General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: let me be very clear: everything is on the table. [View all]betsuni
(29,245 posts)Nancy Pelosi says she wanted to fund service members and veterans but not the war, and for Bush to end the war by 2008, told him she was opposed to nation-building -- Bush vetoed a bill with the goal of ending involvement in Iraq by March 2008.
"The Art of Power":
"While there were major disagreements over what I considered the largest destabilizing mistake in American history in terms of its consequences, I resisted the calls for impeachment. Sen. Bob Graham, in his book 'Intelligence Matters,' had presented a case for impeachment on the basis of Iraq's nonexistent nuclear weapons and our leaving Afghanistan too early. Although I was strongly opposed to the war -- and constantly pointing out the false statements by the administration -- as long as American troops were in combat, I held that we had the responsibility to support them.
"In May, we passed the very specifically named U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act of 2007 on the House floor. The bill was very clear in its support of our military service members and our veterans. Many provisions were directed toward their well-being and their care. Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, chair of the Armed Services Committee, proposed a 3.5 percent pay raise for troops and a $40 per month increase in survivors' benefits.... Rep. Chet Edwards of Texas ... put forward the largest increase to the Veterans Affairs budget in the department's seventy -seven-year history. So it was very clear that our debate was not about whether or not we supported our troops. ... It was about opposing the war"
Obligatory personal insult: "it didn't make as much of an impression on you as it did me. Not surprising I suppose."