(Mods, not sure of where this belongs, move if necessary)
The current arc in the Doonesbury comic strip is that Congress has cut off funding for the Iraq war… and Bush responds by simply refusing to withdraw the troops, even as they run out of food, fuel and ammo. Gary Trudeau is making a sarcastic point about the Bush administration’s criticism of Congress “not supporting” the troops; but could truth be stranger than fiction?
IIRC Teddy Roosevelt had the supply cut for the Navy so he sailed the Navy half way round the world until they ran out of money/fuel and then left it up to Congress to reinstate supply! Looking for cite.
You are referring to the Great White Fleet.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see Bush hold the troops hostage.
Thanks. Got distracted by another post.
Bush will time it perfectly so that there is a huge outrage in the United States against the Democratically controlled Congress- just in time for the election in 2008.
What- this isn’t completely transparent?
Cartooniverse
Wow. What a big dummy! That Bush must be droolingly stupid to come up with a plan like that.
To the contrary sir! It is a fiendishly clever plan.
That Bush is willing to hold American troops hostage and point the finger at political opponents in order to protect his own ego can be described by a lot of adjectives, but stupid is not one of them.
Of course if Bush vetos bills to fund the war in 60 day increments it could backfire on him. Isn’t there a Civil War era law that lets the President incure debt to provide for soldiers in the field without Congressional approval?
True dat! But…
That the Democratically controlled Congress is willing to hold American troops hostage and point their collective fingers at political opponents in order to further their own political agenda can be described by a lot of adjectives, and stupid is the least of them.
I hasten to remind that the Dem’s agenda is supported by a majority of the public.
Enrich themselves at the expense of the people?
You guys don’t see the irony in point out that Bush is holding the troops hostage…while handwaving the fact that Congress is doing (well, attempting to do) the same thing? 
Is it possible that it will pan out this way? I would say its LIKELY it will if Congress manages to cut off funding. I’m pretty sure Bush ain’t going to back down…and I THINK there are a few loopholes a president can use to get funding even if Congress cuts the funds off.
-XT
I’m less than convinced of that. I acknowledge the public’s discontent at the handling of the war, and that they, in many cases, elected alternatives in the search/hope for alternatives.
But that doesn’t necessarily equate to approval of the Dems. “cut & run” strategy, either.
But I can see how it can easily be seen to support their strategy. I want to bring the troops home; not because I think the Iraq situation is hopeless, but that W is incapable of formulating and then executing a strategy for success or “victory” in Iraq. Therefore, why waste more American lives?
I don’t think I’m alone among conservatives in thinking/feeling this way.
This appears to be one of them there distinctions without a difference.
Perhaps it is only GeeDub who is “incapable” of producing a winning strategery in Iraq. Does the distinguished correspondent from Missouri have anyone in mind in whom we can place our confidence, anyone who can produce such a strategery? I find the prospect unlikely, but am willing to listen, having a great fondness for miracles.
The Feed and Forage Act of 1861. It allows the President to spend money, without congressional approval, for “clothing, subsistence, fuel, quarters, transportation and medical supplies” of troops in the field.
Could he start closing bases or cutting costs at bases at home, to come up with the funds?
I’d be careful. The Republican’s agenda of invading Iraq was supported by the majority of the public in 2003. And 2004. And 2005. I think the wheels came off somewhere in 2006.
IIRC, only ~10% of the U.S. population wants the funding from the war cut, although a sizable majority want us to get out of dodge via timetables. We ain’t getting either. There’s no way the Dems have the unity, let alone the balls, to not fund the war. Who are we kidding?
Like Bush has been saying for years – withdrawing from Iraq will be left up to future presidents.
In effect, yes. But not in principle.