Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

How American!
1 posted on 03/05/2007 11:26:37 AM PST by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
To: Sub-Driver
Yeah that really helps with the diplomacy front. Good idea, send our people in with nothing to bargain with. That should guarantee military action!
2 posted on 03/05/2007 11:28:27 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

I don't think even Ruth Bader Ginsburg would go for that one (tying the president's hands before the fact).


3 posted on 03/05/2007 11:29:00 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
This would be the most irresponsible piece of legislation I remember seeing.

Might as well negotiate terms of surrender for Iraq and kiss off the Middle East now.

4 posted on 03/05/2007 11:29:13 AM PST by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Well hell why limit it to just Iran?


5 posted on 03/05/2007 11:30:23 AM PST by mainepatsfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Webb proves that "once a Marine, always a Marine" is no longer true.


6 posted on 03/05/2007 11:30:34 AM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Way to go VA... you sure made a statement in November.


7 posted on 03/05/2007 11:30:43 AM PST by johnny7 ("We took a hell of a beating." -'Vinegar Joe' Stilwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Webb to Introduce Legislation Barring Funding For Military Action Against Iran

And thats about as far as that goes...

9 posted on 03/05/2007 11:32:58 AM PST by Paradox (Secular Conservative, thank God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Of course, Webb is willing to assume all responsibility for a nuclear attack by Iran, right?


10 posted on 03/05/2007 11:33:25 AM PST by TommyDale (What will Rudy do in the War on Terror? Implement gun control on insurgents and Al Qaeda?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Pre-emptive surrender.


11 posted on 03/05/2007 11:33:57 AM PST by NeoCaveman (Hillary Hugo Chavez wants to "take those profits" away from you, for the common good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Thank you for staying home and punishing the President.......you know who you are!!!!!!!!!!!


13 posted on 03/05/2007 11:35:51 AM PST by OldFriend (Swiftboating - Sinking a politician's Ship of Fools by Torpedoes of Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Boland amendment-Part II

Bush better not be stupid enough to sign it.


14 posted on 03/05/2007 11:36:42 AM PST by Finalapproach29er (Dems will impeach Bush if given a chance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Too bad soldiers can't have their negative opinions published.


16 posted on 03/05/2007 11:37:48 AM PST by wastedyears ( Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Webb's amendment would prohibit Bush from spending any money on a "unilateral military action in Iran without the express consent of the Congress."

Sounds like "pre-emptive surrender".

Webb believes that it's better to surrender now just in case Bush were to war against Iran and then, some months or years down the road, they wouldn't be able to stop the war or pull-funding for the war.
17 posted on 03/05/2007 11:39:03 AM PST by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

He's impotent. He can't bring himself to propose a real bill cutting off funding for the war he claims we should never have fought, so instead he proposes a bill to cut off funding for a war we aren't even fighting.


22 posted on 03/05/2007 11:46:52 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
But, Webb continued, "the situation that we have right now where we continue to talk only about the military side — again, it's half a strategy."

Just dam!
If Webb would have only been around in 1943 we could have avoided most of that WWII thing.

After getting our butts kicked all over the Pacific and massacred as Kasserine Pass we should have talked to Tojo, Hitler and Mussolini. Why that would have solved everything. Why didn't anyone think of that?!?

And who were the idiots running things back then? All we had to do was talk darn it. All that military stuff was only half the strategy. Sheesh, what a bunch of maroons.

24 posted on 03/05/2007 11:49:40 AM PST by Condor51 (Rudy makes John Kerry look like a Right Wing 'Gun Nut' Extremist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Webb is quickly reaching the anti-American delusional actions of his cohort murtha and he's only been in office a couple months. It's going to be a long six years.


25 posted on 03/05/2007 11:50:51 AM PST by jazusamo (http://warchronicle.com/TheyAreNotKillers/DefendOurMarines.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Sounds like a good time to unload on Iran NOW


27 posted on 03/05/2007 11:54:20 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

Did he introduce legislation calling barring funding for Al Queso from invading Virginia?


28 posted on 03/05/2007 11:55:29 AM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver
Do these congressional clowns have to attend any type of classes to learn how the process works? To pass such legislation would require 60 votes for cloture, pass the house in it's compromised form, be resubmitted to the senate and require 60 votes for cloture on the compromised legislation and then pass a 2/3rds majority in both chambers to override the guaranteed Presidential veto. If the President wants to strike Iran he can do it for up 60 days before even having to go to congress for authorization or funding and by then Iran could be sent back to the Stone Ages. The Democrats are to a point of pretending they have any power just to try to keep their liberal base happy for the next couple years.
30 posted on 03/05/2007 11:56:15 AM PST by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sub-Driver

And when Iran attacks us, which they are already doing in Iraq, then what?


31 posted on 03/05/2007 11:57:03 AM PST by Howlin (Honk if you like Fred Thompson!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson