Both the U.S. House and Senate are now on record wanting to set a date for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The House voted last week to end most American military involvement by the end of August 2008. Then the Senate voted Tuesday not to remove a withdrawal date from a military spending bill (which hasn’t passed yet). The public agrees; 59 percent said they support compelling U.S. forces to leave Iraq by August 2008, according to a Pew poll.
"When it comes to the war in Iraq, the American people have spoken, the House and Senate have spoken," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. "Now, we hope the president is listening."
President Bush is hearing, but he isn’t listening. He is still vowing to veto any bill that includes a timetable.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- LonnythePlumber on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- LonnythePlumber on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- XXX on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- DavidB on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Monkeyhawk on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- Monkeyhawk on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- Monkeyhawk on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- DorisKing on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
99 Comments
Actually, only majority of left wing want a time table. Exactly how many Kansans were polled by Pew on this question? :)
I am strangely kinda sorta on the Bush side with this. I was not for this stupid ass war to start with but once you start something, you gotta finish it. Americans took a country that, while a dictatorship, functioned fairly well and was not killing field and we made a big mess out of what was a “small mess”. You cannot go in and make a mess out of another country and leave. You stick it out no matter what it cost until you fix what you broke. Next time listen to your sense. But you owe Iraq.
Phillip,
Does a misinformed public who has been fed nothing but the bad on this war from day one really get to decide that we should pull out in a year?
Do any of you have any idea of what that would do to Iraq if we just left?
It is sick that you would sit here talking about wanting to save lives when you don’t even care about what would happen on a complete withdrawl.
This is not even leaving room for us to provide air support and logisitcal support to the Iraqi’s.
This is a complete withdrawl. The Iraqi infrastructure is still working with American military logistics and air support.
What a damn shame. I hope President Bush veto’s these as I am sure he will and we continue to support the Iraqi people in this time.
Damn miserable democrats trying to force a withdrawl.
Makes me sick. None of you have been there or seen the wonderful things we are doing. The hard work we have been doing. The sacrifices we have been making for the Iraqi people to live in freedom.
And you want to throw it away?
I was flying back from Iraq last week when I seen that vote from the Democrats in the house forcing a withdrawl by next year. Made me want to throw up.
You people have no idea.
You want to talk about Vietnam comparisons? This is the best one yet. Just leave the Iraqi people hung out to dry…
The stale, old: You people have no idea rationale. Sucked then, still does. The people showed in the elections that they absolutely have the idea.
I think the idea of requiring the Government to set an absolute withdrawal date and stick to it is ignorant and shortsighted.
We do not need to have withdrawal date, we need to have an exit Strategy. We need a measurable idea of what our goal in Iraq is so we can tell when it is accomplished and Then get the hell out.
This is exactly what I predicted.
Didn’t the democrats go around talking about how they had a better strategy for Iraq and that they wanted to win too, but it was the President mismanaging the war?
The only solution they offer is withdrawl.
Great strategy. Just quit.
Nathan what wonderful things? if things are so great you should have voluteered for a another tour.
JR,
I gave it thought and inquired about it. The incoming unit didn’t need nor wan’t me.
Many people had tried to “roll over” as they call it and were turned down.
It is not as simple as you think.
The PEOPLE voted on this very issue in November. And Nathan if you mention another school opening in Iraq I will be sick. We have made a huge mess of that country. Do you call what they have right now freedom. Hell, they can’t even shop or go to school without worrying about being killed or kidnapped. Iraq is going to explode when we leave – it doesn’t matter when. MIght as well be now and maybe save a few lives.
I smell pink.
Nathan, maybe they didn’t want you because you haven’t a clue what’s going on there.
If it’s so full of good news, you can book a flight to Jordon, drive to Baghdad, and film all the joy with your video camera.
Let us know how that works out for you.
I can’t believe we have people who are just as delusional as this President.
Oh, and your best ally in the region, the Islamofascist dictator of Saudi Arabia, now refuses to meet with Bush and called our occupation illegal, immoral, and all that other stuff.
You Republicans should know you’re in trouble when your puppet dictators no longer support you.
Regardless of what happens in Iraq, everyone should recognize invading was a huge blunder. One thing we can do is make sure the Republicans who made this horrible mistake — insisted on making this mistake over the objections of most of the world — are kept out of foreign policy decisions for the forseeable future.
So here’s a question for the 30% of you who still support the war and insist that withdrawal has severe consequences.
Every prediction Bush made about Iraq proved wrong. Why should I believe him now? I know you’re sure they will follow us home and all that other stuff you keep saying, but remember you were just as sure in 2002 that we would find WMD, that Iraq would be a shining example of democracy, and all that other stuff that seems pretty stupid in hindsight.
What makes you think you’re any smarter now?
