Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, July 09, 2007
Amanda Carpenter :: Townhall.com Columnist
Reid Renews Push for Withdrawal
by Amanda Carpenter
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will renew his push to end the war in Iraq as his chamber begins work on the 2008 defense authorization bill Monday.

Recently, a handful of Republican senators have broken ranks with the White House on President Bush’s Iraq policy. Reid will force them to vote with or against the President before the August recess, adding pressure to the fracture within the GOP on the issue of Iraq.

Beginning Monday, a series of Democrat-sponsored amendments will be introduced to the bill to mandate a date for withdrawal, to slow the rotation of deployments to Iraq, to limit U.S. missions in the region, and to revoke the Senate’s 2002 authorization of the war.

Although these amendments have yet to be formally announced, a handful of Democratic senators have publicly discussed the amendments they will sponsor. Sen. Carl Levin (D.-Mich.) and Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.) have signaled that they will sponsor an amendment to redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq within 120 days. It also aims for full withdrawal by April 2008.

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.), who spent the Senate’s Fourth of July recess campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President, will introduce an amendment to the bill to “de-authorize” war operations in Iraq by setting, as she calls it, an October 11, 2007 “expiration date” for the war. That date is the 5 year anniversary of when Clinton, along with the majority of the Senate, voted to authorize President Bush to use force in Iraq. Her amendment will be co-sponsored with skilled Senate parliamentarian Sen. Robert Byrd (D.-W.V.).

Sen. Jim Webb (D.-Va.) has been working on a military readiness amendment to delay deployments to Iraq. His amendment will require soldiers to take time off between deployments for a period at least as long that they were previously deployed. Leader Reid explained in a June 12 press conference that Webb’s amendment could be “something very simple that says a soldier cannot go back to Iraq until he's home for the length of time he's been there; 15 months, 15 months.”

The new Democratic Congress spent their first three months in power passing an emergency supplemental Iraq spending bill that President Bush ultimately vetoed because it contained withdrawal date for U.S. troops to leave Iraq. The language was then stripped from a second version of the bill and later signed by the President.

This time around, Leader Reid believes anti-war Democrats have an upper hand over the President. “Remember, this isn’t a spending bill,” Reid said on June 12. “This is an authorization bill. So, we’re playing in our territory now, not the President’s.”

The $648 billion defense authorization bill legislates what government money can be spent on. The FY 2008 defense spending bill, to be considered by the Senate this fall, then releases government money to be spent on those authorized projects. By severely limiting what war operations the government will fund in the authorization bill, anti-war senators could evade a controversial vote to explicitly de-fund military activities.

Reid’s efforts to push for withdrawal and de-funding are scheduled at an opportune time for anti-war Democrats. In the past two weeks, five formerly pro-war Republican senators have publicly split with the White House on Iraq: Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Sen. Pete Domenici (N.M.), Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), Sen. Richard Lugar (Ind.) and Sen. George Voinovich (Ohio). continued...

Lugar, ranking member of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, said on June 25 that he did not believe the President’s surge of 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq would be successful.

Voinovich, also a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, called on the President just days later to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.

Over Fourth of July recess, Domenici said, “We cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress to move its country forward.”

Leader Reid has since latched on to these statements to propel anti-war momentum.

In a statement released on July 6, Reid said: “Senator Domenici is correct to assess that the Administration’s war strategy is misguided. But we will not see a much-needed change of course in Iraq until Republicans like Senators Domenici, Lugar and Voinovich are willing to stand up to President Bush and his stubborn clinging to a failed policy – and more importantly, back up their words with action. Beginning with the Defense Authorization bill next week, Republicans will have the opportunity to not just say the right things on Iraq, but vote the right way too so that we can bring the responsible end to this war that the American people demand and deserve.”

On July 7, the Los Angeles Times reported that both Alexander and Gregg said in separate interviews that they believed the President must soon change course in Iraq. Neither said whether they would support legislation to withdraw forces. Republican senators Chuck Hagel (Neb.), Gordon Smith (Ore.) and John Warner (Va.) have disagreed with President Bush’s Iraq strategy for months and are likely to support other members of the GOP who openly question the administration’s strategy in the coming weeks.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Amanda Carpenter is the author of “The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Clinton,” published in October 2006.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Amanda Carpernter. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Harry Reid - The REAL Loyal Muslim.
This is very good news indeed. My local cell was considering disbanding due to there being no light at the end of the tunnel, but Senator Reid has given us renewed vigor in our fight against the infidel. With the West engaged in preparations to raise the white flag, we know that all we need to do is hold out a little longer and victory will be ours.

And to think that we almost gave up a couple years ago. We thought the United States was a strong foe, but now we know they are ready to surrender to Allah's might. My friend, Ho Chi Mohammad was right; America's Left will submit to any enemy rather than fight.

Excellent as always Amanda!
It's amazing to me that the American people have not already started a full revolt! The stupidity of these communistic leaning Demo/Libs, displayed everyday. Is beyond the pale. We need to get every one of these people out of government! How in the h*ll did we allow such self-serving idiot's become leaders!? The damage these people are doing to our country will take generations to repair. If we manage to survive at all!

I can't believe that any sane American would even consider the Marxist Hildabeast for President of the United States! You constantly hear the Lib/socialist claim the beast to be the most intelligent woman in America. Even as she tries to turn our country into a Communistic/Socialist State! The only thing 'it' is intelligent about is the use of communistic propaganda. And the Liberals eat it up like sheep being led to the slaughter!

Hitlery's amendment to "De-authorize" the war. Is so stupid it's unreal! That's like trying to call back a bullet once fired! What it amounts to is the same old Liberal BS to cover their butt's! You know, like Kerry's "I voted for it, before I voted against it."

A Sad State of Affairs
Loyal Muslim's comments are so close to the truth that it's sad. We have the DemocRAT political party engaged in high treason against the United States.

To wit:
providing propaganda for the enemy (ie comments by Sen Kennedy, Sen Durbin, Sen Kerry, Howard Dean and others)

undermining the morale of our soldiers engaged in combat (ie comments by Sen Kerry, Sen Loser Reid, and others)

undermining the lawful authority of the President to wage war under the Constitution and the AUMF (ie wiretapping, financial monitoring, gitmo, etc...)

advocating rights for unlawful combatants (ie gitmo, abu grab)

The list goes on and I'm sure the people here at townhall can add many more...

Missing the point
The problem is not Reid, the problem is the incompetence of the administration and blind obedience, until recently of the Republican legislature. Even stalwarts like Lugar and Alexander are finally waking up. Are they traitors as well? I note the posters here don't mention them.

bryce2 is correct
The administration was incompetent when it opted to respond to the attack on 9/11. The correct action would have been to recognized that our foreign policy had failed somehow, and we should have opened up a dialogue with the elements that attacked us. In conducting the war, our leadership should have used the information that was discovered later on rather than the information they had at the time of the initial assault.

Reid's cheerleading for the terrorists causes no problems for our soldiers in the field, and his outright declaration that the United States has lost the war by no means sent a sign of encouragement to the enemy. Instead, as Harry put it, each American death translates into Democratic votes, so the higher the American soldier body count the better for Dem 08 candidates. Since Dems know how to run a more efficient and ethical administration, we can only hope that a huge massacre of U.S. troops occurs in late October 08.

It is also great to watch more rats leaving the ship as time passes. These are our true leaders, the ones who are willing to alter their positions based on the direction the wind of public opinion is blowing. A true leader is a person who determines which way the crowd is heading, and then runs to the front of the pack.

And as has been noted, no Muslim has invaded the United States, so we have no business invading Muslim countries. The incidents of 9/11 were likely staged by Americans who wantd an excuse to go to war, and it is a shame that they kidnapped so many Muslim men and made them ride those aircraft into critical targets.

We owe the Muslim world our humblest apology, for our devious actions have sullied the peaceful reputation that Islamists have so rightfully earned. As the world already knows, if an evil act transpires, it is the doing of the United States. All that is evil with the world is our fault, and it is truly a shame that we ever became a nation.

HalO is also correct.
Our soldiers are taken from a pool of the most ignorant, worthless batch of losers that America has to offer. Furthermore, no soldier in Iraq believes in the cause, rather they are all there as a result of being bribed with citizenship or some tangible good. Nobody in their right mind would spend an ounce of energy fighting for this terrible country of ours, and given the disgusting level of people that are in our military, we can once again feel good about spitting on soldiers as they return from war.

The truly brave and intelligent are the ones who are sitting out this fight. When the Muslims incinerate a city, the blast will bypass all of the enlightened who know that nothing is ever worth fighting for.

So if you have some spare time, join me and HalO on our next trip to the airport where we will be throwing handfuls of garbage at passing soldiers while waving Hezbollah flags.

Defeatist Reid; Need for New GOP Leaders
Harry Reid insists on defeat. Yes, I think he is a traitor. I have a son who is a U.S. Army First Lieutenant (with Ranger tab) serving in harm's way as an infantry platoon leader in Iraq. The vey mention of the name Harry Reid makes me angry.

It is raised by bryce2 what about "Republicans" like Lugar and Alexander? The short answer is that they should be voted out in the next Republican primary and replaced by real Republicans who won't play politics with our military guys at war and stab them in the back if it suits peceptions of political interest. I, for one, have been calling for the turning out of office old wussy "Republican" Senators like Lugar, Voinovich, Domenici, Lott and Alexander. There is a need for new Republican leadership courageous in dealing with the challenges of the 21st century facing America.

Voinivich
is no Republican and he is a big cry baby. He is the one who hung up on Hannity because he couldn't answer Hannity's simple questions put to him about the scamnesty bill. Not only that but he threw a fit about how dare the people of Ohio "threaten" him when he was swamped with calls to vote against the scamnesty bill. He thinks he owes nothing to the people who hired him. It doesn't surprise me one bit that this fool would turn around and be hand in hand with the demorats.

The surge has started to work from the reports and Reid wants to make sure he gets it stopped now.

I have an article on 9/11 and the danger still facing us. Come by and visit when you have the chance.
http://peppermintsplace.townhall.com


Why can't they be on our side?
What if Reid and the Dems had been saying we were doing well for the past three years? What if they had said "In spite of Bush's blundering and inept leadership, our soldiers and Marines are whomping every terrorist that shows his face in Iraq. With your votes we can force this administration to do a better job supporting the young Americans that are winning this war! Or better yet, we can replace it in 08 with a competent President that will stifle terror, bring peace and secure our boarders." The Dems could easily be against Bush without being against the military, against victory, and against America. Why, then, do they persist that losing is the best way forward?

Like VietNam

Like Vietnam, the war can be lost in the halls of Congress, even though the battles were won on the battlefield.

(satire alert) Dateline 1776 , G. Washington surrendered today after the loyal Congress refused to further fund his personal battle with the other George.

From RON PAUL
From RON PAUL September 12, 2001 after the 9/11 attacks

Did President Bush and lawmakers make a mistake by not listening to Ron Paul when he said “killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security”?

NightVision-Yesterday, Americans were awakened to find ourselves in a war, attacked by barbarians who targeted innocent civilians. This despicable act reveals how deep-seated is the hatred that has driven this war.

Though many Americans have just become aware of how deeply we are involved in this war, it has been going on for decades. We are obviously seen by the terrorists as an enemy.

In war there is no more reprehensible act than for combatants to slaughter innocent civilian bystanders. This is what happened yesterday.

If there is such a thing, a moral war is one that is only pursued in self-defense. Those who initiate aggression against others for the purpose of occupation or merely to invoke death and destruction are unforgivable and serve only to spread wanton killing.

In our grief, we must remember our responsibilities. The Congress’ foremost obligation in a constitutional republic is to preserve freedom and provide for national security. Yesterday our efforts to protect our homeland came up short. Our policies that led to that shortcoming must be reevaluated and changed if found to be deficient.

When we retaliate for this horror we have suffered, we must be certain that only the guilty be punished. More killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security. Congress should consider its constitutional authority to grant letters of marque and reprisal to meet our responsibility.

Demanding domestic security in times of war invites carelessness in preserving civil liberties and the right of privacy. Frequently the people are only too anxious for their freedoms to be sacrificed on the altar of authoritarianism thought to be necessary to remain safe and secure. Nothing would please the terrorists more than if we willingly give up some of our cherished liberties while defending ourselves from their threat.

