It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Kills First Vote on Iraq Withdrawal (moved from ATSNN)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
By a 128 to 300 vote, the House of Representatives officially voted down a measure that would require President Bush to devise a plan for the withdrawal of U.S. forces in Iraq. This marks the first time that Congress has officially voted on legislation that deals with a possible Iraq withdrawal.
 



www.antiwar.com
The House of Representatives voted down a measure, by a 128 to 300 vote, that called on President Bush to devise a plan for a withdrawal from Iraq. It came in the form of an amendment to the $491 billion budget for the Pentagon that was passed on Wednesday night.

But the withdrawal amendment marks the first time that Congress has officially voted and debated legislation that deals with a withdrawal.

"No, it won't pass today, but it will give us a chance to talk about it," said Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), the sponsor of the amendment. "It's an opportunity for members of Congress who are frustrated that our troops are being killed for a war that wasn't necessary in the first place and that there is no plan in sight to bring them home."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Stats show that two-thirds of Democrats voted for the withdrawal in Iraq and only five Republicans. One of the republicans that voted for withdrawal was the infamous Representative Walter Jones of North Carolina.

With an additional $45,000,000,000 bill passed to aid Iraqi war efforts, it doesn't look like the U.S. government has any plans from withdrawing forces from Iraq anytime soon.




posted on May, 27 2005 @ 01:22 AM
link   


I can' tbeleive anyone would be so irresponsible as to vote for withdrawl. Even people who voted against the war in the first place have to realize that leaving now will result in death and destruction, far more than anything that is being seen now. The US would be under immense pressure to return when genocide and warlords start runnning rampant, and then they might have to deal with Syrian and Iranian 'peace keepers' in the country.

Absolutely absurd.



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 06:18 AM
link   
They weren't voting for withdrawal....they were voting for a plan!! You know "23 Not So Easy Steps to Get of Iraq"!! kind of deal.....with the words "This is a Fluid Plan Subject to Revision when situations warrent".

Give us a plan, so we know just where we are going with this...

I don't know if I would be supportive of whatever plan was adopted, but well, I wouldn't start a business without a business plan and I sure the heck hope that they do have some kind of plan of just what they feel is an adequate situation Iraq would be sufficient for withdrawal, and just how we are to get to that state.

A plan.......seems rather concerning that some in the legislator and many withn the population seem to think that Bush doesn't really have one, or that it is really poorly planned. Makes me think that Bush really doesn't have one and he's just shotting in the dark, since hey, if it was clearly defined, legislators would at least be seeing glimmers of it.

[edit on 27-5-2005 by dawnstar]



posted on May, 27 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Dawnstar, well done


Couldnt of said it better myself.

I suppose its a surreptitious attempt by some in Congress to get a plan that proves its not an imperial occupation of Iraq for an indefinate amount of time. Now its looking more and more like American soldiers are going to be in Iraq well past their welcome. Not even plans for a withdrawal are being considered. Why?




top topics
 
0

log in

join