[cva66snipe]

That is where people like you get it wrong. He said no to Petraeus, the general that wanted the extra troops to assist our soldiers there. He said our troops do not need the reinforcements to win. I can't wait for the next vote to cut off funding for the war, Ron Paul will be right there to support it and eternally seal his defeat of ever seeking higher office

No I have it right. END TROOP STRENGHTS. Look them up. We are at a 1996 level of active duty and reserves. That means more deployments longer deployments and shorter time home. That has absolutely nothing to do with how many ground forces are in Iraq or elsewhere. We are in a critical shortage as its obvious from the rotations. That is of course unless you think Slick Willies 1996 numbers are just fine.

[jrooney]

That has nothing to do with Paul voting no on the surge. Petraeus wanted reinforcements to assist our soldiers there, and Paul said no. Screw him and anyone that supports that notion. You post here has nothing to do with what we were talking about. You should quit drinking. Put down the bottle, and sleep it off.