It is our job to wisely choose our policies and work hard to understand the root causes of the war in which we find ourselves.

We must all pray for peace and ask for God’s guidance for our President, our congressional leaders, and all America- and for the wisdom and determination required to resolve this devastating crisis.

READ MORE

http://www.controlcongress.com

HalO
Yep, game over. Thanks to the friends of Al-Qaeda and OBL at the:

1. Dhimmicratic National Party.

2. NY Slimes.

3. Mainstream Media.

4. RINO's.

The only people who are gonna suffer are the saemones that the libstains FKKED back in the 70's, the American troops and those we're fighting for.

John Konop
Thanks for checking in from the Ron Paul kookpen.

Loyal Democrat
"So if you have some spare time, join me and HalO on our next trip to the airport where we will be throwing handfuls of garbage at passing soldiers while waving Hezbollah flags."

You and your conservative ilk have been throwing "garbage" on our troops since you extremists got in office. Reduced and inadequate healthcare for our wounded and troops, cutting VA funding, deliberately slowly acquisition of armor and weapons - that is real garbage and it is your conservative trademark. Support our troops? You folks don't have a clue how to

Next car bomb?

What are the chances it will be in Dearborn Michigan?

What do you think?

Phil Byler
"I, for one, have been calling for the turning out of office old wussy "Republican" Senators like Lugar, Voinovich, Domenici, Lott and Alexander. There is a need for new Republican leadership courageous in dealing with the challenges of the 21st century facing America. "

You folks had your chance and screwed it up in mythic proportions. Now for the sake of the nation please go back to your secure bunker

Love the picture!
Harry has been telegraphing this retreat for months now. Don't underestimate Reid. He is a tenacious surrenderer who can still could still manage to get two arms in the air even with both shoulders pinned (yes -- he was a wrestler as well as a boxer). This latest move is just a part of his grand strategy outlined here:

http://kilroyreport.townhall.com/g/3ffed952-eee6-45b8-b7d3-460754506d0f

Peppermint
Good morning I hope you are well

Save Iraq? Or save Bush?
bryce2 writes: "The problem is not Reid, the problem is the incompetence of the administration and blind obedience, until recently of the Republican legislature."

I agree, and I have a solution (though it may possibly be too late now):

If winning the Iraq War is so important to America, then why not have a Commander-in-Chief who still retains some credibility and popularity with the American public?

Are we trying to save Iraq or save the Bush Administration?

If we're trying to save Iraq, then the answer is simple: Bush and Cheney should both resign and turn the country over to an Acting President of their choice (with the Senate's advice and consent). They could let Condoleeza Rice be Acting President till January 2009. Here's how to do it:

1. Cheney resigns for "health reasons."

2. Bush appoints Condi Rice (or whoever) to replace Cheney as VP, and she's confirmed by Senate.

3. Then Bush resigns too, saying he has lost his political base.

4. At which point Condoleeza Rice becomes President.

Let Condi have a chance to rally the country. She's better liked than either Bush or Cheney at this point.

(This is similar to what happened during the Nixon Administration: VP Agnew quit and was replaced by Gerald Ford, and then Nixon quit too, leaving Ford as president. And if you remember, even Democrats thought Ford did a decent job as caretaker President.)

Black Dog
"But leave it to the lunkheads on the right to always get it wrong.
They were wrong in 'Nam - and now their wrong here..."

While I'm not one to stand in the way of a good rant, the fact is, is that it was liberals in Congress who screwed the pooch in Vietnam. Nixon was busying bombing the crap out of them in Operation Linebacker. The Viets went straight to the peace talks. The liberals ordered a halt to the bombing and the commies gave us the finger. Hanoi John Fonda Kerry even tried to privately talk to them, with emphasis on nuance, to no avail. Thus, Operation Linebacker II.

In the end, it was liberals in Congress, in a Dhimmicratic controlled Congress, who cut funding to South Vietnam and even after they KICKED COMMIE BUTT in the Easter Offensive in 1972, the libs finally axed them totally.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your diatribe.

Packrat
"Like Vietnam, the war can be lost in the halls of Congress, even though the battles were won on the battlefield."

Wrong sir Vietnam was lost by incompetant military and political leadership

one more thing
I have one other suggestion instead of Condi Rice: Let Fred Thompson be Acting President for the next two years, but ON THE CONDITION that he not run for President himself in 2008.

-Kilroy
Here is one of Harry "Nevada Land Deal" Reid surrendering to al-Qaeda.

http://www.bloggernacle.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/harry-reid.jpg

Harry imitating his buddy DICK "Turbin" Durbin.

http://www.free-press.biz/graphics/people/Harry-Reid.jpg

Harry showing how he tested OBL's resolve.

http://www.christianaction.org/june_36.jpg

Bruzazki
"The Dems could easily be against Bush without being against the military, against victory, and against America. Why, then, do they persist that losing is the best way forward?"

The Democratic Party supports our troops from the battlefields to the old folks home. What they do not support is an incompetant president abandoning the military in the middle of a desert and a civil war. It is clear Bush's strategy is to hang on in Iraq until the next president has to withdraw. Our troops deserve better. For the record our troops did exactly what their mission was in Iraq and won but now they are just abandoned there.

Hal Donahue
Wrong answer.

Name ONE battle the US lost in Vietnam.

The Marine Corps annihilated THREE NVA Divisions in Hue City after Tet 68. The US CRUSHED the VC after Tet and rendered them UNABLE to do anything after that. General Giap even states so in his memoirs.

Even AFTER the libstains FKKED the SVN, they crushed the commie's Easter Offensive in 1972 and held out for three more YEARS!

Congress cut off the funding to the South Vietnamese as well as supplies. That Congress was libturd ruled. Just the gutless libscum at work.


Packrat
"What are the chances it will be in Dearborn Michigan?

What do you think?"

I think we are safe until the last six months or a year of the Bush regime. Why? Because the Bush Regime's tactics provide aid and comfort to the terrorists. That is why we have not been seruiously attacked since but wit Bush leaving office watch out.....

Hal Donahue
Being a 20 year vet, retiring just a few short years ago. I would rather have the inadequate health care we have been getting in some places than have to type of support we have been getting in the field from our dem leadership.

Dems leaders and there ilk have given more support to our enemies through propaganda then anything they could have come up with on their own.

Dem leaders have indirectly killed more service men just by raising our enemies morale then by any inadequate health care.

GunnyG
The military and political leaders built up Vietnam was changing becoming secure etc... TET proved our leaders were lieing to us. At that moment they were done and the war was over...

Other points can be shown to lead the way but TET was the big one. You are right the military was superb and won but the mere fact that the NV could do that showed the leadership for the liars they were. Bush is there now but interestingly enough the generals have been able to maintain their reputation and integrity by resigning and speaking out

Black Dog
How is it that when we fight terrorists in Iraq, the terrorists (that live) become "battle-tested" but our Army becomes in Murtha's opinion "broken?" Or if you prefer Hagel's RINO words from this weekend "it will take a generation to repair" the damage done to our military? How is it we can't even win in a blog opinion? You don't seem to realize, the terrorists are losing their base of support in Iraq and are burying most of their recruits as well as leaders.

Hal Donohue
"The Democratic Party supports our troops from the battlefields to the old folks home."

Yeah, they did a great job in the Civil War, remember the Copperheads!?

How about FDR abandoning 76,000 troops in the Phillipines because of his "Europe First" doctrine. I guess helping his buddy Uncle Joe Stalin was more important than the troops who needed beans, bullets, and bandaids.

Yep, you libs SURE DO care about the troops. Ol Dhimmicrat Congcritter Andrew May's remarks only sunk TEN US subs and killed 800 sailors.

http://www.ww2pacific.com/congmay.html

Oh yeah, WHO can forget Truman's awesome slashing of the DoD budget from 1945-1950, and then committing Task Force Smith to battle against the NK?

http://www.quartermaster.army.mil/oqmg/Professional_Bulletin/1996/Spring/tfsmith.html

Yep, you sure do care for us. With friends like YOU, who needs al-Qaeda?

Hal Donahue
You also seem to forget that Vietnam was hatched by liberals. JFK expanded the mission by sending 15K advisors there in October 1963. LBJ took the ball and ran with it often playing General from the WH and dictating down to the platoon level.

Don't try to spin it, that war was started and ended by Liberals. You OWN that mess. Just like you OWN Bay of Pigs, Tehran Hostage Crisis, Black Hawk Down, The RISE of Global Terrorism under Bubba, Sandy Burgular, etc.

AreDNmYheaD
Strangely enough many of the troops do not agree with you at all. The out pouring of support from the troops that Murtha and the other Democratic leaders receive is exactly what keeps them going

"Dems leaders and there ilk have given more support to our enemies through propaganda then anything they could have come up with on their own.

Dem leaders have indirectly killed more service men just by raising our enemies morale then by any inadequate health care."

Really? How by questioning the Bush Regime leadership? Sir, that is patriotism to do any less would be disloyal to the troops and the constitution.

Finally, it is ok with you that our military has inadequate healthcare???????

HalO
Oh, the polls that you quote, the polls that you quote.

Here's a media that, since the war even began, grabbed the public by the lapel every day and roared in its face "THE WAR IS LOST! DO YOU UNDERSTAND, YOU MORON? IT'S LOST!"

Cut to the next scene. Ring ring. Hello? Yes, this is NBC News conducting a national poll: do you think we are winning in Iraq? Ummm... no? Correc... I mean, thank you for your time.

That night on the news (blowdried idiot with concerned look on his face): Has the public had enough? An NBC national poll of 1,502 likely idiots shows support for the war is waning.

Look, pal. The only reason we haven't made the progress that I'd like to have seen is because a bunch of professional bureaucrats and PC statists have tied the hands of our military with ridiculous rules of engagement.

Case in point, Fallujah, 2004. When that despicable rat Al Sadr was holed up there with his militia of bearded pedophiles, there should have been a barrage of Daisy-cutters putting an end to the nonsense; that's what Patton would have done, and it would have been the end of the story.

So while you and the pantywaists you support are busy finding new ways to tie our hands, you have the audacity to turn around and decry our not winning? Sheesh. Let me tell you: pray God or whoever else you think is up there that there is not another attack on our soil, or else you'll see just how "ugly" ugly Americans can become.

Hal Donahue
"Strangely enough many of the troops do not agree with you at all. The out pouring of support from the troops that Murtha and the other Democratic leaders receive is exactly what keeps them going."

Do us all a favor and STFU. I WORK with troops EVERYDAY. I see them EVERYDAY. I tlak with them EVERYDAY. Many of whom are BACK from Iraq/Afghanistan and who will go again when required. My nephew is there on tour number three, without complaining. I have YET to hear them seriously b*tch, moan, or groan outside of NORMAL griping. I will be there later this year in support of the mission.

So please, do us all and favor and S.T.F.U. You're a babbling idiot w/o a clue.


ThighMaster
WELL SAID.

Hal "Without a clue" Donohue belongs in a RUBBER ROOM in a straight-jacket.

Hal Don
Yes the troops accomplished the first part of the regime change mission. The second part is the what does the regime change to? We are trying to keep that from being a weak state at war with itself and all others. Even the Sunnis are now coming around and opposing the al-Quedas there. The dems want to surrender the field when we have a chance to win. It should not matter to the Dems if we win or lose they can still blame Bush for all the trouble. Why don't they (and be extension I have to think YOU) stop trying to hand al-Queda the victory of a lifetime? Don't they (and YOU) get that a press victory is as good as a real victory? It won't matter that we killed 10 times the number of terrorist for the number of wounded GIs if we leave in a tail twixt the legs pullout that Reid is wanting the world will view it as a loss for America. We cannot afford that. How about we agree that Bush, heck all Republicans, can't take any credit for doing anything useful against terror of for security for 3 elections if the Dems will just let us win?

