WASHINGTON, Oct. 1, 2007
Senate Authorizes $150B More For Wars
Passage Of Defense Policy Bill Comes As Democrats Try To Force An End To Combat
-
(CBS)
-
Photo Essay Scrutinizing The Surge Commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, U.S. ambassador testify before Congress.
-
Interactive 110th Congress The balance of power shifts and new leadership takes control as the latest session convenes.
The 92-3 vote comes as the House planned to approve separate legislation Tuesday that requires President Bush to give Congress a plan for eventual troop withdrawals.
The developments underscored the difficulty facing Democrats in the Iraq debate: They lack the votes to pass legislation ordering troops home and are divided on whether to cut money for combat, despite a mandate by supporters to end the war.
Hoping the political landscape changes in coming months, Democratic leaders say they will renew their fight when Congress considers the money Bush wants in war funding.
While the Senate policy bill authorizes the money to be spent, it does not guarantee it; Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers.
"I think that's where you're going to see the next dogfight," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., of the upcoming war spending bill.
Democrats say their options include directing that the money be spent on bringing troops home instead of combat; setting a date when money for the war is cut off, and identifying a goal to end the war to try to pressure Bush to bring troops home.
Similar attempts have been made but fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate.
"Many of us have reached a breaking point on this," said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill. "I've done this for too many years. I've waited for the president to start bringing this war to an end. I'm not going to sign up for this any longer."
In the House, Democrats are pushing for a bill that would require the administration to report to Congress in 60 days and every 90 days thereafter on the status of its redeployment plans in Iraq.
The bill, sponsored by Democrats John Tanner of Tennessee and Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, was initially cast aside as too mild by Democratic leaders focused on tougher proposals ordering troops home this fall.
But after Democrats were unable to peel off Republican support, the Iraq debate stalled and some four dozen rank-and-file Democrats demanded a vote on the Abercrombie-Tanner bill.
"This will be the first time since the war in Iraq began that we are working together as a Congress instead of one party or another to be a constructive voice in the civilian management of operations in Iraq," Tanner said in a statement e-mailed to the Associated Press.
In February, Bush requested more than $140 billion for the war, and is expected to ask for another $42 billion to cover costs in the 2008 budget year, which began Monday. The Senate's defense policy bill authorizes Bush's initial request, plus an additional $23 billion for the purchase of bomb-resistent vehicles.
In addition to war money, the Senate's defense policy bill authorizes more than a half trillion dollars in annual military programs, including such big-ticket items as $10.1 billion for missile defense.
Republicans predict the bill is on track to be vetoed by President Bush because it includes hate-crimes legislation by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The White House has said Kennedy's proposal, which would let federal law enforcement help states prosecute attacks on gays, is unnecessary.
The House passed its version of the defense authorization bill in May by a 397-27 vote. That $646 billion measure would trim hundreds of millions of dollars from some weapons modernization programs and use the money instead to aid troops in combat.
The House bill has drawn a veto threat from the White House because of provisions insisting the military rely heavily on American-made products and proposed changes to the Pentagon's personnel policies.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 6
- next
See all 112 CommentsSorry lars, we have not started to pay for this war hardly, you want to put it off the bill on our children, guess you dont support the war afterall, you wont pay for it so you are against it. Thanks for clarifying.
yada yada yada,,, the american taxpayer will pay it,,, who do you think is going to pay it??? martians???
Honestly, why did I bother addressing anything to lars. Nevermind. Sorry to anyone reading for wasting HTML.
hahaha the american taxpayer is already paying for it nancy,,,
Why the heck wouldnt we pay for this war if we are spending all this money for it? It is total logic, you spend 150 billion, you gotta pay for it somehow (when I buy groceries I have have pay for them). Instead, the repubs want my children to pay it later with interest? If this war is so needed, we should pay for it. Any repubber who is against paying for this war is against the war.
To fight this idea, the repubbers spoke about 22 billion in increases the dems want for domestic spending and did their "tax and spend" ***. The repubbers are so out of whack finanially, they are just "spend and spend".
Also, 150 Billion for the war is almost EIGHT TIMES the money dems want to spend in our own country.
What say you Lars? Will you support a surtax to pay for this war? If yes, contact your legislators. If no, end the war.
http://www.amazon.com/Democrats-Had-Brains-Theyd-Republicans/dp/0307353451/ref=sr_1_1/104-3631381-4433551?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191342401&sr=8-1
None Of Us Are Free - Lynyrd Skynyrd
http://www.lyrics007.com/Lynyrd%20Skynyrd%20Lyrics/None%20Of%20Us%20Are%20Free%20Lyrics.html
WHY IS IT NOT ONE MUSLIM COUNTRY GRANTS EQUAL RIGHTS TO NON MUSLIMS???