Whatever happened to all the Lib talk about “balance of power”?The Cut & Run Defeat-oFrench-ocrats have passed a bill by graft and pork promises. The Prez will veto, the America Haters can try to over ride the veto. And fail miserably. Democracy in action!
“Nathan, maybe they didn’t want you because you haven’t a clue what’s going on there.Posted by: tw | March 28, 2007 at 03:36 PM”
FU, tw. You can spout all the cowardly crap you want, but lay off the man who has been there.Perhaps, since you have no clue, you could get one from Nathan.
Dick Cheney was there. He said things were going remarkably well. The insurgency was in its last throes two years ago.
Was he right?
Should we just lay off and give this war another five years, another 3,200 dead, in the hopes that everything will turn out different this time?
What predictions about Iraq did you make in 2002? Were you right? If you were wrong then, what makes you think you are any better at predicting mideast politics now?
Address my question, FU.
tw~ I will not respond to questions from one who, figurately, just spit on a returning soldier.And, my fu still stands.
If we give a timetable, the enemy will rest, retreat and refit.The Defeat-o-crats don’t care.
Fleetwood,
What if we announce, weeks in advance, that we’re going to send a “surge” of troops to Baghdad? In that instance does the enemy magically decide to stay and be slaughtered by our clever surprise “surge?”
We’ve been doing variations of this “surge” plan for four years now. Before we’ve called it clear and hold. And in each instance our troops perform exactly as they’ve been trained to do, which is to say, as the best, most professional, most highly skilled fighting force ever assembled. And then our troops are reassigned to other areas because we don’t have enough troops in country to hold the whole damn country. And what happens? The enemy slinks right back into the space our troops have left.
A fixed date to withdraw is, I know, politically popular. Getting out of a war is always popular, and always a good thing.
BUT . . . setting a fixed date is militarily and politically stupid. Do we want out? Absolutely. When? As quickly as possible, with as little loss of life as possible. Will a fixed date advance that goal? NO; it will do exactly the opposite.
Dumb move, no matter how popular. Bush should veto the bill. Demand a clean bill, without the pork and a fixed date.
A set date will put the Iraqi government on notice that they must straighten up their own house.
Condor~ The ’surge’ (which is less than 1/2 deployed), is meant to hold areas we have already taken. And, just as important, but less discussed, is the corresponding change in the ‘rules of engagement’.Sadir City is no longer off limits, prisoners aren’t returned by order of the Iraqi gov’t, etc.
When it comes to the war in Iraq, the American people have spoken, the House and Senate have spoken,” said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. “Now, we hope the president is listening.”
I do not know if the President is listening, but the enemy certainly is.
I wonder if the Baghdad government is listening.
HT~ I agree. Iraqi gov’t better start listening is another stipulation of the surge.The surge is more than just more troops, it’s supposed to be a change in tactics also.
Sanford,
Your response proves my point. First of all, if the “surge” is still only half deployed, how long is this “surge” going to last before it becomes an escalation? And why couldn’t we hold Baghdad before the surge? It’s only the capital of the country and the home of the heavily fortified green zone. My point is that the Bush administration led us into this war with semantic gamesmanship meant to whip the country into a state of fear and confusion. All the while they were working so feverishly on the domestic political angles that they completely neglected to plan an exit strategy. Four years later they still don’t have an exit strategy and they’re STILL focused more on the domestic politics of the war than they are on winning and/or getting out.
“Surge” is but one example of semantic gamesmanship that make it clear the White House is far more concerned about domestic talking points than actual strategy. Fleetwood dutifully parrots but one of the nonsensical talking points handed down by the White House: “If we give a timetable, the enemy will rest, retreat and refit.”
There’s also this gem: “If we leave, the enemy will follow us home.” I think the enemy already knows where we are.
Then there’s any number of now abandoned nonsensical talking points, my favorite of which was “we’re fighting them over there, so we don’t have to fight them here.” And I thought this war was all about bringing freedom, peace and democracy to the Iraqi people, not turning their country into a friggin fly trap.
Bush equates leaving with losing and losing with leaving. He has no plan other than to dump this in the lap of the next President.
Condor~ Surge/escalation call it what you want, and it should be as large and as long as needed to get the job done.I don’t agree with all management decisions about this war. However, it is clear, for many reasons, that we cannot lose it.
And, for the ’semantic gamesmanship’ comment, Bush used the same info that was read by, and agreed on by Bill, Hillary, Russia, Germany, Congress, etc.Everyone agreed that this was a problem and wmd’s were there.There was no gamesmanship, unless you go back years before Bush’s election.That’s not an opinion, that is fact.