Hal Donahue
Well you are wrong as usual. If you think we lost the War in Vietnam on the battlefield, could you please name for me a battle that we lost to the V.C.?
As for the democrat party, how on earth can you say they support our troops when they, along with their willing cohorts in the drive-by media, have done everything in their power to undermine their efforts to win this war? Forget it, I know how you can. You are a liberal, and for liberals the history of the world began this morning, so in that regard I understand how you can look at the democrat party and see americans (Joseph Lieberman notwithstanding).
Oh well. The good news is Bush will veto the democrat parties' surrender bill and there is not a damn thing the democrat party can do about it. Harry Reid is a disgrace and he will be removed from office by the people of Nevada the next time he is up for re-election.

Have a nice day everyone, I'll talk to you later.

harry reid
if dumb old harry is anything more than a shill for corrupt land developers and the willing tool of the moveon.org crowd than what is he. He lines his pockets but sends iran the message he is their boy in the senate. Knowing hoiw he loves shady deals one would wonder if he gets an occaisional "present" from the ME

GunnyG
"Yeah, they did a great job in the Civil War, remember the Copperheads!?

Remember the Civil Rights Bill? Their spawn left the D party to join yours and you know it


I am speaking of now Gunny and you know it. You Republicans and conservatives stopped caring about the troops when you took tax cuts, failed to mobilize the nation and provided inadequate funding to care for the troops

It is disgusting and you should know it

wildwest
lol!

My folks live in Nevada where Harry reid is WELL KNOWN for scammery. He is hated there and only gets elected through the time honored liberal method of vote buying.

My favorite one is LBJ buying the town of Alice texas in his 1948 Senate election. The town vote for him 100%...and in alphabetical order no less!

Hal Donahue
LOL!

Yeah, let's discuss that Civil Rights Bill of 1964 and how 64% of the Dhimmicrats voted AGAINST it vice 15% of the GOP.

Senator KKK Byrd, elder statesman of the Dhimmicratic Party anyone?


***PLUG ALERT***
New content at the Spade, here’s a small sample:
New Prime Minister Gordon Brown scares me, quite frankly. I am concerned that he is more of the politically correct European that Prime Minister Blair, and that his PC bent will affect his commitment to defeating the jihadists. And I believe that my concern is a valid one.

GunnyG
"You also seem to forget that Vietnam was hatched by liberals. JFK expanded the mission by sending 15K advisors there in October 1963. LBJ took the ball and ran with it often playing General from the WH and dictating down to the platoon level."

And your point is? Did I say the D's were innouncent? FYI: NIXON was a treasonist Republican not a liberal

"The RISE of Global Terrorism under Bubba, Sandy Burgular, etc."

You big tough extremists are incapable of accepting responsibility aren't you? Bush was in power over 8 "eight" months what did he do? Ashcroft was worried about a $15,000 drap covering a bare breast in the hall of justice oh and that was after down grading counterterrorism as an FBI priority. No one is perfect least of all anyone in this regime


Dems in charge now?
Where is all the funding for military health care now that the Dems are in charge?

Where are the earmarks for the VA and for TRICARE?

Where is a funding bill for the troops with out tons of PORK attached.

I thought Pelosi and company were going to correct all the evils of the world in the first 100 days.


GunnyG
"Do us all a favor and STFU. I WORK with troops EVERYDAY. I see them EVERYDAY. I tlak with them EVERYDAY. Many of whom are BACK from Iraq/Afghanistan and who will go again when required. My nephew is there on tour number three, without complaining. I have YET to hear them seriously b*tch, moan, or groan outside of NORMAL griping. I will be there later this year in support of the mission."

If what you say is true then you know EXACTLY what I mean. You are not the only one with military ties and you know it.

Are you going as a mercenary or government civilian?

Hal Donahue
took tax cuts? They raised more revenue! The problem is when the "spirit of bipartisanship" hits the GOP they spend like drunken Mass Dem Senators.


Full points to you on the mobilization. After 9/11 Bush could have asked the American people to join up, buy bonds, or anything but he asked us to go shopping!

You are disingeuous if you think the GIs are not getting adequate health care. A few pictures of peeling paint at a facility slated for closure is not failing.

hal
"Strangely enough many of the troops do not agree with you at all. The out pouring of support from the troops that Murtha and the other Democratic leaders receive is exactly what keeps them going"

If that is what you believe then your judgment is poor. You will always find a few that will agree with you, Of that I am sure, but having been there and done that I can safely say that you are speaking of a minority view (small minority).

"Really? How by questioning the Bush Regime leadership? Sir, that is patriotism to do any less would be disloyal to the troops and the constitution."

No your memory is as poor as your judgment, We can start with.
Sen Kerry who called our troops terrorist by describing there actions terrorizing woman in children in the dead of night.
Sen Durbin who compared us (U.S. military) to the third reicht on the senate floor.
How about howard dean or the swimmer kennedy who said the president new about 9/11 in advance and allowed it to happen.
How about that idiot murtha who has all but told our enemies that we can't keep it up we (the military) are broken, so if you hang in there long enough and keep killing you will win.

I could go on and on but I find it is beginning to make me ill.

Is it decent that make you unpatriotic no. Its the fact that this type of decent is obviously meant to achieve one goal, to regain power for dems, not help our troops.



GunnyG
"Yeah, let's discuss that Civil Rights Bill of 1964 and how 64% of the Dhimmicrats voted AGAINST it vice 15% of the GOP."

You are absolutely right and to sort of qoute LBJ: I just lost the South to the Democratic Party for a 100 years. They are now the CORE of the conservative movement and Republican Party. Those racist idiots left the Ds

"Senator KKK Byrd, elder statesman of the Dhimmicratic Party anyone?"

Old history isn't it? He repented and admitted the error of his ways.

Packrat
"Where is all the funding for military health care now that the Dems are in charge?"

The continuing resolution passed by the Dems and signed by Bush included what Bush called excess spending and the R's called Pork. A huge chunk of that was funding military healthcare, VA and providing amored vehicles to the USMC and equipment to stripped units. Too bad you didn't check

Where are the earmarks for the VA and for TRICARE?

That is in the new budget that Bush is already saying is excessive spending. You free lunch R's and conservative are really over the top

Where is a funding bill for the troops with out tons of PORK attached.

See above

I thought Pelosi and company were going to correct all the evils of the world in the first 100 days.

As much as the can with a cowardly R Congress although that does seem to be changiong doesn't it


sorry, to much multi-tasking
decent = dissent

Hal Donahue
LOL!

Mercenary of course. But slightly higher paid than the last time I was there as a Sgt.

You may have military ties but it seems that yours fall into the whiner camp on the left. The VAST MINORITY of the armed forces falls into that camp as well, thankfully.

In closing, your whining and mewling would probably be better received at the other whiny sites like: DailyKoS, moveyourbowels.org, DNC, etc.

To Hal Donohue
So you say in your smart aleck way in your 8:39 AM post that I should go back to my secure bunker. I don't work in a secure bunker. I am a lawyer in the practice of law in Manhattan. I have not forgotten 9/11. You obviouly have.

Bruzazki
"You are disingeuous if you think the GIs are not getting adequate health care. A few pictures of peeling paint at a facility slated for closure is not failing."

True but it is failing. Reduced nurses limiting surgery schedules; top flight research facilities being told not to apply for research grants, patients being pulled from the operating room for klack of personnel. No the military medical system appears to be being deliberately dismantled. All that is holding the system together at this point is couragous medical staff from the e-1 to 0-6 level. But like the rest of the military it is stressed to breaking

Hal Donahue
Are you purposely obstuse or were you born like that?

YOU frigging brought up the CRA of 1964.

I pointed out how racist the libsquirts ARE and STILL are. How many minorities were in Bubba's Admin vice Bush's?

BTW, YOUR party calls "KKK" Byrd an Elder Stateman, currently. And WHO can forget what your party calls Blacks who jump the DNC plantation? I believe YOUR PARTY called Michael Steele an "Uncle Tom" and threw Oreos at him in the last election.

How quaint.

Phil Byler
"So you say in your smart aleck way in your 8:39 AM post that I should go back to my secure bunker. I don't work in a secure bunker. I am a lawyer in the practice of law in Manhattan. I have not forgotten 9/11. You obviouly have."

I am in NYC every week and do a bit of work there so don't feel alone. 9/11 I will say this one more time slowly fopr you:

The war in Iraq has NOTHING to do with the war on terror except provide aid, comfort and training to terrorists.

"You obviouly have." that is a cheap whine LOL

Breck Girl Academy?
Is John Edwards giving lessons to other Senators in BOTH parties on how to be a GUTLESS COWARD?

GunnyG
"Mercenary of course. But slightly higher paid than the last time I was there as a Sgt."

Explains a lot gunny

"You may have military ties but it seems that yours fall into the whiner camp on the left. The VAST MINORITY of the armed forces falls into that camp as well, thankfully."

You are simply wrong here gunny and you must know it

"In closing, your whining and mewling would probably be better received at the other whiny sites like: DailyKoS, moveyourbowels.org, DNC, etc."

You forgot Huffuington too. They even provide me a home.

Hal Donohue
Please stop spreading your bullsqueeze here.

I USE the VA and have NOT been let down by them.

My family uses Tricare and we have received EXCELLENT care. We've even had the same doctor for the last five years.

For someone who supposedly has military ties, you spent a lot of time denigrating the system and thus, making it unappealing to future recruits.

What unit are YOU with? The Fifth Column, 1st DNC Bn, Libstain Company, 3rd Herd?

Robert
"I agree with "The problem is similar although not exact here. We never seemed amid "freedom reigning or ringing" to recognize that we were tearing down a government and was legitimate through terror and other tactics...and had NOTHING To go in its place."

This was the first major mistake and actually the undderlying cause as to State being isolated and Shinsecki "retired".

I think we agree completely on TET

Hal Donohue
"Mercenary of course. But slightly higher paid than the last time I was there as a Sgt."

Explains a lot gunny.

Yeah Hal, it's called putting your money where your mouth is. A concept unknown to liberals.

"You may have military ties but it seems that yours fall into the whiner camp on the left. The VAST MINORITY of the armed forces falls into that camp as well, thankfully."

You are simply wrong here gunny and you must know it.

Really Hal? Please clue me in with FACTS not supposition.

"In closing, your whining and mewling would probably be better received at the other whiny sites like: DailyKoS, moveyourbowels.org, DNC, etc."

You forgot Huffuington too. They even provide me a home.

How sweet. Hal posts at Ruff Huff, home for the mentally disabled.

Georgetwin
After paying 1200.00 for a haircut last week, the Breck Girl NEEDS to raise some cash!

Maybe he can sue some more doctors into bankruptcy like he did in NC!

Democrats & HONOR
Does your word mean anything? When you give your word, is your word your bond? Do politicians' words mean anything?
Now that we are committed in Iraq, a proposed withdrawal and a timetable for it, without achieving our goal of establishing a permanent, peaceful democracy in Iraq, free from tyrants, sounds like surrender and a letting down of those who made the ultimate sacrifice.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's waving the white flag of surrender.
Do you remember America's betrayal of the people of South Vietnam and how surrendering them to subjugation by the Viet Cong and the NVA caused widespread terror, and how they tried to escape from impending bondage. It was monumental human tragedy and a nightmare.
It's a message not lost on the people of Iraq as well as other allies of ours, sticking their necks out on our behalf. Are they thinking when will America betray us too? How can they not?
If America betrays the people of Iraq, how can the word of America be trusted and have honor, value, and meaning in any part of the world, ever.


The forces we have.
The comparison to VN ignores one basic reality, and that is that we had a draft which gave us more forces and much greater flexibility.

In the case of Iraq, we're fighting with one hand tied behind our back because we have no means to redesign strategies if more forces are required - which is where we are today.

The surge ends next spring - and for those who support this war - they better hope the Iraqi's can resolve their differences and that their Army can hold the territory we're currently clearing. If we had the forces - no one would be having this debate.

In VN, given that we had a draft, soldiers were not expected to serve three or four tours, were given time out of the line in combat, and were rotated at the rate of 12 in, and a minimum of 12 out. In general, they could get 24 months out. Most career soldiers only served two tours, for example.

None of this exists in Iraq. The Senators have every right to be concerned about the Army. We've stretched it as far as it can go. After the spring, the troop count will drop to presurge levels or below. We will then have no options left on the table other than to provide support at the level that the forces we have can maintain.

