Jim Ryan notes the irony.

This is so well reasoned. Let’s see if the warmongering crowd can refute this.

” As we approach the final day of the debate on this resolution, I have enjoyed the debate thoroughly; I have found it humorous at times…

Our friends on the other side of the aisle have tried every argument they could muster; they’ve talked about President Clinton; they’ve talked about Vietnam; they’re trying to bring up Israel;

And my friend from Indiana also mentioned something about the issue of consistency; and I find it funny that the pro-life– the self-proclaimed pro-life party is the party that wants to keep extending the war;

I find it ironic that all of the great budget hawks of the Republican Party want to throw 8 billion dollars a month to keep going and going and going as we borrow the money from China;

But I also found the debate at times disappointing; where members of the other side have questioned our side; when they’ve said ‘Whose side are we on?’ and ‘How can we say that we support the troops?’ and that we’re somehow unpatriotic.

And I would just like to say that, you know, when the Republican Party and this President didn’t send enough troops, we didn’t call you unpatriotic; and when you sent our young soldiers over there without the body armor, we never called you unpatriotic.

[republican tries to interrupt]

I will not yield.

[republican won’t shut his yap]

The house is not in order.

[republican back-bencher still tries to bully. Didn’t we already tell you to STFU???]

[snip republican nobody getting scolded and slapped down by the speaker]

Thank you Mr. President. We never called the other side unpatriotic, when they sent our soldiers over without enough body armor. And when they didn’t send enough up-armored Humvees, we never called anybody unpatriotic. And now when the next batch goes over without enough jammers, or up-armored kits, we won’t call you unpatriotic.

Now we’ve called you incompetent– we said you’re incapable– and we’ve said that you’re derelict of your oversight duties– but never Mr. Speaker have we called anybody in this house unpatriotic. Now Mr. Speaker–

[republican hatchet man interrupts AGAIN!]

The House is not in order!

[republican tries to issue a BS parliamentary inquiry, a favored tactic when a good Democrat works up a head of steam. Speaker asks Ryan if he will yield]

I will not yield.

Now let me speak to the resolution. This is very simple. It says two things. We support our troops and we do not support escalation. It’s very simple. And here’s why.

We have already done this. Mr. Speaker; we’ve already done this, we’ve already tried the escalation, and it HAS. NOT. WORKED. From November to January ’05, we escalated by 18,000 troops, boots on the ground, and the number of daily attacks increased by 17%. From June to October of ’05, we increased by 21,000 boots on the ground, and the number of dialy attacks increased by 29%. And from May to November of ’06, 17,000 more boots on the ground, and the number of daily attacks increased by 80%.

This escalation has not worked, and it will not work. The number of insurgents has increased from 5,000 in ’03 to between 20,000 and 30,000 in October ’06.

So this is very simple. And I wanna make just a few more points Mr. Speaker, and one is this: with the last vote for the war, no matter which party you are in or how you voted, we assumed that the President and the Secretary of Defense would send our troops over there with the proper equipment. But with this escalation, Mr. Speaker, we know that the 21,500 troops that are going to go over there will not have the proper Humvee kits, up-armor for their Humvees, they won’t have the proper jamming devices or enough of them, and the won’t have have the number of trucks that they need. Period, dot. You now know it.

So if you vote against this resolution, you’re voting to send our troops over there without the proper equipment. Before it could be excused. Because we trusted the president and assumed, but now we know.

And finally, Mr. Speaker, we’ve heard a lot over the past couple days about the American Revolution, and the Civil War, and World War Two. Well Mr. Speaker, our President today is not Washington, he is not Lincoln, and he is not Roosevelt. And so I think our Republican colleagues should take the advice of the Secretary of Defense, and that is YOU GO TO WAR WITH THE PRESIDENT YOU HAVE. You don’t go to war with the President you wish you had.

I yield back the balance of my time.”

Further statement from Ryan in response to Republican whining:

” I just want to, Mr. Speaker, it is entirely possible and welcome under the Constitution of the United States, to have disagreements about how we need to handle troop deployments, how we need to handle our situation in different wars, and it’s not to be said that because one Party or one group of people have a different philosophy and a different strategy, [From this point on, his statement was shouted] that somehow they’re not supporting the troops! Now your Party and your President, the Republican Party, Mr. Speaker, and the Republican President, are the ones who sent our kids to battle without armor. Without body armor. And it took Jack Murtha months to uncover it and then to finally get it paid for and distributed. It was the Republican Party, Mr. Speaker, who sent kids into battle without up-armored Humvees. Now, nobody questioned the Republican Party’s patriotism. And nobody asked them if they supported the troops. Again, we called you incompetent, we said you were incapable, we said you were derelict in you duty, we said you should have provided oversight, you didn’t, but we never called you unpatriotic. Now enough of the unpatriotic business.

I yield back the balance of my time.”