In the Public Square: Timetables to Abandon Iraq

By staff - Mar 28, 2007 - 1

We urge you to contact your contact your senators and share your thoughts on this critically important piece of legislation.

Following the House’s narrow passage last week of an emergency supplemental bill to extend funding for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Senate has begun heated debate on its own war spending measure, which, like the House version, includes a controversial timetable to pull U.S. forces out of Iraq and plenty of pork.

The Senate bill under consideration, the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health, and Iraq Accountability Act of 2007 (H.R. 1591), would set a timetable to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq 120 days after enactment, with a goal of bringing all combat troops home by March 31, 2008. The House version, passed 218-212 on March 23 with the help of two Republicans, would set a series of benchmarks but still require troops to vacate Iraq by no later than August 31, 2008.

Similar to the House version, the $122 billion Senate bill is loaded with pork—earmarks for pet projects unrelated to President Bush’s request for troop funding, which otherwise will dry up next month. Earmarks totaling nearly $20 billion include $22.7 million for geothermal research, $25 million for construction projects at the Capitol, and $100 million for the cities of Denver and St. Paul, Minnesota, for the 2008 presidential conventions. To help secure House votes last week, House leadership fattened their bill with $28 billion in pork, including $25 million for spinach growers and $74 million for peanut storage.

While bill supporters appear to want to manage the Iraq war from Capitol Hill, funding for our troops is nearly depleted and many fear radical Islamists are being sent a message to wait it out because Americans will soon bow out of their mission. President Bush, however, has announced he will veto any bill that sets a timetable for withdrawing troops.

We urge you to contact your senators and share your thoughts on this critically important piece of legislation.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Citizenship, Christian Citizenship, Legislation, National, War, Issues

1 comments (post your own) feed

1 On Mar 30th, 2007, at 9:54pm, Fred Thompson wrote:

Dear Dr. Land
Thank you for sending me the cd in reference to your talk about the US abandoning Cambodia.  William Bennett’s “America The Last Best Hope”, and starting on the chapter where Thomas Jefferson took office.  This book verifies the subject matter below.  I have yet to hear any of the conservative talk shows make mention of this subject.  I hope that you might find it useful. I cannot put the entire article in this space, but would hope that you would look up the article in the information given below. I will send money for the cd.  Thank you for your faithfullness and ministry.  That our God might be glorified through His son Jesus Christ.  Fred Scott Thompson

Subject: What Thomas Jefferson Learned about the Quran

From the shores of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli . . .

How does that saying go? If you forget history, you are doomed to
repeat it?
By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan07/jeff_quran.htm

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com