Like it or not - it comes down to the Iraqis.

Bush, in turn, cannot continue to present the myth that we will not be reducing forces in the spring. Whether he wants to talk about it or not - it will still happen.

Petraeus and the entire Army knows that to be the case. The surge used up every available resource. At the time, the Army warned that this was a one shot deal.

GunnyG
"I USE the VA and have NOT been let down by them."

I do not use the VA but I get very few complaints after access is given. Where I get the complaints is being denied access or the length of time required for appeal or approval. This is a funding problem along the catagory classification.

"My family uses Tricare and we have received EXCELLENT care. We've even had the same doctor for the last five years."

Tricare is good in areas in others not and this is based on reimbursement levels. Don't forget that reimbursement is based on medicare reimbursement levels.

"For someone who supposedly has military ties, you spent a lot of time denigrating the system and thus, making it unappealing to future recruits."

LMAO the Bush Regime is certainly making it unappealing to future recruits hiring criminals, metally challenged, old.... No my mission is to help fix the system. If it isn't fixed now during wartime it certainly won't be after.

"What unit are YOU with? The Fifth Column, 1st DNC Bn, Libstain Company, 3rd Herd?"

Remember I am a patient at Walter Reed. They and the whole military healthcare system need help

Group Insanity
This is fun. Ilove watching the country finally catching on to the Do as I say not asI do, Chickenhawk,wolf crying so called Conservative Revolution. Your brand of conservatism is a fraud, and finally, after 30 years the people are finally catching on. No one lost this war but loyal bushies.

What's really funny is the VietNam Argument.After the War an American General remarked "We won every battle. The Vietnamese general resopnded "True, but irrelavent."

Your reign is over and you have squandered it. Heckuva job, Bushies, and thank-you for destroying "conservatism" as a credible political philosophy.

To Hal Donohue
Your statement that the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the fight with the radical Islamists could not be more wrong. Repeatedly, al Qaeda's top leaders have defined Iraq as the central front of the war between the West and radical Islam, and the enemy we face in Iraq is more accurately described as radical Islamist. Senator Lieberman pointed out in June 15, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal Online that 90% of the suicied bombings in Iraq are by non-Iraqi al Qaeda. What al Qaeda's top leaders have said that they intend to do if they take over Iraq is to set up Baghdad as the center of a caliphate and use it as a base of operations.

Defeatists such as you do not consider the consequences of failure in Iraq. but you really need responsibly to do so instead of playing the blame game. If we withdraw from Iraq precipitously and there is massive bloodshed and death as radical Islamists set off bombs and wield the beheading sword, will the defeatists such as you simply turn your back? How can you ignore that al Qaeda will have a client state from which to launch attacks, as they once did from Taliban controlled Afghanistan, and that is in fact al Qaeda's plan? And shouldn't we all understand that radical Islamists will be emboldened by what al Qaeda and Iran will trumpet as a victory for radical Islam and to attack us again on American soil? Or do defeatists such as you simply not consider such matters because you think that you are living some kind of glorious repetition of an opposition to the Vietnam War? If so, how do you handle the parts that the elected South Vietnamese government fell in 1975 because of a massive invasion from North Vietnam after congressional Democrats cut off any funding to the elected South Vietnamese government and that after America left Southeast Asia, all of Vietnam was subject to a rigid Stalinist-type totalitarian dictatorship, Cambodia was under the control of a genocidal radical communist regime, thousands of Vietnamese sought to escape tyranny by taking to the seas in open boats (the “boat people”) and literally millions of those who could not escape died in Cambodia and Vietnam?

Black Dog
Now I know that you're not too bright, as exhibited in your reply to Thighmaster so I typed this real slow.

This is the State Dept's very own terrorist website. Please examine the dozens of terrorist acts that happened under Bubba Klintoon's watch.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm

Now, go to my blog and read what I posted in regards to the Klintoon Era. Actual FACTUAL data on what well-respected people stated about him and his inability to fight terrorism.

Afterwards, please try to frame your reply in manner that real people can understand, not the moonbat type you are used to being around.

Thank you for your support.

Hal Donohue
"Remember I am a patient at Walter Reed."

They let you mental patients get on computers? Is that considered therapy?

Pity
Neither the Republicans nor Democrats have seriously considered the partioning of Iraq along regional lines as proposed by Joe Biden, and , prior to that, Peter Galbraith.

The question of spending billions on the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad's Green Zone is rarely addressed either, although it likely will be when it becomes the target of daily rocket attacks.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to build such a facility AFTER the chaos in Baghdad had subsided?

Robert
Amen but I am hoping for the Hague even if it takes 10 or 20 years

GunnyG, you're correct on all
counts concerning the Democrat whiners. LBJ invented the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident by claiming a North Vietnamese torpedo vessel fired on our ship, USS Maddox, which got us into the war big time. That was a classical Democrat WMD!

GunnyG
""Remember I am a patient at Walter Reed."

They let you mental patients get on computers? Is that considered therapy?"

LMAO good one touche' only if I stay on conservative anti-military websites

SSGTRET
Thanks for your continued service. I've been to several VA hospitals while on travel and they've handled me in a timely manner with no complaints.

The trouble with the libsquirts is, is that as spoiled children, they expect instantaneous service and top-of-the-line no doubt. Spare no expenses!

Hal Dononue has posted here while loopy on drugs and admitted such. He's just another libclown to be laughed at.

Phil Byler
"Defeatists such as you do not consider the consequences of failure in Iraq. but you really need responsibly to do so instead of playing the blame game. If we withdraw from Iraq precipitously and there is massive bloodshed and death as radical Islamists set off bombs and wield the beheading sword, will the defeatists such as you simply turn your back? How can you ignore that al Qaeda will have a client state from which to launch attacks, as they once did from Taliban controlled Afghanistan, and that is in fact al Qaeda's plan?"

First point, the defeatists are those who abandoned our troops in the desert and are slowly disarming them. Second point, we need to withdraw from most of Iraq with a phased plan rather than overnight. Good point on Taliban. Who let them into power then ignored them? But a real possibility without planning.

Our withdrawal from Iraq will be a major coupe for our enemies but that is the price of failed planning and must be accepted and corrected. The whole Iraq debacle has been a huge disaster for our country and our military. It is time to regroup and move forward. The Brits did ok after recovering from Dunkirk. Oh a good first step might be to get a chap named Osama. Surely you remember him?

SFASU7392
HAHA!

The libs would be whining about going to war with Germany when it was the Japanese that attacked PH!

I can hear it now:

"NO war for Jews." (Always a big hits with libs)

"NO two ocean war. Our military is stretched too thin."

"NO war for __________"

SSGTRET
"Hal, remember that I work at a VA hospital and our budget is an average increase of 7 million a year just at our facility. That is an increase, Hal. And my care here is Outstanding."

But Far from fully funding and you must know access and appeal is a problem

Robert
I am for deaths under torture

sad sack
Quote;
jammer writes: Monday, July, 09, 2007 2:15 AM
A Sad State of Affairs
Loyal Muslim's comments are so close to the truth that it's sad. We have the DemocRAT political party engaged in high treason against the United States. End Quote.
I wonder just how many of those "DemoRats are soldiers fighting for your sorry A-- in Iraq.
jammer wants to do some name calling him/her and the rest of the Bushican's have came to the right place.

Robert
Hal Donahue writes: Monday, July, 09, 2007 10:34 AM
Robert
I am for deaths under torture

I had better correct that to read properly:

I am that much of an internationalist when it comes for deaths by torture. By our own statistics over 30 prisoners have died during interrogation

Robert
So following your Am Civili War logic, we should stay in Iraq so they don't go Jim Crow and we have to come back stronger. Bush should sign you up.

Sick Sick Sick
Quote;
MohammadLiedPeopleDied writes: Monday, July, 09, 2007 10:35 AM
Gitmo Poems

72 virgins for me, hee hee, hee hee, hee hee.

Achmad only gets 20, for him it will be plenty.

When we’re done, we’ll have some fun,

In a three way with Nancy Palosi.End Quote.

Have you ever considered getting some Psychiatric help? I think you need it.


Black Dog
Huh, I thought I made it perfectly clear.

Reagan sent terrorists like Khaddafi a message even while people like Farrakhan were lining up to kiss his a**.

Bush sent Saddam and ultimately others a message by whipping thier butts and tossing them out of Kuwait.

Klintoon did nothing. He treated Global terrorism like it was a law enforcement problem. He ignored The Sudan's offer of OBL not once, not twice, but three times! He ignored FAA warnings on Atta and his group. He cut and run from Somalia encouraging OBL.

Did I forget anything? Is this easier for you to comprehend or shoud I use crayon?

GIVE HARRY REID A ONE WAY TICKET TO IRAN
H.REID,NANCY P.& HER SAN FRANCISCO BUTTIES NEED TO TAKE SOME OF THERE BONGS AND GET ON THE WAY TO IRAN, THEY WILL LOOK GOOD WITH ALL OF THERE BUTTIES OVER THERE, THEY LOVE THAT COUNTRY SO MUCH, THEY WILL GET SOME GOOD STUFF FROM THERE BUTTIES, A BASKET TO PUT THERE NEW FACE LIFT, THEN A GOOD HANGING BY THERE FEET FROM THE NEAREST BRIDGE, BECAUSE THERE HEADS WILL BE SENT TO AIR ON THE BBC&CNN, GO ,GO ,GO ,YOUR WHITE FLAG WILL NOT SAVE YOU AFTER YOU SAY, WE GIVE UP, WE WILL BE GOOD TOWARD MOHAMAD, SO GO GO GO

Distortion
While Democarts like Reid apparently can't see the positive aspects of Sunni tribal leaders(formerly known as insurgents, or even terrorists by those who like to use the word generically) now working with US forces to marginalize foreign jihadists in Anbar, most of the so-called conservatives in Congress and on this board seem to think that Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds will somehow suddenly come together in an organized fashion that will allow for the chaos to subside in these lands.

It's time to realize that Bush and his crew, as well as Reid are basically clueless when it comes to not only Iraq, but the entire region.

Lugar and Biden are probably the most knowledgeable and informed members of Congress regarding Iraq. Bush should empower them to help strategize a deployment of US forces to Kurdistan, while continuing to concentrate on stabilizing Baghdad and turning regional security over to local forces, even if that means local militias. But Bush has no vision, so there likely won't be any bi-partisan effort to find better and longer lasting solutions.

SSGTRET
"But Far from fully funding and you must know access and appeal is a problem". And your point is? Since when has the federal government fixed its problems in a timely manner."

Actually quite a few times the government delivered services in a timely and often adequate manner. The military, the WW II GI bill for a starter. Medicare works well when funded. I can go on. Just because this Regime is completely incompetant don't assume they all are.

"I hate to say this to ya Hal, cause I like Ya, but you need to be a little more positive with the good that is being done. Its a heck of alot better now, then it was 10 years ago. Common, Hal. "

Is it? See there I am at a handicap but I am told by users that the VA under Clinton was a world premier success. I was not involved with veterans then but I do know one thing that many people forget. An old RAF Squadron Commander of mine said: "Hal, you young yanks so often forget that the perfect is often the enemy of the good." VA by every account that I hear and those are many is superb. Access and appeal are growing pronblems

Black Doofus
I concur with the other posters. You are indeed, thunderously stupid.

Next time you see America's worst POTUS, while building sh*tty homes for the poor, tell him that Ahmadinejad and the Islamic Radicals thank him for giving them a country to sponsor terrorism from. Step One from "Milestones."

Robert
For example, when al-Qaeda hit the USS Cole, Bubba sent over FBI agents to investigate vice bombing the p*ss out of their training camps.

When he DID act, he shot a cruise missile into an empty aspirin factory in the Sudan, after giving three hours notice, and then paid reparations for blowing it up.

SSGTRET
You are correct. I actually had to get a few statements BEFORE I retired to update my medical records! How many millions of vets separate not knowing that? How many of them sat throuh a brief, ignoring that information thinking that they'll never need it?

This goes back to WW2 so I'd have to call it FDR's and Truman's fault.

Black Doofus
Actually, that policy was in place before Reagan but having your head so far up your alimentary canal would prevent you from knowing that.

