Do Obama supporters not equate funding the war with support for the war?

[hiaasenrocks]

I'd be interested in hearing from some Obama supporters (or anyone, I guess) on this issue. Many people say Obama is consistent on Iraq, opposed it from the start, etc. But he has voted for funding. Should we overlook this? Why?

[CAG]

1. Voting for funding simply supports the troops... the troops need to eat,

they need fuel for their vehicles, they need vehicles, they need uniforms, they need bullets, etc. While the troops are over there, congress and the people should support them with funds and work to get the idiots who sent them over there out of the white house.

[Colobo]

5. Exactly

To punish the troops for the mistake of those who make decisions for them would be not only unfair, but inhumane.

[illinoisprogressive]

2. And starving the troops and not giving the needed equipment to protect

themselves is a good thing???? It's pure irreponsibility to take Bush's stupidity out on the troops. To keep them from the needed equip to protect themselves or even food.

[not_a_robot]

3. Well People will tell you they need funding while they are

on the ground and in defensive position. In a rational world we know a cut in funding will force a withdrawl before the troops are fuel and foodless, but well, it doesn't make a very good apolegetic's scenario does it?...

[illinoisprogressive]

4. You obviously don't understand Bush and his not caring.

he won't care. He;ll let it drag and shortages run to keep the war going. it's about Presidential power and that will trump anything.
Afterall, how long before some body armour was made available and good. The humvees? What about head gear that does protect. they still don't have that. He don't care