Sandford,
Everyone always talks about Bush’s leadership abilities. The fact here is that Bush led us into this war without planning how to lead us out. That’s bad leadership. I don’t care how many people thought Iraq had WMD. When Congress authorized the use of force they didn’t authorize the endless use of force due to lack of planning.
When Bush and Rice and Powell and Cheney deliberately led us into war with phrases like “mushroom cloud,” they were working far harder on the semantic gamesmanship than the war planning. That’s not an opinion, that is fact.
condor-We are there. You keep harping about the past. What was the vote to authorize? Almost 100%.A lot of the votes came from you people. Stop embracing defeat like a warm blanket and give this newest effort a chance. I think you will find if it doesn’t work, even people who love this country will join you in the call to cut and run.
And how long should we stay fleettwood? Why not put Maliki on notice?
How long did the French stay when we needed them during own Revolutionary War? :)
Not very long as I recall. Once the Brits were toppled there was no reason for them to stay.
Prediction:
Unless Bush gets ‘just’ the appropriations he wants for the war, sans the timetable…
he will start shutting down Federal projects and agencies to syphon the money needed. NASA might be the first, then… :)
“Why not put Maliki on notice?”
He is.”the enemy will rest, retreat and refit.”
Tell me why the above isn’t true.
Condor~ I do not have the time, nor the want-to, to refute your hyperbole.
“Everyone” “always” “The fact here” “without planning” “I don’t care” “endless” “deliberately” “mushroom cloud,” “semantic gamesmanship”"That’s not an opinion, that is fact.”
Sorry, Condor, but your post is littered with opinion, not facts. Did I say littered? Yes, because it is an accurate description.
Not very long as I recall. Once the Brits were toppled there was no reason for them to stay. Posted by: HardTruth | March 28, 2007 at 05:40 PM
You can recall that? Tell me, how was the food back then? :)
Now the Shiite police are getting involved in reprisal killings, can’t you see the progress we’re making?
Steve~The MSM only covers the planes that crash, they don’t cover the planes that land. ‘Cause it don’t sell.
fleettwood – “the enemy will rest, retreat and refit.”
That might be true. However, Maliki should be able to deal with a few “dead-enders” without much difficulty. How many have we trained so far?
Republican – the food got a lot better after the British left. Always hated everything boiled!
“Apart from the Iraq provisions, the Senate legislation includes about $20 billion in domestic spending that Bush did not ask for. Republicans readied an attempt to strip out much of it, and Bush listed it as among the bill’s objectionable features.”Here’s the bottom line: The House and Senate bills have too much pork,” he said. He got a laugh at lawmakers’ expense when he said $3.5 million was included “for visitors to tour the Capitol and see for themselves how Congress works.” The funds are for a new underground Capitol visitor center, over-budget and still incomplete years after its initial target date.”
The Dem leaders said if you vote for this, we will give you this.Doesn’t sound like a strong vote to me. Supposedly, the Repubs were voted out because we spent too much and the Dems were going to be smarter with our money. HA! And how’s that minimum wage thing coming along?
I disagree with the title of the post. Yes, congress wants a timetable but I don’t agree with the public part. This is even evident in these postings that some, although against the war ARE against a timetable.
And by the way this wasn’t what America voted on in November. The Democrats were elected by the majority of voters but all of that was not tied to the war, I can guarantee that. There were PLENTY of Repubs who stayed home due to there not being one TRUE conservative on the ballot. Speaking of that I’m looking forward to hear what Fred Thompson might have to say, because I sure haven’t heard anything that great from McCain, Rudy or Mit.
There is a Democrat from Arkansas who voted against the Public time table. He wanted a Secret time table, for the reasons that should be obvious. I think he was trying to be too clever, but it is telling that he understands what a Public time table would do.
Gene,
It’s wonderful how conservative ideology can never fail, it can only be failed.
You guys have a terrible track record of electing people who aren’t TRUE conservatives. Someday you might want to ask yourself why that is.
Gene~ you got my vote.
They have stretched the November election into some kind of mandate that really wasn’t on the table.
Also, while standing firm with withdrawl dates, I haven’t heard any unveil their own plan. How would they ‘fix’ Iraq?The silence is deafening and revealing.
Condor, correct me if I’m wrong, but what the Hellck do you know about ‘true conservatives’ and the election thereof??
Name me a TRUE Lib that is elected Nationally? Ain’t none, they hide, and speak of the center.
Fleetwood,
Since you’re so annoyed that I “keep harping about the past,” I assume this means you won’t be participating in any more late night Clinton-era giggle fests with Hank, Republican and ksgrm.
How about Republican’s reference to French military policy during the Revolutionary War? Is that harping about the past?