Reagan ended Khaddafi's little reign of terror, he worked AGAINST Communism in Nicaragua, without committing troops BTW, and he ultimately defeated Communism at Reyjavik when he walked away from the SALT talks, much to the squealings and whinings from you libturds!

I know that racists like you have trouble understanding facts and logic but do try to keep up with the thread.

SSGTRET
"Now you sound like Reid! Under Klintoon, good. Under Bush, bad. That is just absolutely pathetic, Hal. Poor Poor Vets not getting help. Admit IT! Hal. There are NAM VETS still trying to get service connections. BUSHY's FAULT???"

Sure I will admit it. But I am told that the VA right now is being inundated with cases and not being funded. Bush? Yes! Do not forget this is Bush's war the least he could do is properly fund it. He has not and is even making the soldiers pay by cutting their support services etc. That is the part that confuses me so much. This conservative "pro Military and pro War" site says they support the troops but do not demand full funding to meet their needs. Shop away....

SSGTRET
I think that Hal gets too much Thorazine to get a grip. He's been posting the S.O.S. for two or three YEARS now.

Of course!
Of course they want to pull out. The reason is this war and the ME are beyond their limited IQ along with many posters on this board.

Be careful what you wish for Dems and RINO's. If you pull out you will get more war than you can handle.

Notice these idiots who want to quit have no answers as to what to do with Iran and Syria?

As far as I am concerned 95% of Congress are posers. They pretend to be smart when in actuality they are a bunch nit wits who give new meaning to corruption and selfish.

Robert said it all....
"It probably doesnt matter now because the movement would replace him; but not killing OBL in the first year or so after 9/11 was a dreadful mistake.

BTW stopping 9/11 was a law enforcement issue."

ThighMaster
He's using the NY SLimes as a source since he and Dopey Sulzberger have the same opinion concerning American troops.

That is, they both hope that they get shot by the enemy.

SSGTRET
And after all these years you guys still do not support the troops. But the point is made

Black Dog Doofus
You say history is going to judge Bush badly? What would you know? Obvious to your posts you know nothing of history. Thanks for making me laugh!

P.S. As to your complaining about Reagan and Lebanon he pulled out for two reasons. 1) He didn't want to get involved in a civil war. Isn't that what you libtards accuse Bush of doing in Iraq? 2) He knew how to keep his eyes on the bigger end game. Communist Russia. Much bigger threat to us and Europe.

Black Doofus
As one who lived through that debacle, let me clue you in.

First of all, Jimmy the Poofter Carter did not like the Shah for his supposed human rights violations.

Second, Jimmy the Poofter then refuses to aid said Shah.

Third, the Shah, seeing no other avenue, basically abdicates to the Ayatollah in order to avoid widespread violence.

Fourth, the Ayatollah proceeds to kill more Iranians in ONE YEAR than the Shah did in 25 YEARS! So much for human rights.

Fifth, Jimmy the Poofter allows 52 Americans to remain in an Iranian prison for 444 days. Talk to one of them and see how the accomodations were.

Sixth, Jimmy the Poofter exhibited to the world America's lack of resolve, when led by a L1MPD*CK!

Now, print this out, roll it up, stuff it into your crackpipe and smoke it. Then maybe it'll be able to follow that twisted path in the mind of every libstain and find a spot to roost.

Black Dog
Until this incompetent Carter was hands down the worst president we ever had...

Hal Donahue
LOL!

What point is made, that you're high on drugs and in a loony bin?

I'm going overt there TO SUPPORT the troops and the mission.

DO try not to stab me in the back while I'm gone.

the will of the people
because of the incompetence of this president in prosecuting this war, the american people in poll after poll say by 66% they want a time line for withdrawl from this mess.

conservatives screamed for a month about Congress ignoring the "will of the People" when it came to immigration, but now they imply the people are stupid and only they (warmongering conservatives) know what is best for the american people and America.

hypocrites

Black Dolt
Yep, it's ALWAYS better to do the Dhimmicrat thing and let an ally twist in the wind. You all are SOOOOOOOO good at it.

Bay of Pigs.

Vietnam.

Iran.

Iraq...probably.

Cut and Run, that's the Dhimmicrat way.

GunnyG
"I'm going overt there TO SUPPORT the troops and the mission.

DO try not to stab me in the back while I'm gone."

You are going as a mercenary for money and I will do my best to get you guys out of there.

Lolo I agree with you
"As to your complaining about Reagan and Lebanon he pulled out for two reasons. 1) He didn't want to get involved in a civil war. Isn't that what you libtards accuse Bush of doing in Iraq? 2) He knew how to keep his eyes on the bigger end game. Communist Russia. Much bigger threat to us and Europe."

And the Bush Regime is doing the exact opposite and our army is being dismantled in the desert while our enemies grow stronger

SFASU7392
Ashcroft downgraded counterterrorism as an FBI mission and during Sep was more concerned with curtains to cover bare breasts.

Enjoy
Off folks be well and enjoy the day

SFASU7392
Feel free the truth is the truth. By definition he is a mercenary. Why do you find that offensive?


Clinton actually beefed up counterterrorism as an FBI mission

N/A
Why would I want to debate you? Complete and utter waste of time. My fence post has more intelligence than you. I must of touched a nerve in you though. GOOD! Your post was so garbled and ridiculous apparently through your anger you couldn't form coherent thought.

Hal Donohue
The circumstances of the so called civil war in Iraq are totally different than Lebanon. The flash point start of Iraq was the bombing of the Golden Mosque by Al Qaida backed by Iran. Notice every time we start making headway they bomb it again? Al Qaida and Iran are utilizing the ignorance of the Iraqi's and using Mookie Al Sadr. Boy did Bremmer ever blow it there. Al Qaida has to be given credit. they are using our history against us. they know if they sucessfully start a civil war we will pull out like Nam. Iraqi govt. with their case of the slows is not helping that either.

lolo
the shia-sunni civil war goes back 1000 years.

alqieda and iran will be dealt with by the iraqis.

that is what is happening in the anbar province.
iraqis hate foreigners of any kind.

Withdrawal
I read the headline and immediately thought Reid had decided to bring back the Immigration Bill for further debate and was demanding a phased withdrawal from the Gadsden Purchase and the SouthWestern Territories: Texas, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, California, and New Mexico.

TraLeftist traitors
Even before we went into Afghanistan, the Left was screaming that it was a quagmire and was making comparisons to Viet Nam. That is all forgotten now, unless they are successful in undermining the Iraq campaign. We will see Afghanistan in the news again as an un-winnable war.

General Petraus received unanimous approval from the US Senate upon his confirmation to take over command of the Iraqi theater. The VERY next day Reid and his cronies undermined the General’s strategy to increase military operations against the enemy. To quote Reid, “The war is lost!” So much for allowing the operation to proceed and then assessing the results at the end. The brainwashed Left stands behind these traitors because they are blind to these actions. These actions demoralize the GOOD GUYS (that would be the US soldiers et.al.) and embolden and encourage the enemy (the ones who behead helpless victims, burn civilians, kill and murder children all while screaming “Allah Akubar!”)
The Leftist leaders who have stolen the Democratic party from the visions of JFK, FDR and the like need to be thrown onto the trash heap of history with their fellow comrades from the debunked USSR.
You can not use logic and facts to argue with these people. Facts that indicate the “surge” (translation – reinforcements) are causing things to improve in Iraq are useless on these brainwashed, brain-dead leftist autotron.

taking longer than WWII
We would have won this war a long time ago; if we had faught it with the commitment we had in WWII.

Our military cannot fight and win with one hand tied behind their back. (If Billory gets in, they will have to fight with both hands tied!)

I'll try again: Bush or Iraq?
Well, I see nobody attempted to respond to my little thought experiment. Perhaps everybody thought I was being facetious. But I wasn't. I was being deadly serious.

I really want to get a clear reading here: Are we trying to save the Iraq War from defeat or are we trying to save the Bush Administration from repudiation?

Because those are NOT the same things.

If Bush and Cheney believe with all their heart that the Iraq War must be won, then they should want it to be won EVEN IF they're not in power leading it anymore. Hence I still propose a "Grand Bargain": The Congress fully funds the war through January 2009 on the condition that Bush and Cheney resign and turn the country over to some other Chief Executive who has a chance of getting popular support for it.

I don't want to see America defeated in Iraq. But NOT at the price of having to carry water for the Bush Administration anymore. THEY'RE NOT WORTH IT.

religious lib
Why in the HE double hockey stick tell me something I don't know. That was a really dumb statement on your part. Who is exploiting the conflict between the Shia and Sunni, not to mention creating more conflict where none existed before? AL QAIDA AND IRAN!!!! Why in the heck do you think the Sunni tribes got on board with Petraeus in Anbar province?! They copped a clue and so should you. That conflict isn't as great as made out to be btw, since they inter-marry quite a bit. Oddly enough the Kurds actually frown more upon inter-marriage than the Shia and Sunni.

SteveL
since you seem to get a little ticked when no one answers you I will. The answer is Iraq. Bush has little to do with it.

lolo
again you are misinformed.

you are buying into what bush is selling and he has been wrong from day 1 about this war and everyone now realizes it but you.

do some studying, those who intermarried are among the 2 million who have fled along with the christians.

the sunnis are simply using petraeus to get rid of foreigners and when they drive them out they will use our weapons on us.

sheesh.

SteveL
BTW your plan is not the only viable option and quite frankly orbits Mars. It's not about carrying water, that is a side issue.

war supporters
In war, as in all life's endeavor's, timing is everything. You often have exactly one shot at doing the right thing, at the right time, for the outcome to be favorable. The Iraq war has been mismanaged from the outset -- including the decision to wage it at all -- but having attacked, what might have been difficult, but manageable issues, if dealt with in timely fashion, have now grown out of control. These issues were well known, and the proper responses described in detailed preplanning such as that done by the Army War College, but the administration ignored and actively discounted what would have been necessary. It is now a case of too little, too late. The country is going up in flames. It's like trying to stop a 1,000 square-mile forest fire two weeks after it starts, when it should have been taken care of immediately while still small and manageable. You have a window of opportunity, and if you lose it, you simply do not have the resources to do anything but retreat to a safe distance and monitor the conflagration. That's what we have in Iraq -- thanks to this administration's total mismanagement of the war from start to finish.

As just one indication, everyone understands it is critical for the Iraqis, through the Iraqi Parliament, to start making decisions and leading the country. What’s happening? Oh – they aren't even willing to talk to one another! Nothing is getting done, and nothing will get done. It's just setting the stage for some group -- undoubtedly of one sectarian stripe or another -- who is willing to make those decisions. Here is a related NPR discussion:

NPR's Debbie Elliott: John, the Iraqi Parliament has been working on a new oil law for the country, and members of the U.S. Congress have been demanding progress on this issue. Any progress to report?

NPR's John Burnett: "Well, Washington wants to see the Iraqi Parliament approve several pieces of important legislation as benchmarks to prove that they can make progress toward political power sharing, so in the last week there has been a lot of activity around a new oil law. Iraq sits on top of the world's third largest oil reserves, and the Parliament has to decide how all three ethnic groups here -- the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds -- will share that oil wealth, and then how much participation they'll allow in the oil industry by foreign companies; so, you can imagine this is an incredibly sensitive issue because billions of dollars in oil revenues are at stake, but the oil law -- it's going nowhere fast, because they can't even get a quorum. Shiite politicians loyal to the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, have boycotted the Parliament, saying the oil law is unfair, and then the largest block of Sunni politicians is also boycotting the Parliament over an unrelated issue; so add to that a fatwa, or religious edict, was issued this week by the association of Muslim scholars, which opposes the American presence in Iraq. They declared that whoever who votes for the proposed law 'will be exposed to God's wrath.'"

Another indication is whether it is working for individual man-in-the-street Iraqis. Not even close, as the following NPR discussion shows:

NPR's John Ydsti: "In Iraq, widespread unemployment is creating hopelessness and resentment against the United States. Joblessness in Baghdad is estimate at 60 percent."

Iraqi Mahadi Muhammad: "There is no work at all. I'd say three-quarters of Baghdad is unemployed. We are afraid to leave our houses because there is no security. We hear about dead bodies turning up daily. So how can I work safely?"

