"Enough is enough," Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said. "I urge my colleagues to support amendments over the next 3 days to reduce the funding for this war, bring it to an end and honor the sacrifice of our troops by bringing them and our tax dollars back home."
Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) said he supports most of the bill, but has to oppose it for its continued spending in Afghanistan.
Several said the war is no longer serving U.S. interests, in part because of how people in Afghanistan will view the United States after so many years at war.
"What has this misguided war cost us in international standing?" Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said. "Is the U.S. more popular in the Middle East and Central Asia? No.
"Are we any safer? Probably not. As a new generation of Afghan children grow up in an occupied country, aren't they learning to hate the West? Yes."
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) argued that modern wars are not even approved by Congress any more, but that Congress is expected to continue funding wars or else be criticized of not "supporting the troops." But he rejected that logic.
"For anybody to argue that you don't want to send troops carelessly into no-win, endless wars, and to think you're against the troops, it's nonsense," Paul said. "If we lived within the Constitution, lived within our means, believe me, we would not be in Afghanistan."
Others cited the cost of U.S. lives. "Keeping our troops in Afghanistan comes at great cost to us, not only does it cost them $8 billion a month, but it continues to cost American lives," Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said, noting that more than 2,000 U.S. lives have been lost in Afghanistan.
And, others said the mission in Afghanistan should have ended with the death of Osama bin Laden.
"Osama bin Laden is dead," Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) said. "The Taliban were cleared from Afghanistan years ago. So, it's time for us to declare victory and bring our troops home."