When George H. W. Bush went to Congress to get authorization for the first Gulf War, he waited until after the mid-term election because he thought the issue was too important to risk politicizing. His son chose to do the exact opposite and made the Authorization for the Use of Force a centerpeice of the 2002 mid-term campaign. This Bush administration has politicized this war at every turn. They have spent FAR more energy on planning their attacks on Democrats than they’ve spent planning the actual damned war. Personally, I don’t like to see our country led into war with no plan to win the peace. I especially don’t like it when I’m called a traitor for objecting to such idiocy. So get used to me “harping” about the past.
“I especially don’t like it when I’m called a traitor for objecting to such idiocy”
I don’t recall anyone using the word “traitor”. As I’ve said before to another queer like you, the word is “sedition”. Maybe it’s the same queer.
“Prediction:
Unless Bush gets ‘just’ the appropriations he wants for the war, sans the timetable…
he will start shutting down Federal projects and agencies to syphon the money needed. NASA might be the first, then… :)”Posted by: Republican | March 28, 2007 at 05:41 PM
LOL
Ok, I haven’t read any further than this post, but that’s only because I can’t stop laughing.
Oh, christ, my gut is aching.
Sweet farking Jesus, that’s got to be the stickiest Democrat wet dream I’ve ever heard writ by somebody seriously calling himself Republican.
LOL, your post could better be called “when poster A is so worried that he becomes delusional to the point of psychosis.”
Yer killin’ me, lol. Sure he will, and too we will all marvel at the variety and Grate Nomber of monkeys that fly out of your butt.
LOL
Ok, back to reading comments post-5:41PM…
Disappointing further reading, from a “what can possibly top Republican’s carefree and light psychotic episode.” Hmmph.
Ok, Republican, you are lookin’ very much now like the great, great, and infinitely missed Republikhan. You got something you want to get off’n yer chest? Hmm? That mayhaps you NEED to say here to make the voices go away?
Roscoe, heads up dude! The competition has kicked it up a notch AND A HALF!
LOL
Only in America……do they have drive-up ATM machines with Braille lettering
Sorry, pal, but me thinks these statements come from the “Dept of Unable to Think for Myself, and Repeat Party Line Hyperbole”
Condor~ We’ve already had this conversation, refer to 5:43 pm.
Really, how ’bout an original thought. Trust me, it feels good.
Condor | March 28, 2007 at 07:00 PM”led into war with no plan to win the peace.”"This Bush administration has politicized this war at every turn.”"spent FAR more energy on planning their attacks on Democrats”
Fleetwood,
I really can’t believe you used the word queer as an insult. Were you hermetically frozen in the 50’s and just now thawed out? And besides, you’re going to make Republican cry. He just falls apart at the merest hint of incivility.
LOL, yeah there’s a GRATE need for help in America today for those like Fearless Leader Bush (and others ;>)), help for the most blind among us.
To wit:
“…Increasingly, the White House is demonstrating not only defiance but disdain in its dealings with Congress. On Iraq, Bush has rejected any role for Congress other than approving his demands for more funding. He’s been equally confrontational in ignoring the ample precedent of public congressional testimony by White House aides and insisting that his advisors will provide only unsworn, untranscribed, private testimony on the U.S. attorneys controversy.
On both fronts, Bush has approached Congress with the attitude of a teacher determined to discipline unruly kindergarteners, not as the head of a co-equal branch of government. The White House last week asserted that Congress has no oversight authority over the executive branch.
Dan Bartlett, the White House counselor, declared that Bush would not negotiate over testimony on the U.S. attorneys issue with “members of Congress who seem intent on having a political trial.” As far as legal scholars can tell, the Constitution does not limit congressional authority “to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper” solely to those members whose motives the president considers pure….”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brownstein28mar28,0,2175578.column?coll=la-opinion-center
Republican, remember this: monkeys got nothin’ against brushin’ up agin a little KY on their way out (and think of the merciful help if the “in” case holds). Think of it as a little insurance, ‘k? Just in case?
LOL
Who is it that keeps saying that the Demis can’t get anything done? Seems to me they are getting a lot done. Now I realize that bush has the power to stop everything like minimum wage, like support for the troops. But that’s on his door step now. Now will he prove he supports them or will he prove he can give a sh@#! The truth is, if we pull out what happens to all that work that Halliburton’s done, all that money still to be made.
At least with a veto overide vote failing, the war will be seen as what it truly is. Initiated,Sponsored and the property of the Republicans. The rest of us will just have to pay the price for it along with them.
