, it accepted $17 billion in spending that Bush didn't ask for as the price for getting an Iraq war funding bill that didn't tie his hands on the war. Now that it's clear that Democrats won't insist on a troop withdrawal timeline, the White House is focusing on making sure the measure doesn't exceed his request. The Senate war funding bill combines $194.1 billion in spending over 2008-2009 for war funding, foreign aid, military base construction, heating subsidies and a variety of smaller items. Then there's $14.5 billion to give 13 weeks of unemployment checks to people whose benefits have run out and $51.6 billion over 10 years to improve GI Bill benefits. There's $108 billion remaining from Bush's war funding request for the 2008 budget year ending Sept. 30. But the White House appears willing to lump that request together with $70 billion to carry the war into next spring, as well as Bush's $5.8 billion request to construct levees in Louisiana. That puts Bush's request at $183.8 billion — more than $10 billion below the Senate measure. The immigrant farm labor provision added to the measure at a hearing last week by Sens Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, would allow almost 1.4 million immigrant farm workers to stay in the United States for up to five years to ease a shortage of farm workers that has left some crops rotting in the fields. Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Judd Gregg, R-N.H., followed that up with a provision to extend an expired program to allow seasonal workers to return to the country using H-2B visas. Gregg, typically a fiscal conservative, voted with Democrats at last week's hearing to adopt $1 billion worth of additional energy subsidies for the poor. That provision led top Appropriations panel Republican Thad Cochran of Mississippi — himself the driving force behind $1 billion for coastal restoration in Mississippi — to warn his colleagues that they were simply guaranteeing a Bush veto. Still, Republicans such as Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas — a member of the Senate GOP leadership team — pressed ahead with add-ons of their own. Hutchison won approval of $100 million in grants to local law enforcement to fight drug trafficking along the U.S.-Mexico border. It's the type of situation White House budget director Jim Nussle had in mind last month when he chided senators for a "sky-is-the-limit mind-set" regarding "the desire of some in Congress to load up this troop funding bill with tens of billions in additional spending." Republican Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri moved to keep open three "veterans business resource centers" with $600,000 in taxpayer funds. One of the centers, naturally, is in St. Louis; the others were in Flint, Mich., and Boston. Pacer, that's the absolute truth. Abe, We've been trying to get term limits for senators for years, but so far it just don't happen. Ladyshondra-Underhanded tactics does seem to be one of the things they do best. Shane--Very true. I don't know much about CAPS but Numbers Usa is one of the best (if not the best) group to belong to. They really have a lot of information posted.

Why has my Question been removed?...What about free expression? I said: Why I´m against the war....and you? Here are 4 reasons I oppose this war: The Iraq war is based on lies and deception. Overwhelming civilian casualties are a daily occurrence in Iraq. The Iraq war violates international law. Excuse me ...Last time.. I forgot one reason more and link … The war in Iraq is tearing our families apart. The use of stop-loss on active duty troops and the unnecessarily lengthy and repeat active tours by Guard and Reserve troops place enough strain on our military families, even without being forced to sacrifice their loved ones for this ongoing political experiment in the Middle East. For further reading: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_loss_092704,00.html www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/index.html http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/imtconst.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1338749,00.html It is not a rant. It`s my opinion... and I believe in free speech...that is the point...

In support of Pres Chump. There were no WMDs in Iraq Bush either knew it or should have known it..so why the? defense of our government (BOTH PARTIES) on this issue? A. Ahmed Chalabi, financed by the Clinton Admin, lied to congress ,CIA and the UN about WMD's. B.British Intelligence associated with the Rockingham project noted "our" other source as "curveball" for his lies. C. CIA, under direction of Bush, cherry-picked intel for congressional review. C.Saddam in fear of Iran would not publicly admit his weakness. Please read this link to get the real UNBIASED time line of events that led to the "war" in Iraq. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq As a moderate I am not a Bush basher but facts are facts. Light house- yellow cake was never found, this was some of the discredited information from the Rockingham Project (British Intel task force). The yellow cake rumors came from the Liberian embassy which was also discredited by the US ambassador whose wife was later outted as CIA...or don't you remember that?