NPR's John Burnett: "It's a long-standing tradition in Iraq for applicants to pay a bribe for a good job. According to locals, $500, for instance, buys a job at the Ministry of Interior, or a cellphone company."

Hider Rahad, an unemployed Iraqi teacher: "There are fixed prices, just like buying a tomato or a cucumber. They should print the going rate in a newspaper."

Iraqi Muhammad Ali: "If I cannot find a job, and somebody offers me $500 to bury a roadside bomb, I would do it. I have no money, and I have a wife and child to support, so what do I do?

Muhammad, a part-time Iraqi taxi driver: "Five guys take a car, drive around Baghdad, kidnap someone, and ask for $50,000 in ransom. That's what the people are doing for work. Iraq is filled with people who are doing this."

Captain Jason Lewis: "Well, I mean, you can see the desperation is acute."

What a monumental catastrophe! -- none of which had to be, save the total bungling of the war from start to finish by an incompetent and arrogant Republican administration. We, and the world, are going to pay dearly in the coming years for this foreign policy nightmare.


religious lib
Don't presume to lecture me as to what I am buying into by the Bush administration. You have no idea what your talking about. I lived in the ME for three years, how about yourself? Your buying into the overblown MSM bs. You haven't a clue as to what your talking about. You haven't a clue to the culture there.

SHEESH RIGHT BACK AT YOU LIBTARD!!!

religious lib
BTW since when are you clairvoyant? How do you know what's going to happen with Petreaus and the Sunni's in Anbar?

What?
>Oddly enough the Kurds actually frown more upon inter-marriage than the Shia and Sunni.

Kurds ARE Shia and Sunni, mostly Sunni. They likely oppose inter-marriage with Arabs.

Pancho
You are incorrect. That's like calling an Armenian a Russian. Ridiculous.

Hi thighmaster!
How are ya? No they won't implement the Fairness Doctrine on that. They only want to silence what doesn't work to their advantage.

thighmaster
Life is good! Except I'm a little nervous because my youngest just got her driver's license! Everybody park your cars! LOL!

thighmaster
You smoke pot? Yeah right, and I got a big red bridge to sell ya! Suck it up buttercup, of course the knuckle prints in the dash seriously de-value the car. LOL!

thighmaster
LMAO!!!! Luckily this my last! Any forthcoming grandchildren(not for a long time I hope)are strictly on their own!

Trust me you and your wife invest in a boat load of hair dye! Of course I did that when they all became teengagers. Teenagers, I am firmly convinced, are God's way of humbling us and our parents way of getting even!

Bring in Generals Ernesto & Giulio Gallo
And the Middle East will cease to be a problem in a matter of a few years. It worked once before in our history. Heh heh. (Ducks)

Lolo is ridiculous
Kurds, Armenians, Arabs and Russians are enthnic or national groups.

Shia and Sunni are religious sects of Islam.

Are you always this dense?

No One?
>But no one on the democratic side has a clue on fighting radical muslims either.<

Well, at least Biden has presented a reasonable alternative to the Iraq debacle. There has been some bipartisan support. Unfortunately, Reid is a moron, like most of the rest of the Senate.

There or Here
We as the people of America have a choice. The Democrats, for their own political gain, have done everything they can to sabotage this war. They are a complete disgrace. I have never voted Democrat and I never will so long as I live. But here is the choice, the terrorist have said it. Either we win the war and let our troops do their job or we come home and mark my word the terrorists will follow. Either we fight them there or we fight them here. It is our choice.

For Black Dog
Reagan withdrew from Lebanon because the Democrats who controlled Congree refused to authorize their continued presence there.

Throughout the Marines' deployment in Lebanon the Dems kept insisting that Reagan must invoke the War Powers Act, which would require Congressional authorization for any deployment of troops in harms way after 90 days. Reagan held out against that for months, arguing that the troops were not in harms way. He could not plausibly argue this after 241 marines (not 300 as you allege) were killed by a truck bomb.

Reagan was forced to withdraw from Lebanon by the Democrats who controlled Congress.

The Democrats liked this power so much they subsequently refused to authorize funding for the "Contra" rebels in Nicaragua. Mind you, the funding was not for the US to send troops, only to help the Contras buy weapons and ammunition. It was only this refusal to fund a group of surrogates (allies, actually) that were helping us fight worldwide communism that Reagan and/or his people sold weapons to Iran (to which you have alluded) and used that funding to help the Contras.

BTW - your assertion that Reagan funded OBL in Afghanistan is incorrect. You have been misled on that one by a common liberal lie. OBL did not fight in Afghanistan. He went there after the Soviet withdrawal and recruited some of the mujahadeen that fought the Soviets and had US training and weapons. OBL himself was never a recipient of US aid or training.

The reality of war in the US since 1950 is that most wars have been started by Democrats and ALL wars are ended by Republicans. In this regard war is like racism. The Republicans are always fixing what the Democrats break, and guys like you end up blaming the Republicans because you're dissatisfied with the fix.

The left even blamed Bush41 for not deposing Saddam in 1991 after chasing him out of Kuwait. Once again you can thank the Democrats in Congress, whose resolution authorizing Bush41 to use our military, issued with the shadow of "Irangate" over his head, strictly limited him to "reversing Iraq's occupation of Kuwait".

It's like Paul Newman told Sally Field in the movie "Absence of Malice", "You can't just write down what you read or see or overhear. You don't come by the truth that easily."

It doesn't matter what Reid does
Everyone knows that we are going to begin the exit from the Iraq debacle next year at the latest. The republicans who need to run for reelection next year just see the handwriting on the wall and the message is: GET OUT!!!! YOU DOLTS LOST THE WAR!!! STOP GETTING OUR KIDS, HUSBANDS, AND WIVES KILLED OVER THERE FOR NO REASON!!!

Bush is just trying to buy as much time as possible to hope for some success from the surge. Everyone knows that the surge can't be sustained beyond next spring. The army and marines are already broken and troop levels in country will have to start falling by then.

The ever disingenuous lying Bush will reach new heights of spin when he announces this later this year. He will claim it shows how successful his policy has been, even though all but fools will see it has been a disaster. He will keep his fingers crossed and hope the full nature of the catastrophe that befalls Iraq once this happens occurs after the election on someone else's watch.

Meanwhile our troops are dying over there for nothing. Unless you count helping Bush put off withdrawal and defeat until he leaves office as something they should be happy to die for. You'd have to be pretty dumb to think that was worth dying for. But I hear they have drastically lowered standards for recruitment lately. Must be true.

No
Wrong again liberals. YOU have done everything to sabitoge this war effort all for Democratic political gain. You start endless investigations, no-confidence votes, delay funding, disrespect our commanders, and say we have lost over and over again. And then there are your allies in the media. They report only bad news, only the American body count. Never hear about the emeny body count or any progress such as our victories in Abnar provience. No to you its all a game. You claim to care about our troops but not the mission, well you can't separate them.

Why don't you offer ideas to win this war instead. Take the gloves off our military and let them do their job. But no, that might effect your election plans and your self-rightous we love everyone crap. I am so tired of watching our military fight for our freedom while the people at home complain, the war has cost them nothing! Our military and their families want to win this and we should let them and stop embolding the enemy, because they do keep track of our media.

If you don't want the war, then find, call you congressmen/women, and all the senators. Tell them and get them to cut the funds just like we stopped amnesty. Just do it, but mark my words we either fight them over there or we fight them here. The choice is yours and they will follow us home to destory the paper tiger great satan.

Drew
Unfortunately, the "we fight them there or we fight them here" truth will not fly in the national discourse until the MSM continue being the DNC's b!tch.

Whatever we do, the Dems will find a way to blame Bush and Conservatives.

Guys, let's wake up to this reality: to Libs, there is no war on radical Islam. America is the only active agent in every single problem in the world, and all the more so under a hated Republican administration.

Thus, only political opponents are the enemy, and their sights are set on them, with monomaniacal fervor.

Mark my words: if all it took for them to consolidate their hold of congress and win 8 years in the White House was a lost war, a stronger Al Q'eda, an American city obliterated by a dirty nuke or the annihilation of Israel, they would gleefully go along with any or all of the above. The end justifies the means, as theorized Machiavelli 500 years ago.

Don't believe my words. Believe the history of the last 6 years. Only a child could not see the syllogism: War belongs to Bush. We lose the war. Bush loses (=we win). And only a child could not see the dogged determination with which they have done their darned best to follow their doctrine.

These guys are literally sick. Meanwhile, while radical Islam gets more brazen, more sophisticated, more widespread and more barbaric, they get hysterical about their pet "designer's issue," global warming. They are deranged, and that sick messiah of lunacy Al Gore embodies all that I loathe about Liberalism.

Fortunately, though, in spite of the sick symbiosis between the MSM and the DNC, people have other means of information--and they stay informed. You idiots, you won't ever be able to fool a nation the way you did in the '60s.

That's why the Lib congress has an approval rating even lower than the IQ of Michael Moore.

Don't believe me?
Look at the lib posters here.

God, even a whiff of victory in Iraq would make them queasy. We *must* lose, or else all their effort in the past 6 years goes up in smoke. Then, by God, we'll get Bush!

From RON PAUL


From RON PAUL September 12, 2001 after the 9/11 attacks

Did President Bush and lawmakers make a mistake by not listening to Ron Paul when he said “killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security”?

NightVision-Yesterday, Americans were awakened to find ourselves in a war, attacked by barbarians who targeted innocent civilians. This despicable act reveals how deep-seated is the hatred that has driven this war.

Though many Americans have just become aware of how deeply we are involved in this war, it has been going on for decades. We are obviously seen by the terrorists as an enemy.

In war there is no more reprehensible act than for combatants to slaughter innocent civilian bystanders. This is what happened yesterday.

If there is such a thing, a moral war is one that is only pursued in self-defense. Those who initiate aggression against others for the purpose of occupation or merely to invoke death and destruction are unforgivable and serve only to spread wanton killing.

In our grief, we must remember our responsibilities. The Congress’ foremost obligation in a constitutional republic is to preserve freedom and provide for national security. Yesterday our efforts to protect our homeland came up short. Our policies that led to that shortcoming must be reevaluated and changed if found to be deficient.

When we retaliate for this horror we have suffered, we must be certain that only the guilty be punished. More killing of innocent civilians will only serve to flame the fires of war and further jeopardize our security. Congress should consider its constitutional authority to grant letters of marque and reprisal to meet our responsibility.

Demanding domestic security in times of war invites carelessness in preserving civil liberties and the right of privacy. Frequently the people are only too anxious for their freedoms to be sacrificed on the altar of authoritarianism thought to be necessary to remain safe and secure. Nothing would please the terrorists more than if we willingly give up some of our cherished liberties while defending ourselves from their threat.

It is our job to wisely choose our policies and work hard to understand the root causes of the war in which we find ourselves.

We must all pray for peace and ask for God’s guidance for our President, our congressional leaders, and all America- and for the wisdom and determination required to resolve this devastating crisis.

READ MORE

http://www.controlcongress.com


Thank you, John
For reminding us periodically of why Ron Paul should never be president.

SFASU7392
I have read some of Black Dog's historical (hysterical?) revisionism, but I didn't know it was that bad.

Before he got his butt sent packing from the UK, Ted Kennedy's old man, Joseph, made the family fortune as a head of organized crime (bootlegging) during prohibition. He was so good at eluding (and bribing) federal enforcement agencies that when FDR created the Securities and Exchange Commission he named Joe Kennedy its first chair, explaining "It takes a thief to catch a thief", or words to that effect.

There is no doubt that the effort to defeat Hitler would have been much harder without Stalin's Russia. It might have even failed.

On the other hand, they would be speaking German in Moscow to this day if Russia didn't get help from the US, the UK, the Aussies, and the battalions from France, Poland, and Belgium that survived Hitler's Blitzkreig of Europe and made the trip across the channel from Dunkirk.

Does Black Dog have any idea how many British and American merchant seaman died in the icy cold North Atlantic after being torpedoed by German U-boats while trying to deliver war goods to the Russians at Murmansk? Has he ever heard of Murmansk? Does he know what a convoy is?