There’s a gigantic point of contention among the commentors here that I don’t entirely understand. This whole “winning” angle. We’ll stay till we get the job done. We can’t pull out. Sounds like the kind of strategy that results in knocked-up sophomores. I think the real point of this pull-out date in the budget is not to put an actual date on the war. They knew it was going to be vetoed. That’s not the point. The point is to put pressure and attention on the president. It would be his veto that kept us in, his plan, and nobody else’s. I think this is wholy necessary. We need answers, and we need to threaten the power of the purse to get them. Perhaps not an exact date to pull out and strand the country to figure it out for themselves, but some win-condition. Maybe I’ve been hiding under a rock, but I haven’t heard one. We refer to this as a war, and so we start thinking in terms of war. But wars have things like armies and opposing governments. Things that can be defeated, quatitized. That’s not what we’re fighting. The regime is already toppled. We’re fighting “terrorists” and “insurgents.” Do you know who those people are? They’re just citizens. Any citizen. Potentially, every citizen. And think about it from their side, to us we bring up how the president lied about his pretenses for the war as a zinger to the conservatives. Oooh, he’s a liar, he’s was wrong, so you’re wrong, so we’re right, pa-zing! They got invaded. They got killed. We did that to them. For no reason. For a lie. For a lot of lies. They had no WMDs. And we went there to liberate them? That’s very zen of us, liberate them from the suffering of life. I’m not saying that Saddam had a perfect regime, and maybe a lot of them didn’t want him as their ruler. But I’m damned sure they didn’t want air strikes and occupation from an outside country they can’t possibly fight. They didn’t want to get hauled off to prisons and never released. They didn’t want themselves and their families slaughtered. Would you want that? Would you not fight and die to try and stop that? Well, that’s the enemy. We’re fighting the people of a nation who are trying to fight an invader. They win when we leave. We need a win condition. What does winning mean, because our current definition of killing or imprisoning the entire country until they’re too afraid and weak to do anything won’t work. Simply and bluntly surging more troops in won’t help. Right now, there is no formulated solution. Our “decider” has no plan to leave. He will keep us in their as long as it takes. And this is an unwinnable war. And he will not hear any other plan. We need to discuss this civilly and seriously. Its real easy to call each other defeatist and war mongers, saying we can’t allow ourselves to lose, or to say that we can’t win and we have to pull out. We need a condition for victory before victory or loss can be declared. Maybe I’m asking a really obvious question, but I don’t think its being asked, and its certainly not being discussed.
Point taken Gammon.
The victory, if you want to call it that, is to help the Iraqi’s achieve independent sovereignty.
That includes the ability to govern without intimidation from external and internal sources.
Once that intimidation is gone, then the Iraqi government can begin to interact with their own people to see what direction their government wants to go and by what method.
To withdraw before that is accomplished makes us as a nation very untrustworthy and most likely despicable in the eyes of many in the Middle East.
It’s not about reputation, it’s about who we are and how we would want to be treated in that situation.
Now that the dems have embolden the enemy we will someday again be attacked and 99% of them will be Aaaggain Saudis. I wonder if Bush will attack Venezuela to get rid of that evil dictator Hugo Chavez.
Our Fearless Leader apparently has his own plans for removing our troops fron Iraq. All indications point to withdrawing troops from Iraq toward the east, into Iran. Never mind that Saddam already tried that maneuver at our behest and got the livin’ crap beat outta him. We can do it the same way we won Iraq; after all, we’re ‘Mericans and God is right here in our back pocket next to the magic decoder ring! We only have to wait until either Iran or our guys does something stupid enough to make the excuse.
Now that the dems have embolden the enemy we will someday again be attacked and 99% of them will be Aaaggain Saudis. I wonder if Bush will attack Venezuela to get rid of that evil dictator Hugo Chavez.
Amazing, somebody else is awake at this hour.
Thank you, Republican, for your civil response, I was getting increasingly irritated by what passes for debate on the internet. And what’s more painful is I couldn’t stop reading because there is at least some discourse in all that name-calling. We’re all very passionate about this, its a shame that we’re too fired up to express those passions in a way that other people will listen to and think about.
And your response was also thorough and concise, and correct. There does need to be a stable and independant government. And truly, therein lies the rub.
More to play devil’s advocate than anything else, but at what point, if any, do you think they’ll accept whatever government we install? I would distrust any government put into place by our oil tycoon administration. Unical pipeline through afghanistan, now iraqi oil fields. Sounds like a good asset for us to control, or least for halliburton to have a nice slice of. Not to mention how well our own elections work. I still feel a little dodgy about those electronic voting machines, especially after seeing Hacking Democracy. It would be a more than a little tinfoil-hat-paranoid to say that they 100% stole the election and are raping the middle east, but its not too difficult for an american to at least ponder it, let alone for an Iraqi. To assume they’re going to see how we run things at home, and then buy a wholesale knock-off version of our governement is also a little credulous.