Didnt we know the Dems would punk out? Senate OKs war bill with Iraq timeline By ANNE FLAHERTY, Senate Democrats ignored a veto threat and pushed through a bill Thursday requiring President Bush to start withdrawing troops from "the civil war in Iraq," dealing a rare, sharp rebuke to a wartime commander in chief. In a mostly party line 51-47 vote, the Senate signed off on a bill providing $123 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also orders Bush to begin withdrawing troops within 120 days of passage while setting a nonbinding goal of ending combat operations by March 31, 2008. The vote came shortly after Bush invited all House Republicans to the White House to appear with him in a sort of pep rally to bolster his position in the continuing war policy fight. "We stand united in saying loud and clear that when we've got a troop in harm's way, we expect that troop to be fully funded," Bush said, surrounded by Republicans

Why do some democrats want the terrorists in Iraq to know when we are leaving? Democrats are always complaining about a timeline in Iraq to made known. Why can't liberals just let the military handle Iraq and Afghanistan intead of trying to be war time advisors? http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/19/iraq.pullout/index.html http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061016/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

Is McCain the same as Bush? John McCain plans to continue the Iraq war without a timeline, he will give corporation (not the middle class) even more tax breaks, he wants to drill which will stop any alternative energy plans cold(I saw the same thing in the seventies) so exactly how is he different than Bush?

It's March and the Democratic congress has failed to propose a solution to Iraq? It looks like business as usual in D.C. The Democrats took congress because "stay the course" was the wrong policy in Iraq. Yet it looks like the same course is being followed. The Democrats approved Bush's troop buildup with the stinging restriction that the troops must be fully trained before deployment. That certainly is going to go a long way toward resolving the war. So what do you think is going to happen first. Will the enemy combatants give up, or will the USA run out of money to fight the war? How do you see the end of the Iraq conflict and its timeline?

Why does Obama get a "Free Pass" on the Iraq war, even tho he kept the SAME timeline as Bush? Protesters were all over the place against the Iraq War. The Media was all over the Iraq War, listing casualties around the clock. Bush implemented a time line to bring down the amount of troops. Yet the protests and media flare continued. Obama stated he would end the Iraq war quickly and bring the troops home sooner. Yet, he kept the EXACT SAME TIME LINE as Bush. But now where are the Protesters? Where is the Media spotlight? Nothing has changed, except Obama gets a free pass? How did that happen? He kept the same timeline, and the protests stopped?

Is anyone else tired of the same tired rhetorical "if we leave it will emboloden the terrorists?"? aren't they already "emboldened"? There are no more 'terrorists" unless the U.S. is included. Who is anymore "terrorist' than us! We have killed hundreds of thousands of innocents. And we have sustained the loss of over 3,200 American lives. Now. Someone tell me WHY. What have we gained!? Senate votes for Iraq withdrawal by next March Defying veto threat, lawmakers attach timeline to $122 billion funding bill• March 27: By a slim majority, the Senate on Tuesday voted to keep a withdrawal timeline in Iraq funding bill. John McCain, R-Ariz., a presidential hopeful, said that “we are starting to turn things around” in the Iraq war and that a timeline for withdrawal would embolden the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere." "The effect of the timeline would be to “snatch defeat from the jaws of progress in Iraq,” agreed Joe Lieberman, who won a new term last fall in a three-way race after losing the Democratic nomination to an anti-war insurgent. It is all such bs. It really is. The United States government. Forever devoted to an almost religious pursuit of death and destruction. How pathetic. I must laugh. It is always the same old aswers. First I'm not a "liberal". I have no political affiliation. At all! I think for myself. I don't need a "label" as most of you do. And second, what I find here is that if I criticize something being done in the United States, or I don't say EXACTLY what you want, you "invite me" in fact, you have the AUDACITY to invite me to leave the Untied States. A country not even your own. You see, I may be young, but I have learned a lot about this great USA-- who live by the sword, and who ascribe to a certain kind of thievery which you call accomplisment.