And we will never know whether Hitler would have had such an easy time conquering mainland Europe in 1939 and 1940 if Stalin hadn't first made a pact with this monster.

And it's not like the Russians were making some heroic sacrifice to fight Hitler. They were mostly defending their own homeland (at first) and then grabbing more land for their revolution.

Compare this with the Aussies, who spent all of 1942 and 1943 under real threat of invasion of their homeland by the Japanese, yet had the courage to offer substantial troops to help their motherland (UK) fight Hitler and Rommel in North Africa and Italy.

Stalin's Russia my butt.

You have got to be kidding
>And it's not like the Russians were making some heroic sacrifice to fight Hitler.<

Qualifies as one of the most ignorant atatements ever, historically speaking.

Look, Will
There's nothing childish in calling out what your party has been doing for the last 6 years. Don't give me a line on serious dialogue, because for this to take place, all you libs should start answering a simple question:

Do you want to win in the fight against radical Islam, or do you not?

Then, tell me how your party has gone about winning. And after you're done with that, explain to me how judicial hamstringing, leaking National security information, standing for CAIR, wanting to close Guantanamo, calling our troops murderers, nazis and mercenaries and cheerleading for defeat fits in the "victory" scheme.

Until then, shut up. We see through your BS, and we're fed up with it.

Hi Hal Donahue
I'm doing very well. Thanks for asking. Hope you are doing well too.


Pancho
Words have meanings. Look them up.

Stalin and his countrymen sat on their fat behinds while Hitler ran amok through the rest of Europe, secure in the belief that their deal with Hitler (the two countries were going to conquer the world and divvie it up between them) would keep them safe until they were ready to finish off Chiang Kai-Shek and claim a share of China (the rest would go to the Japanese, who had been invading the SE Asian mainland since the early 1930's).

Sure, individual Russians fought heroicly for Russia, but as a nation the Russians did next to nothing for anyone but Russia. The Russians were not heroes in WWII. Their interest was entirely self-serving as was evidenced by the fact that Stalin began annexing conquered lands, including non-German lands, practically before the ink was dry at Yalta.

But that's OK, you and Black Dog just keep writing your new liberal history of the world. Someday Hollywood will make a series of movies about it, like Star Wars. Except that Star Wars is more believable than what you guys will write. More entertaining too.

Will, it is truly amazing
You and I can see plain as day the last throes of the lying spin masters of the Bush administation and exactly how it is going to play out.

True conservatives like Hagel, Warner, Lamar Alexander, Domenici, Judd Gregg, Lugar and Voinovich and many others now see the failure of the Bush administration and patriotically want to do what they can to help patch up the mess.

Its just amazing that there are still a few dimwits with their heads so far up their you know whats to see the truth.

I feel like a genius, or at least clairvoyant. I predicted the day Bush announced his surge policy right here on TH that within 6 to 9 months he'd be back talking about the Iraq Study group recommendations as a "new" Plan B. And here we are. Right on schedule, or perhaps even a bit early. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out Bush is a fool. What IS amazing is that there are still people out there who are too stupid to realize what a fool he is and how much damage he and Cheney have done.

Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush
Thank you for proving our point, Slacker.

You guys are like a broken record.

Your party has become like a sick, old cur, who barks at the family cat while ignoring the intruders who are threatening to burn the place down.

The enemy is OVER THERE!!!!!

Slacker, you genious you
Why don't you tell us how you and your moronic party are planning on defeating radical Islam?

That would be a first, BTW. So far, all we've heard is (guess?) how much you hate Republicans. Hint: we want to win the war too, we can care less about Bush. You guys are the partisans, not we.

Only, we haven't heard a peep from you on this subject, besides sophomoric self-congratulation after you have done your best to derail our effort or spin our successes into setbacks.

We are all ears. Tick... Tick... Tick...

Nothing? Aawww. Well, can't say I didnt' try.

A typical idiot rant....
Drew says he is ...

"... so tired of watching our military fight for our freedom while the people at home complain, the war has cost them nothing! Our military and their families want to win this and we should let them... "

And what, pray tell do you Mr. Genius Drew propose the military should do that Bush is not letting them do? What exactly has the military asked that Bush has not given them? Has Bush been lying when he said he was 100% behind the generals and would give them everything they need to "win"?

See how empty the brains of these few dead end TH nutcases are that can do nothing but whine and cry the mess in Iraq is all the democrats fault? Amazing!!!

Then as they snivel and shuffle off with nothing of any substance to say they come up with something like "we either fight them over there or we fight them here." How dim can you get?

Bush/Cheney and their policies by starting a war they couldn't finish or win created pure chaos in the ME. Bush created the training ground for the terrorists and so they could learn how to maintain an insurgency that kills Americans, ties our military in knots and destabilizes a country and milks its oil wealth to fund additional terrorism. The Iraq war has made us LESS safe from terrorism, not safer.

Just as Obama predicted when he was still in the Illinois legislature and before Bush invaded.

SFASU
Why would Black Doofus read up on WWII?

G W Bush was not around to blame back then. So their sectarian monomania wouldn't apply--therefore they are not interested.

Silly Voltaire ...
... You are so twisted in a knot by your own hatred of anyone that doesn't share the dementia of the fringe right wing that you can't even read.

I don't hate republicans. I explicitly listed quite a few that I actually admire: Hagel, Warner, Lamar Alexander, Domenici, Judd Gregg, Lugar and Voinovich. I would add Lindsay Graham to that list as well though I often disagree with him.

Before you spew your irrational hatred of anyone that doesn't see the world exactly the way you do, consider this: Maybe the reason you are in the minority is that you are wrong and the majority is right.

Wiseone
>Stalin and his countrymen sat on their fat behinds while Hitler ran amok through the rest of Europe<

As did the US.

>Sure, individual Russians fought heroicly for Russia<

So, words have meanings, but not when you use them? You talk about Stalin as if he were the only Russian. Russians, you know the people who fought the Nazis in the streets of St. Petersburg, Moscow and Volgograd in defense of their land, were every inch heroes.
So let's review your original statement:

>And it's not like the Russians were making some heroic sacrifice to fight Hitler<

Easy to say for you as an American who hasn't had a a foreign army set foot in your country since 1812. What would you know about defending your home?





Hey, Slacker
Yep, claiming you like a few RINOs makes you truly impartial. Uhu.

Your party does hate Republicans--so much so that they can't see the world in a clear fashion, theyr eyes have been watering so much after the 2000 election put that massive wedgie up your collective hind ends. Talk about something being twisted in a knot. ;-)

You can call my views "irrational hatred" all you want, I couldn't give any less of a darn.

What it does is it proves our point: you have no arguments. The question is and has been for 6 years: how do you defeat radical Islam? Hint: for them to lose, Western civilization would have to (gasp!) win!

The truth is that you have no plan, because you don't give a fig. As long as a Democrat is in office, the world is right with you, no matter how rotten things are. With a Dem in power, you can stick a smiley on problems the way Clinton did in the '90s, and que sera sera.

So, hey, why give a hoot about radical Islam when we can work full-time to get a Dem elected?

The difference between you and us is this: realize we are at war and come up with a good plan to *win* and we'll follow you gladly. Keep being a water-carrier for your political party while deluding yourself with your Global Warming poppicock and your "have you hugged a Muslim today?" plans, and we'll keep considering you part of the problem.

And part of the problem is precisely what you've been for the last 6 years, regardless of what you may want to tell yourselves.

If you don't want to win, get out
The war was mismanaged from the start. Not enough troops to secure the country at the end of the "war", not enough to secure the country now. The surge is too little too late and the rules of engagement turns US troops into cops and are afraid if they make a mistake and kill some so-called innocent they will be placed in irons and put on trial for murder.

Bush has no plan for victory and is simply putting US troops in harms way without the tools to win. Under these conditions, I think it is time to go. And before you blast me as a liberal--Michael Savage holds the same view.

Akagi,
I'd defer that judgment to the Generals. I think that we, as a nation, are too prone to be backseat drivers.

So far, we are making improvements, and we are controlling up to 40% of Baghdad. That, plus the fact that the majority of the country is under control, is proof that things are not going as disastrously as the DNC/MSM would want us to know.

You see gloom, I see hope--the Generals see the truth. I trust them to do the right thing. Also, don't forget that we are not there to build a dam, we are there to stem Al Q'eda and their International supporters. We pull out, the message is clear.

Generals??
The CJCS said before the war that the troop levels were inadequate and Rumsfeld and Bush basically drove him out and there have been countless others that have said the same.

And what do you think would happen if the current set of leaders came forward and said the war was lost at least as a military objective?

The war is over. Just the shooting and killing hasn't yet. No matter who wins the election in 2008 (and seeing how bad the GOP is right now I am betting on the Dems), the next president will declare victory and bring the troops home--if Harry and Nancy and some Republican defecters don't end it sooner.

Ummm.... Akagi
The war is NOT over, as long as Al Q'eda is on the offensive.

We can't run from them. We must fight them, since they are fighting us. Also because when we do, without much political PC nonsense tying our hands, we give them a world of hurt.

Osama said it. The USSR was the toughest battle, because the feminized, weakened and divided USA would roll over like a puppy. Let's not prove him right.

So let's stop making this a political problem--it ain't. It's a Western problem, and a problem that we either get on top of real quick, or our whole civilization is toast.

Meanwhile,
The smaller minded among us are still obsessing about the '08 election, blinkered like the true draught-donkeys they are.

The generals
General Petraeus, as a counter terrorism expert, understands that the wanton killing of civilians is the absolute worse thing a foreign army can do in this type of conflict.

However, there are many here who have publicly expressed a desire to see the military abandon Petraeus's policy and "untie" the military's hands. There are many here who view all Muslims as enemies, despite the fact that Kurdistan has been a loyal ally from the beginning, and despite the fact that Bush opposes their long held dream of an independent Kurdish nation.

Pancho
The Japanese took Guam, Attu and Kiska--all US territory as well as Wake.

Roberto Mencia
Don't talk to me until you come up with a *winning* solution. I don't give a rat's proverbial about your (or anyone else's) monday-night quarterbacking. This is not an optional fight--we didn't start it, and our quitting it won't end it.


Democratic Wake Up Call
So you think that the Democrats got a wake up call over the 4th of July?

With their ratings dropping, and their lack of action on the Iraq war, it will be interesting to see what happens.

I doubt it very much that the Democrats will get rolled over a 2nd time. If they do, they'll suffer the consequences, however, the Republicans still haven't gotten the message at all.

If things remain the same, the Republicans will suffer more.

Administration Shaving Yardstick

Administration Shaving Yardstick for Iraq Gains


WAPO: The Iraqi government is unlikely to meet any of the political and security goals or timelines President Bush set for it in January when he announced a major shift in U.S. policy, according to senior administration officials closely involved in the matter. As they prepare an interim report due next week, officials are marshaling alternative evidence of progress to persuade Congress to continue supporting the war.

In a preview of the assessment it must deliver to Congress in September, the administration will report that Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province are turning against the group al-Qaeda in Iraq in growing numbers; that sectarian killings were down in June; and that Iraqi political leaders managed last month to agree on a unified response to the bombing of a major religious shrine, officials said.

Those achievements are markedly different from the benchmarks Bush set when he announced his decision to send tens of thousands of additional troops to Iraq. More troops, Bush said, would enable the Iraqis to proceed with provincial elections this year and pass a raft of power-sharing legislation. In addition, he said, the government of President Nouri al-Maliki planned to “take responsibility for security in all of Iraq’s provinces by November.”

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/administration-shaving-yardstick-for-iraq-gains

Iraq
The US launched a preemptive war by invading Iraq and most Americans feel this was a mistake and cost the GOP the Congress and it may very well cost it the White House.

If the US wanted to invade a country for its links to terrorism and WMD a number of others come to mind that were a much greater threat than Iraq--say DPRK or Iran for example.

This was a war of the US choosing and a war it really did not have to fight and is now paying the price. The US will withdraw and it will look like a defeat--like Vietnam, like Somalia, like Lebanon.

small minded fools
slacker you make me laugh, at first I was angry at your remarks, but now I see that you are a complete and utter imcompotent. You are also a fool and a RINO.

