Bush puts Iraq interest over U.S. needs

President George W. Bush clashed again with Congress over the Iraq war Friday, rejecting a US military spending bill on the grounds it would throw up legal obstacles to reconstruction money.

“The aggregate financial impact of these provisions on Iraq would be devastating,” Bush said in a memo released by the White House, outlining his reasons for rejecting the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The bill “would imperil billions of dollars of Iraqi assets at a crucial juncture in that nation’s reconstruction efforts and … would undermine the foreign policy and commercial interests of the United States,” he said.

Bush said he was withholding approval of the bill — effectively vetoing it, since the law cannot pass if he does not sign it within 10 days of it being presented to him.

A key provision of the bill would expose the Iraqi government to “massive” demands for compensation from victims of Saddam Hussein’s regime, deputy White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said.

The administration believes Iraqi funds in the United States would be frozen when a claim was filed, blocking money desperately needed for Iraq’s reconstruction.

“The new democratic government of Iraq, during this crucial period of reconstruction, cannot afford to have its funds entangled in such lawsuits in the United States,” Stanzel said.

Senior administration officials who briefed reporters Friday estimated Iraqi assets in the United States at up to 30 billion dollars, not including joint US-Iraqi ventures.

Bush on Wednesday signed a different, 555 billion dollar catch-all budget bill for 2008 that includes 70 billion dollars for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars without any timeline for troop withdrawal.

Majority Democrats in Congress had unsuccessfully pushed to hold back the money for Iraq in that bill, in a bid to make Bush commit to withdraw US forces from the violence-wracked country.

The NDAA is an annual bill that allocates how funding granted in separate legislation is to be spent.

10 Responses to "Bush puts Iraq interest over U.S. needs"

  1. Janet   December 29, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    So what else is new? Where’s the funding to reconstruct New Orleans? Where’s the funding to fix our infrastructure that’s crumbling?

    The question is a good one – Of which country is George W. Bush president? Looks more and more like Iraq.

    He’s so pathetic. 1.20.09…1.20.09…1.20.09….

  2. darknyt4   December 29, 2007 at 2:18 pm

    Forget Iraq. The real story is Pakistan. I do not mean who killed Prime Minister Bhutto. I mean an assanaition attempt and “terrorist attack” that gives Musharrif the excuse to “suspend” the Constitution. This is a trail balloon. They are trying it in Pakistan to see how it works. If it works like they think it will and Musharrif becomes “President” for life, then I want to leave you with six words that would terrify any sane person:

    President-for-life George Walker Bush.

    As they say around the Texas Legislature, if you
    can’t drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, and vote against ‘em anyway, you don’t belong in office.-Molly Ivins

  3. Jenifer D.   December 30, 2007 at 9:48 am

    Well DUUUUHHH!

    I’ve been saying this for two years now; There are too many eerie parallels between the way Hitler took power and the way Dumbya is running his little medicine show, if he’s running it at all. The declaration of a false state of national emergency was in the cards since the reich took office in 2001. Yes, I agree, the majority of U.S. voters could give two beans about what happens to this country as long as it doesn’t affect their paycheck or their way of life. When the jackbooted American Gestapo shows up on their front porch and drags away their men to go work in the Gulags, or worse, that’s when the apathetic masses will begin to care, much like the Germans did when the Nazi regime began persecuting the Jewish folks, but, it was already too late.

    Bhutto was a threat that had to be eliminated, at any cost. She knew too much and that is what brought about her untimely demise. The only consolation I have is that BushCo are in their sixties and older and they won’t live forever. Any successor would be ineffective and that’s when the s— really hits the fan.

  4. Carl Nemo   December 29, 2007 at 4:40 pm

    Well we already know the outcome on this one. Pelousy and Reid will both get down on their bellies and slither like the traitorous snakes they are to Bushco’s jackboots and give them a good “tongue-shine”…no?! :|

    Carl Nemo **==

  5. surgethis   December 29, 2007 at 5:51 pm

    Interesting how the terrorists acts seem to always make it easier for the power elite to take more power and destroy our rights. It’s almost as if the terrorists are really agents of the regime in power and are working covertly. I always thought it was odd that Bush/Cheney would say a vote for the other guy means the terrorists win.

    Seriously … do we need a Hollywood movie to show how twisted that is. It’s almost like Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with 911. Catching him would be a bad thing if this were true. So maybe that’s why Osama was murdered just like Bhutto said in her interview last month. Surely Bush was made aware that she had made such a statement as matter of fact and she ends up dead.

    If Bush knew Osama was murdered which I feel certain he would, then why didn’t he say anything? And Osama had nothing to do with 911 then what really happened and why did Bush say he knew Bin Laden did it? And what the hell was Musharraf doing funding Mohamad Atta? It all seems very strange. There is much to consider here.

    Al CIA DA.

  6. Carl Nemo   December 30, 2007 at 2:12 am

    “Interesting how the terrorists acts seem to always make it easier for the power elite to take more power and destroy our rights. It’s almost as if the terrorists are really agents of the regime in power and are working covertly. I always thought it was odd that Bush/Cheney would say a vote for the other guy means the terrorists win.”…extract from above commentary

    Hi surgethis…

    Little do you realize how close you are to the truth…!

    Carl Nemo **==

  7. yarply   December 30, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    It’s almost as if the terrorists are really agents of the regime in power and are working covertly.

    Simpler said would be; The terrorist are really the regime which is in power.
    The NDAA is not a good thing for the US people. Just like the “patriot” act.
    Hell, The patriot act was written PRIOR to 9-11!!!
    We are not free, we are enslaved.
    This countries supposed freedom is a deception.
    Its a pill of salt with a candy coating which is slowly being licked away.
    The power elite would feed us a bowl of shit and have most people convinced it is a bowl of chocolate pudding.

    No people are more enslaved than a people who think,, falsely, that they are free.

  8. Janice   December 30, 2007 at 10:41 pm

    If you’re upset about this article, read the link below. Mr. Green articulates his feelings, as well as mine – and I would guess yours, too.

    You’re Damn Right I’m Angry. Why Isn’t Everybody?
    By David Michael Green
    What an unbelievable record of deceit, destruction, hypocrisy, incompetence, treason and greed. What a tragic tale of debt, lost wars, stolen elections, environmental crises, Constitution shredding, national shame and diminished security.

  9. Carl Nemo   January 1, 2008 at 1:35 am

    Thanks Janice for the link. Truly, some eloquent posts.

    Carl Nemo **==

  10. JerZGirl   December 31, 2007 at 8:49 pm

    Does anyone actually believe Bush is capable of using a phrase like “aggregate financial impact”? And despite the obvious, Congress still buys into it? You have to wonder what they have on all of them to get them to roll over and play dead.

    Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit.

    Wisdom is knowing not to put it in fruit salad.