I agree with you that we we would be dispicable to make a mess and then leave it for them to pick up. And seeing it like that makes our imparitive clear. But I have this gut reaction that they will have to do it themselves. Is that not an acceptable option? What’s to stop somebody from coordinating a revolution against their government, be it 2008 or 2108. Whenever we leave, there could be an uprising. And the reason that would be bad is, pessimistically, they would again be ruled by a militaristic dictator. So, before we leave, we have to set up a strong government, that would also have have some military muscle. Would it not be better that we let it happen now, rather than later? If there must be an oppressive, militant government, is it not better that it’s their oppressive, militant government?
Hopefully, the “situation” in Iran will be a lot calmer after this whole spending bill thing as well. I think it sends a pretty clear message: We’re trying to pull the plug this war, so don’t even think about another. Iran would have to be testing nuclear weapons in Israel before anyone would even entertain the notion of letting this president start another war.
“The victory, if you want to call it that, is to help the Iraqi’s achieve independent sovereignty.”
They had that before we invaded, didn’t they? So really, we had victory (as you define it) in 2002. Name any ally in the region that had more self-determination for its people.
Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, etc. don’t have the kind of Hamiltonian utopia you guys thought you could impose on Iraq with bombs and guns.
Can we all finally admit that invading Iraq was a mistake?
With this bill, Bush has another 4 months of blank checks to “win” the “war” in Iraq. If he can’t take the country in 4 months, he needs to get out of the military game altogether.
And if you don’t like my criticism, I’ll paraphrase a much better President: If you can’t take the heat, get out of Baghdad.
tw,
It is not the president you are slapping in the face with a 4 month time table.
It is the miltary, which you liberals claim to love, which you are slapping in the face with a 4 month time table.
Do you have any idea of the logistical nightmare it is to start planning on the withdrawl of over 130,000 troops and their equipment?
The democrats don’t care about the troops, you don’t care about Iraq, quite frankly~I am not sure what it is you do care about other than wanting to end the war at any cost.
But hey, I guess you democrats get to go home and sleep better saying you brought the troops home.
What a bunch of nit wits.
You have no idea of how the miltary works or is integrated into the Iraq infrastructure.
Nathan I fear you might be spitting in the wind. The democrats don’t have a plan, are absolutely clueless about national security and unfortunately are, because of the apathy of republican voters in November, now in a position to wield power over dollars.
They have a side show going on with the AG so thinking people won’t look to closely at the real victims in these bills they have passed. They load them down with so much pork so thinking person would ever sign them and then posture for the press about how proud they are to send these bills to the prez.
Meanwhile the military is in the very real bind the demos have put them in.
Thank you for serving. Some of us here recognize the sacrifice each volunteer in our military have made and are making.
Nathan, I know a lot of Iraq war veterans are AGAINST the war and FOR Democrats. How can you call those troops nit-wits? Many many Iraq War Vets ran for public office as Dems against the war. So I guess you can stop pretending to care about the troops. You clearly don’t if you call them nit-wits. If you say our veterans don’t care about our troops. You say our veterans don’t have a clue about logistics. I guess you don’t care about anything except keeping Republicans in power. BTW, Republicans have proven themselves clueless in this war.
ksgrm, Dems did not put our troops in this bind, Republicans did.
You are kidding yourself if you think “voter apathy” is the message of Nov 2006. Maybe you live in one of the few enclaves left of people who still think invading Iraq was a really smart national security move.
The voter message is even Republicans are sick of Bush’s incompetence in national security matters, and the Republican congress’ blank check to lose 3,200 lives gambling on that incompetence.
Tw,You’re pretty good at sharpshooting. How about sharp shooting ALL the people who VOTED FOR THE WAR??? I think there were a few more than republicans voting ‘YES’ there hero.
And national security matters. Yeah you got me there. There have been soooo many attacks on American soil (yeah that would be national security) since 9/11. Lets count them up. Whoooops, there haven’t been any????
I have just found a new scandal for the senate to jump on.
“Sen. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum’s ownership of two major defense contractors who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.”
This of course would mean that the AG problem where no laws were broken might not get all of the media attention. I am sure that all ‘the principle of the thing’ demos on this thread will agree something must be done about the obvious ‘laws’ that have been broken here. I think this puts her right up there with Duke Cunningham and after all the repubs did ask him to resign.
I am at a loss for words, the right wingers are now characterizing anyone that supports a time table as unpatriotic. Sounds very familiar. The right acts as if they have not had a chance for their “plan” to work. YOU HAD 4 YEARS TO MAKE IT WORK! Its your own fault that you stood on the sideline and kept writing checks for this president without accountablity. Now that some want to place accountablity at the presidents door, you call them unpatriotic or defeatists. There has to be a time table to make the Iraq gov’t move. Time tables can be extended with the proper signs of progress. But this open ended committment on our part is ridiculous. Stop hiding behind the troops everytime someone says something that you don’t like. You sent them there on false pretenses. You refuse to care for them when the return home wounded. You turn your backs on their families while they serve. And now you want to leave them there without a plan to win indefinitely. And dem’s are unpatriotic?