The liberals run around crying about civilans, and supposed torture and so on. We are in a war. We need to win. Has Bush done a great job, no I find him imcompotent too. Its the military I want to win. We need to listen to the commanders on the ground and crush the enemy. I would flatten that country till everyone got the idea we are playing for keeps instead of worrying about rules of engagement. That is how you win a war and its how we won WWII.

If you do believe we are incapible of winning then your right, we might as well surrender. Go on, call on the Congress, cut the funds. See what that gets you. We did not start this war, 9/11 did and if you have forgotten that, you an even big idiot than I thought.

One More Thing
I have been rereading most of the comments on this thread. It is a sad day for the USA, I only pray that our military is kept safe while this embrassment continues here at home. If so many of you hate this war and/or don't think we can win and you believe America is something like oh say 70% behind you then you should try to get the funding cut. Why is the congress afraid to do that, they are in the majority after all right? So cut all the funds, right now. That will force the president to bring them home.

Then we see what America really has to say about it. IF they are happy, fine, that's their choice. But I promise you, we will not see the end of it. They are going to come here and this is were we will have to fight it. So good luck to everyone, whatever you want.

ThighMaster
Which is what Conservatives have known all along.

But lest I get accused of using a plurale maiestatis by our local ticks here, let me say "which is what I have known all along."

;-)

Drew
You think our lib friends "forgot" 9/11? I think they remember it all too well--only, they believe the USA did it to herself, either directly (Rosie and pals) or indirectly (chicken coming home to roost).


Thigh
...or any liberal out there, for that matter.

Actually, no, I take it back
Liberals do care one way or the other what happens in Iraq. They positively have a phobia of winning, because they have bet all their political chips on loss.

Better a half-battered, weakened, defeated, threatened, ruined and culturally-destroyed America under a Democrat than a strong, proud, flourishing America under any other administration.

Yes, some of them do
The "saner" ones. The others think it was either an inside job or something we brought upon ourselves and deserve.

Lying to Ones Self
>This is not an optional fight--we didn't start it<

>We did not start this war, 9/11 did<


Pancho
Don't call me an idiot when your the one who posted nonsense. I only gave you an analogy. You quite frankly have no clue as to what you are saying.

thighmaster
I didn't ditch you the dang site went down!

I caught up on the all of the posts and I must admit both sides have valid arguments even when the info behind them is wrong. The trouble is the alternative to pulling out is horrible! Think Taliban with money. That's what Iraq will become. Petreaus isn't the problem. His surge is working but to what point since Maliki govt. is incompetent? Where do we go from here?

BTW I think that if this country stayed united that more than anything would have scared the heck out of the terrorists. I also think in the beginning we were greeted as heroes. Remember the Saddam statue coming down? Bremmer blew it big time and we are having a hard time recovering if it is even recoverable. Some mistakes aren't fixable.

Again...where do we go from here?

will
Okay that post was really funny LOL! I posted to you on the Barber thread.

everyone
JUST CURIOUS FOR ALL OF YOU THAT SEEM MORE INTERESTED IN INSULTING EVERYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH YOUR POINT OF VIEW. Is DISSENT from whomever is in office really treasonous? (This is only in reference to civilian dissent). And in answer to the unasked question, yes I come from a military family which contains both Liberals (anyone not in agreement with the current President and the GOP) and NeoCons (fascist, racist, religous fantics ). Just curious as to your what your ideas of freedom of speech for Americans are. Just checking to see what we are bleeding and dieing for.

Robert writes: Not everyone..
Thank you Robert for stating the obvious. ( not meant sarcastically). I have been reading this site and several others (both right and left) for a long time now and have been disappointed by how quickly commentary devolves into name calling. Also obvious and just for the record...For many, answering the call to serve is not for the party(whichever) BUT FOR AMERICA!!! and her values. Freedom of speech is not just for those that agree with your viewpts. but even for those that disagree. This may seem like preaching but there are alot of young men and woman out here that know of no other political discourse but..( "Not only do you not agree with me but you are evil and a traitor for not being on my side") please consider them the next time you choose to rant and rave on whatever subject and is this the America you are trying to present to them. Utopian hogwash I know, but one can hope. And now for some commentary on the article. There are three branches of government. When one of them chooses to exercise their constitution rights it is not treason but the rule of law. This is still a free country and not a petty dictatorship as much as some seem bent on changing it into one. There are/were more than enough good reasons for going into and positive things happening in Iraq to justify a war. But like in all wars there are political considerations and the excuse for failure in all wars is that the opposition didn't support the military. Right now the tide has turned and the support for this endeavor is gone. It seems foolish to think otherwise. We still have a lot of things to do so try to influence your legislators to think this through and leave as much as possible the partisan bickering out of it.

Let's Put the Following in a Bill
Bush ought to say: "I will sign your withdrawal bill, when you the Senate and House list in the bill all of you who voted for the war. Further, you Senators and Representatives pledge to resign the next time a terrorist plot is found in the US". The silence from the Senate and House would be deafening.

Harry Reid should be hoisted on a particular petard. He was all for being a hawk in the Clinton administration, when Foghorn Leghorn ran the military and all he had to worry about was depleting the military of cruise missiles. Now, he is opposed to the war. And he calls others "Chickenhawks". That is chickens**t is all it can be considered.

voltaire asks...what is the libs plan?
The problem is that because of the incompetence of this admin there are no good options. As I have said in the past, the best we can do is sit it out and react to events on the ground until the sects have fought it out.

Robert Asks Why Iraq?
Robert seems to be confused as to how we entered Iraq.

Simply, because America voted to do so. We are not a dictatorship. President Bush was voted into office, twice, for his performance. Additionally, three elections in a row he was given more Congressional seats to continue that effort. Add to that, Congress, after reviewing all other options, voted to give the President the support to enter Iraq.

President Bush did what what he was commissioned to do.

Unfortunately, whithout victory in sight, the American public turned in the last election. They want, still want and will reward, victory, not retreat.

Prior to 9/11 that effort into Iraq would not have been supported. Although, Iraq did not cause 9/ll, it was apparent to all, except maybe you and asleep others that were nearly invisible in Congress, that America could no longer allow similar anti-American zealots to fester without our serious response.

Turning our head to similar anti-American zealots cost us dearly. We learned a valuable lesson that ignoring such agressive people only encourages their commitment to our deaths.

Thus, we are in Iraq because America has decided not to bury our head in the sand, anymore, while anti-American zealots plot against us.

It may not be turning out to be so easy, but hard work and war tend to always be that way. So far, regardless of the difficulty, our shores have been safe since 9/11. I think America made the right choice.

WOW!
This thread has run amuck and it seems to me there are some people here flush with self importance. So if your so important why aren't you running the country and the war? Get over yourself. Foaming at the mouth solves nothing

BTW...the terrorists are here already.

Robert
Calm down. Your spinning just a bit and letting your temper override your intellect. There are some on here that really aren't smart, but I would not count you among them. I may disagree with you however. Unfortunately none of this is going to end whether we left Iraq alone or not. Iraq should of been handled long ago and did not get better with the keeping. Reminds me of chores. The longer they get put off the worse they get.Get ready for a long hard slog! May we have the patience of our forefathers.

Goodnight...talk to you tommorrow. Don't go to bed in a snit, it's not healthy!

Robert Still Confused
Robert offers, "... a minor nit...it was only two elections while Bush was sitting that the Congressional majorities increased...02 and 04...in 06 it decreased."

00, 02 and 04 it increased. As I said, three in a row supported Bush's performance via increases in the Congress.

Robert offers, "...had the people been told what the Army and Marines were telling Rummy, not what Rummy was telling the people...we would not have gone into IRAQ."

Congress and America had the same information, heard the same stories and made their decision.

Neither the "Army" nor the "Marines" argued against it. Anectdotally, maybe some voices disagreed, but, many voices were weighed, not just a chosen few. In the end, the predominate decision, in Conress, in the Whitehouse and in the Country was taken.

America went to Iraq on purpose, as a team.

Unfortunately, as with any war, it did not turn out to be as easy as other nearby conflicts.

The Democratic team, desparately needing some traction and seeing a weakness, tried to sew the "Bush lied, people died" to the gullible masses simply for votes. Many bought it and voted accordingly.

However, now that they are in office, no impeachment has been entertained. Simply because the "Bush lied, people died" mantra was nothing more than populist Kool-aide, a lie to get votes. It worked. You drank, you voted.

Do not get your hopes up for impeachment. Impeachment requires evidence. Thus, no impeachment. The real lie is in the kool-aide, but it has such a nice ring to it, "Bush lied, people died", "If the glove don't fit, you must aquit". Truth seems to take a back seat to populist mob mentality coaxed by rhimerics.

In the end, Democrats will get votes if no victory is in Iraq. And, Republicans will get votes if victory in Iraq is within reach. America will not settle for anything less.

Carpenter must have hit a nerve
This column sure gets the right wingnuts spinning like tops. They pull out all the stops with inanities like "untie the hands of our troops".... "fight them over there not over here"...

Since when has any general or any military leader in charge of significant operations in Iraq even HINTED that their hands are tied by Bush or anyone else? Come on. That argument is SO weak.

Or they whine, "we invaded Iraq so we don't have to fight Al Qaeda over here." What patent baloney. We have to worry about and protect ourselves over here from extremists regardless of what happens in Iraq! Fighting Al Qaeda was NEVER an argument for invading Iraq - it was all about phantom WMD, and removing a cruel dictator and establishing a beacon of democracy in the ME.

Get it through your thick skulls that fighting Al Qaeda is a side issue in Iraq and has always been a side issue. Most of the violence over there is a civil war between Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds over who controls the country, its culture, state sanctioned religion and - most of all - its vast oil wealth.

And what has Iraq become since the invasion? Even more of a chaotic failed state and training ground attracting would-be terrorists from all over the world to hone their skills. They learn IED and bomb making from the experts. They learn how to destabilize a country and keep it chaotic so the government can't function. They learn how to tie down our military by creating a civil war. They use the civil war to cripple and fully corrupt the government so they can funnel billions of dollars out of Iraqi oil revenues and US aid to fund additional terrorism all over the world.

Meanwhile Iran is licking its chops as Bush virtually hands them Iraq on a platter as a Shiite state to extend their influence over the Muslim world. Does anyone really think that the taste of western style democracy and "victory" over the chaos, instability and insecurity of Saddam's regime has is winning their hearts and minds over ordinary Iraqis?

These TH fools wring their hands like little babies crying that no one else has a plan. But whenever someone like the ISG or Joe Biden offers any suggestions they don't even study them. They don't even discuss it. The only thing that can be done is to keep executing the same strategies that have failed over and over and proven either worthless or unsustainable.

It is time for Bush and Cheney to finally be honest with America. The surge MIGHT have worked if it had been started right after our victory over Saddam. If we had taken control of the country and imposed stability. But the truth is that by 2007 it is too little, too late. Its whack-a-mole all over again. You move the military into an area and it stabilizes. The insurgents go somewhere else and create chaos. You have the impossible choice of moving troops out of the now stable area to fight them which returns it to their control or let them win and gather additinal recruits in the new area.

The one thing you CAN'T do is ask for enough additional troops to make the surge actually work. Why?

Because the awful truth is that our military is exhausted by Iraq and will take a decade or more to rebuild. The surge CANNOT be maintained past the end of the year or early spring at the latest. There is NO military leader who disagrees with this. The truth is we WILL begin a withdrawal from Iraq sooner rather than later. Patriotic Americans need to STOP discussing whether and when it will happen and START discussing how to deal with the catastrophe Bush leaves behind.

Those fools who are too blind to SEE the truth will be blindsided by it. It is the patriotic democrats and republicans like Reid, Biden, Hagel, Warner, and a growing number of others who can no longer refuse to see the truth who are trying to find a way to extricate this country from the catastrophe of the Bush/Cheney admnistration. They need our prayers and every ounce of help we can give them.

slacker
that was a great post.

todays usa today poll has 70% of americans wanting us out of iraq by april.

of course conservatives don't believe in the will of the people because everyone in america except for themselves is stupid.

they and only they know the real truth.

here is the poll numbers website.


http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070710/1a_lede10.art.htm

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.