Why does allowing Iraqis to gain control of their own country mean that American loses the war? the plan is to gain a timeline so that Iraqi troops who have been trained by USA, gain the chance [as well as the government] to control their own country Don't you think its time we stop holding their hand? Reason for this question: Governor Palin's remarks regarding Iraq thank you for explaining Phillip!

Will this plan for Iraq work? The Democrats and the Republicans both want to compromise...Republicans want more funding and will put more pressure on Iraqi government to secure their country, Democrats want troops out but will fund Iraq if a timeline is made. What about this: The war gets its funding as long as a timeline is created to put more and more pressure on Iraqi government (like weening a toddler off of a bottle). This timeline would have benchmarks that say specifically what the Iraqi government has to do to secure their country more. One late benchmark and our troops are out of there. When time timeline finishes, our troops will go away because we would have won. What you think?

Anyone remember Wolfowitz saying Iraqi oil assets would fund the war? Here's an interesting bipartisan timeline of things gov. officials said or did in regard to Iraq. http://www.nicolaibrown.com/iraq/timeline.html Blueridgeliving: AWESOME!!! I think I heard a loud collective CHOKE!!

What is the timeline for the up coming Depression in America? It's clear that a depression is ahead. The $700 billion "bail-out" will not stop it. It is like treating the AIDS virus. Only delaying the inevitable. The way things have been laid out over the past years there is no going back. -Bush's fascist administration -Financially uneducated youth -Money given out in loans that can't be paid back -Banks going under -Money spent on Iraq war -Poor health care as baby boomers age -Social security -9/11 -Widening gap between rich and poor -Social division seen by Hurricane Katrina And the list goes on... Right now its just a question of WHEN, and how bad. What do you see happening to America in the next 10 years?

Are they afraid of another "Veto"? Yes, there were concessions, but do Democrat really have any clout?? Agreement near on Iraq funding bill By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent May 22, 2007 WASHINGTON - Flinching in the face of a veto threat, Democratic congressional leaders neared agreement with the Bush administration Tuesday on legislation to pay for the Iraq war without setting a timeline for troop withdrawal. Several officials said the emerging compromise bill would cost about $120 billion, including as much as $8 billion for Democratic domestic priorities — originally resisted by the White House — such as disaster relief for Hurricane Katrina victims and farmers hurt by drought.. Reid & other Democrats pointed to a provision that would set standards for the Iraqi government in developing a more democratic society. U.S. reconstruction aid would be conditioned on progress toward meeting the goals, but Bush would have authority to order the money to be spent regardless of how the government in Baghdad performed. --- Bring the troops home? Promises, What happened Demos? and what’s this about “reconstruction” funding. Have the demos forgotten the ORIGINAL BILLIONS in “reconstruction” funding ALREADY approved several years ago? Didn’t Halliburton make enough? Bechtel certainly did, but they gave up, leaving projects unfinished. They came home several weeks ago. Besides, alMaliki announced a few weeks ago that Iraq was able to ‘reconstruct” without US funding. Is anyone paying attention?

what is your time line for Iraq? Just heard the president say we cannot leave Iraq in its current situation. I whole-heartily agree with his comments and the rah- rah he was getting from the people in attendance was sort of fake, but understandably. What I don't hear him talk about is that with two forces, US military and Iraqis we are seriously struggling against insurgents who are relentless. How they will never all die and how they will continue to come into Iraq to fight. If we stay there, they never are going to stop coming regardless what anyone says. God Bless our forces, but they are fighting an endless war, where we will win battles and scatter them....but enemy will ultimately return. Let's announcement a timeline and get out within two years. The Iraqi people will figure it out. It may take decades, but they will make it work.