Mike harsh words with a ring of untruth. Democrats and Republicans voted to send them there. You can go back and look at demo leaders stating just that position so I won’t do it for you. That false pretenses stuff just doesn’t fly anymore.
This would be like a football coach who finds himself down by 1 point with 10 seconds to go in the fourth quarter, saying I want to go back to the first quarter and kick that field goal we opted not to try for.
The war was started by all and it is a little to late to back out now. We have to have military leaders leading not the senate or the congress. Maybe you agree with the congressman from Arkansas that says only the prez, senate, congress and Iraqi leaders should know the date we plan to withdraw. When would the military find out? When they wake up in the morning and can’t find their hummer, when their tents disappear, when they run out of ammo for their weapons?
What the demo are suggesting is the height of ridiculousness. That is why they are so maligned on national security. They have no plan and come up with the craziest bills to force the military to play by their rules.
There never was and never will be a plan to leave by Bush until there is nomore money to be made.
Jesus jumped up. The republicans were the OOOOONLY ones who GAVE BUSH the authority to go to war???????????? Were you asleep or what????
Accountability? How is deadline accountability? It is surrender. No other word for it.
“Time tables can be extended with the proper signs of progress” … and this is in the bill??? Maybe if it were it might be more enticing.
Mission accomplished to surrender. Bush can do it all.
Let us not forget who was the majority in the congress and senate over the last 12 yrs. I do not agree with the congressman from Arkansas. We should involve the military with the decisions left to be made. But lets not kid ourselves to what happens when one of them disagrees with the Washington “Regime”. See Gen. Shinskei.Can anyone tell me what the presidents plan is exactly? What is it about accountablility that makes republicans go “poopy” in their pants? Just face it, the blank check days are over!And don’t you people have some group of minorities to go demonize? Gays, women, illegals, the poor. Go do what you do best…..DIVIDE AND PARALYZE.
How do you equate surrender(deadline) with accountability?
How is the training of the Iraqi army coming along? How many hundreds of thousands of combat troops are ready? And how many “dead-enders” can be left after we have killed them all many times over? Aren’t they “in their last throes” by now?
Mike when you can’t talk logic – talk trash. This is a famillar demo tactic.
No matter who had the majority, everyone had a vote. Look and see how your heros voted. You can’t be a monday morning quarterback when running a war.
Who exactly are ‘you people’ who demonize the groups you mention? You wouldn’t be trying to demonize Christians would you?
If all you flag waving republicanswant to win the war why are you all against the draft,dont want to share the pain.If you flag waving gop members want to win the war why are you against raising taxes to pay for it.If you patriots want to win this war why wont you demand congress pass the war act.See republicans dont really want to win this war just continue to fight it,and to continue to benifit monetarily and politically
“How is deadline accountability?”Posted by: SolDevVB | March 29, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Ask Patreus. You can bet your last dollar he’s lovin’ Pelosi right about now.
Why? Because her and other Democrats’ efforts to end the war have given him a credible threat, a threat he can take to the Milaki and the Iraq government. Get your shit together, PDQ, or see my forces leave, sez Gen. Patreus.
While it’s certainly neither unexpected nor unusual, you Bush supporters’ collective lack of imagination will lose this thing yet. I’m sure yall are like the last Americans to figure out that Bush is incapable of delivering an equivalently credible threat. Incapable: it ain’t in Bush.
Pelosi’s doin’ God’s work here, SolDevVB.
The Democrats have ensured our enemies success now too.
They told the enemy that we are leaving in a years time.
So now, the democrats have basically done two things:
1. Told our enemies that we still don’t have the will to fight and they only need wait us out.
2. Ensured that our enemies know that even if we do stay they have us divided.
The democrats are a joke.
You cannot equate surrender to accountablility. Surrender is what you do when you are defeated. By setting a time table you say that we are surrendering? Sounds like something that resembles a plan to me? Accountablility is demanding results for the funds provided. I know it sounds strange to Republicans, but its kinda like when you send dirty emails to children you get fired. Or you spend 320 Billion dollars on a war and someone asks you….what did you buy?
tw,
100% of the military is not going to be in favor of the war.
I knew people I served with who were against the war.
However, beyond the many reasons they had, I disagree with them and yes if they support this time table I call them nit wits.
Anyone who has a retarded strategy or lack there of when it comes to the military is a nit wit regardless of if they are a vet or not.
Mike,
What accountability are you asking for?
Did I miss that in the Democrats “plan” which was to simply withdrawl?
If they wanted accountability, why not provide a list of results they wish to be accomplished or specific strategies they want employed in this fight?