FASCIST NAZI TERRORISLAM SAYS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATES ISLAM LAW...
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
For example, in 1981, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, articulated the position of his country regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by saying that the UDHR was "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.
http://www.un.org/terrorism/
http://www.un.org/terrorism/strategy-counter-terrorism.html
http://www.un.org/
But the accepted assumption in India is that most of India''s Muslims were converted to Islam through the sword. Meaning the Indians were given an option between death or adopting Islam. The third option was getting examined in Islam religion along with heavy taxes- Jeziya (poll tax) and Kharaj (property tax).
http://adaniel.tripod.com/Islam.htm
this is what fascist nazi islam calls peace....
are you ready to live under islam rule as a non muslim???
apartheid fascist nazi islamic style
Rights of Non-Muslims in an Islamic State
http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/islamic_state.htm
Qaeda warns of attacks ''worse than 9/11''
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070530102648.wuwa6k96&show_article=1
Hizbullah Deputy Sec-Gen Sheikh Naim Qassem: We Have Jurisprudent Permission to Carry Out ''Martyrdom'' Operations, Fire Missiles on Israeli Civilians From Ayatollah Khomeini
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD154907
Switching Sides: Inside The Enemy Camp
But then in 2000, well before his arrest, something happened which would make Abas question everything he believed in: a fatwa, a religious edict, was issued by Osama bin Laden.
"It should be understood that killing Americans and Jews anywhere found are the highest act of worship and the highest form of good deeds in the eyes of Allah," Simon quotes bin Laden.
Abas and his fellow commanders were ordered to read the fatwa to their men and make sure they carried it out. The others obeyed, but Abas refused. It was his moment of truth. He firmly believed that jihad was to be fought only on the battlefield in defense of Islam; he had always been taught that the killing of civilians had nothing to do with holy war and that it was forbidden.
The fatwa justified killing non-Muslim civilians everywhere.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/04/60minutes/main2761108.shtml?source=RSSattr=60Minutes_2761108
American Al Qaeda Member Threatens Attack
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/29/terror/main2865282.shtml
non muslims of the world unite,,, fight against the tyranny of the fascist nazi terrorslam imperialist empire of the darkside,,,
I was a fanatic...I know their thinking, says former radical Islamist
By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair''s bombs" line did our propaganda work for us.
More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=465570&in_page_id=1770
Bless the Beasts and Children
Fascist nazi terrorslam kills every man woman and child in the village again%u2026 typical mo for terrorslam%u2026
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bless-the-beasts-and-children.htm
Our Prophet commanded us to fight the kaafirs when we are able and to attack them in their homelands and to give them three choices before we enter their lands: either they become Muslim and be like us, sharing our rights and duties; or they pay the jizyah (poll tax) and feel themselves subdued; or they fight, in which case their wealth, women, children and homes become permissible as booty for the Muslims.
http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=13759&ln=eng&txt=before%20islam%20arabia%20pagan
the truth about fascist nazi terrorislam...
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
Man that was well said!
Elect people with no party system. Elect the best as each one now has an equal vote with out worring about the other side saying no just because they can. What worked many years ago may not be the best answers now
Posted by tuckerndfw
There ya go - damned if they do and damned if they don''t. If they cut off funding and we depart like we did in Vietnam, not only will we jeopardize boots on the ground but we will give a clear signal to Al-Qaeda and the entire world that we will cut and run whenever politics demands it for the sake of elections. So they smear the troops, conservatives, stuff defense appropriation bills with garbage like hate crime laws and play coy with the American public. They are rats in a hat and they always were and will always be.
Posted by hungry1968
Sorry to disappoint you but we never were a democracy. We are a Republic. Scarey, huh?
posted by HIPPY1968
below is what I''m talking about....6 Standing by...for your response "HIPPY" LOL
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv
You''re right - and that''s the real problem. The Republicans want us to stay there, and the Democrats want to oppose them just to oppose them. They''ve been fighting their guerrilla type wars and battles for centuries, and our politicians think that they can just waltz in and install a democracy.
The problem with that is that they hate us, and everything about us including our alleged democracy type of government. (I say "alleged" because our politicians hijacked our "democracy" many years ago. We haven''t been a democracy in decades.)
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 6
- next
See all 112 Comments