Nope, none of that was provided, just a demand for withdrawl.
That is not accountability.
Wait us out! Its their country, a hundred years from now they will still be there. Nathan is a joke!
Gee KsgrmI didn’t know that Christians hated women and the poor? Guess I can add them to the list. I know they hate Gays, illegals, and pretty much anybody who is not like them, but women? the poor? I thought Christianity was a religion of tolerance and foregiveness? I am amazed everytime I speak to a “Christian”. They are the most hate filled, prejudiced hypcrites on the planet. Thanks for pointing that out once again!
The Saudis are rattling their swords. If the Saudis or the Arabs are willing to step up and take some initiative in Iraq, then maybe we can just walk away. But to just walk away from what 3,000 + soldiers gave their lives for????
I am sure Nathan that the dem’s plan is not just pull out. I do believe that the plan has benchmarks in it. You would have to stop watching Fox News for a few minutes to hear that. How long would be too long in your great opinion? 10yrs? 20yrs? 10,000 dead americans? 20,000 dead americans? When we leave all bets are off….period! Whether its next year or 10 years from now. That part of the world has ALWAYS BEEN UNSTABLE. Very naive of you to think the “Great American Military” can change that. We can kick ass better than anybody in the world. What we lack is a good diplomat. And when one speaks on the topic or offers their opinion, this “regime” does the exact opposite.
“If the Saudis or the Arabs are willing to step up and take some initiative in Iraq, then maybe we can just walk away. ”
SolDeVB,If that wouldn’t be handing over the country to the enemy I don’t no what would be.
“But to just walk away from what 3,000 + soldiers gave their lives for????”
Money for Bush and Cheney
Just what DID 3000+ soldiers give their lives for? The al-Maliki government?
Mike, my question:
“Who exactly are ‘you people’ who demonize the groups you mention? You wouldn’t be trying to demonize Christians would you?”
Your answer:”I am amazed everytime I speak to a “Christian”. They are the most hate filled, prejudiced hypcrites on the planet. Thanks for pointing that out once again!”
Posted by: Mike | March 29, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Could this be why I would think you were referring to Christian when you referrenced ‘you people’. I hate it when I have to defeats a man’s argument with his own words.
I am sure Nathan that the dem’s plan is not just pull out. I do believe that the plan has benchmarks in it. You would have to stop watching Fox News for a few minutes to hear that.Posted by: Mike | March 29, 2007 at 01:09 PM
Mike since I am sure you don’t listen to Fox news then you will be able to share those benchmarks with us. We’re waiting.
Nathan,
Are you claiming that they did not KNOW in March 2003 (four years ago) that they only needed to “wait us out”?
Did they assume we’d occupy their country forever?
They’ve got patience, instead of a multi-billion $ yearly military budget.
Yes, how stupid is that argument, “you can’t let the enemy think we’re leaving” all things come to an end, even bad choices.It’s a good thing that con men can’t get away with the other argument presented here “you believed the lies, and believed the imaginary threat they put out” so it’s as much your fault as it is mine”. Incidentally, I said before the invasion that Saddam most likely didn’t have weapons when he didn’t give them up, while we were amassing on the border.Instead of a ‘war on terror’ lets have a ‘war on crime’ and not invade another country until we can make all of our OWN streets safe. That would be as open ended a proposition as stating victory in Iraq is when their citizens stop murdering each other.
I really don’t care how many people believed Saddam had WMD or how many Democrats voted for the Authorization for the Use of Force. The AUMF was not an Authorization for the Endless Use of Force Due to Bad Planning.
To leave Iraq right now will create a refugee crisis that will be worse than WW 2. IS America ready to accept 1 to 3 million Muslims that will come knocking when the ethnic cleansing begins in Iraq? I think that IF this cannot be worked out politically we may have to partition Iraq into 3 pieces and relocate people according to Sunni, Shite and Kurd.
Kev – perhaps you haven’t noticed but there are already 2 million refugees. Bush created them with his invasion/occupation. Ethnic cleansing is already underway.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Bush would say “that’s just goes to show, when you give people democracy, they’ll travel!”.
DR DAVID COCHRANEI was molested by DR.DAVID COCHRANE my psychiatrist . I’am 13 years old and when this happened he told me he was giving me therapy , well let me tell you he did all kinds of sexual things to me including sex ,and told me that it was okay cause he was the doctor and does this stuff all the time .it hurts my feelings i told my parents Dr.DAVID COCHRANE molested me, but they dont’t believe me .DAVID IS A PSYCHIATRIST Who also WORKS NORTH EAST MENTAL HEALTH CENTER HERE IN NORTH BAY , ONTARIO and is a psychiatrist . Canada,ON,North BayMAYBE SOMEONE COULD HELP !!