Democrats skipping briefings on Iraq Updates
posted at 12:40 pm on April 23, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Sen. Harry Reid says that the war is lost, then backtracks.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi declares that the road to peace is through Damascus, and offers to meet with Iran’s apocalyptic pirate president but declines to meet with the President of the United States.
Together, these two and their allies are doing all that they can to de-fund the war in Iraq through the Jack Murtha “slow bleed” strategy.
Call all of that what you want, but it doesn’t amount to supporting the troops. It amounts to supporting the enemy.
Ignoring briefings on the war by Gen. David Petraeus, the commander whom Congress recently approved and whose strategy is now governing ground action in Iraq, doesn’t amount to supporting the troops either. But that’s just what the Democrats are doing:
The commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, returns to Washington this week, but last week Pelosi’s office said “scheduling conflicts” prevented him from briefing House members. Two days later, the members-only meeting was scheduled, but the episode brings to mind the fact that Pelosi and other top House Democrats skipped a Pentagon videoconference with Petraeus on March 8.
The Democrats did the same thing on April 9: Only one Democrat Senator attended a video conference with Gen. Petraeus which was an update and progress report on the war.
What can be a higher priority than hearing from Gen. Petraeus? Can’t they make Petraeus’ briefings a priority, just for show? Apparently they would rather meet with Code Pink than Gen. Petraeus.
The Democrats wanted power but didn’t want any responsibility, but in winning power they have also earned responsibility. This war is being fought on their watch now, too. If they support the troops as they always say that they do, the least that they could do is treat the war as a priority worth studying and understanding, and worth hearing about from the man most responsible for its execution. They shouldn’t rely on media reports or groups like Iraq Body Count, but that’s apparently just what they’re doing.
AJ Strata calls the Democrat’s lack of attention to Petraeus’ briefings “criminal.” He’s right but it’s even worse than that. We’re seeing a complete abdication by the party in power on the seminal issue of our time. They’re running toward defeat now and running on defeat for 2008. We’re seeing a gradual abandonment of the Iraqi people, of American troops in the field, and ultimately of America’s place in the world. The Democrats are making a monumental error that will change the world for the worse. Defeat in Iraq, which is how the Democrats are casting the effort even while they dodge reports from the architect of the American strategy there, will echo for decades to come.
Update: Instapundit–
The goal, I think, is to ensure that the war is seen as a failure, but to make sure that Democrats don’t get blamed.
Yup. And that’s called “abdication.”
Update: Reid speaks.
Reid, the Senate’s top Democrat, released excerpts from a speech today in which he calls on Bush to abandon his threat to veto the war funding bill and negotiate a compromise. Reid delivered the speech on the war in Iraq at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington at midday.
Reid did not repeat his assertion last week that “this war is lost,” a comment that drew sharp criticism from Republicans, who branded the Senate majority leader as defeatist. But he mixed sharp criticism of Bush with praise for Congress’s efforts to end the conflict and appeals to antiwar voters to be patient.
“Be patient…we’re losing this war just as fast as we can!”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
To cover bases of this story. How many republicans showed up?
tomas on April 23, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Whoever is mentoring them on their 08 strategy must be smoking crack.
Bradky on April 23, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Wait….so you’re saying, before we declare the war to be lost, we should check with the person actually managing the war effort on the ground?
This is interesting. Tell me more about this revolutionary concept….
World B. Free on April 23, 2007 at 12:48 PM
They already know what they plan to do, no more briefings necessary.
naliaka on April 23, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Dumb and Dumber.
freebird on April 23, 2007 at 12:50 PM
BACK OFF, Bryan! You’re giving pirates a bad name…
tree hugging sister on April 23, 2007 at 12:50 PM
No doubt. This is a remarkably tone-deaf move and reflects, I think, the classic liberal “closed loop” decision making process in which no fact or dissenting opinion is allowed to disturb the pre-existing conclusion (here, that the war is “lost”).
It usually takes an election result that doesn’t go their way (i.e. 1994) to shake them enough to even pay lip service to reality.
Fred on April 23, 2007 at 12:51 PM
And, of course, they feel they’ll be given a pass by the MSM who will not make a big deal past a token report or two of them skipping these important briefings.
Warner Todd Huston on April 23, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Geez. Pelosi and Reid must have had a seance with Lyndon Johnson. The same strategy worked great in Nam. /
BacaDog on April 23, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Sigh . . . If only we had a man for a president.
Labamigo on April 23, 2007 at 12:56 PM
But the real story is, “Why is Nancy in a red toga?”
- The Cat
MirCat on April 23, 2007 at 12:59 PM
The democratic leadership…and I use that term loosley…should be forced to quit Congress…or they should be impeached…AND TRIED FOR TREASON…THEY HAVE SURRENDERED TO OUR ENEMIES…THEY HAVE DISHONORED THE UNITED STATES…
areseaoh on April 23, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Unless and until the electorate forces them out, that’s how they will act.
For some strange reason, I don’t foresee our fellow citizens paying much attention. They’ll be dazzled by the Enemy Press sympathetic play for no accounts like Obama, or panderers like Edwards, or openly evil candidates like Hillary.
It’s almost as if you have to arm yourself against public stupidity as well as crime….
ScottG on April 23, 2007 at 1:00 PM
This is the political equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating ‘La la la, I’m not listening!’ over and over again.
James on April 23, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Fred!?
Fun Fred! Fact:
Next issue of Superman comics will show the Man of Steel’s trademark hair worm cut off for a Fred! style haircut.
ScottG on April 23, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Isn’t that what they accuse the President of doing all the time?
Why isn’t my President holding a press conference to call these traitors out?
ctmom on April 23, 2007 at 1:06 PM
If history has proven one thing is that democrats love a good “blood letting” or ethic cleansing. Vietnam, Cambodia, India/Pakistan (48-50), Uganda, Rhodesia, China (Chairman Mao) and the list goes on and on. Just waiting for the day they can bring this back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917
I wonder how many Democrats carry around that “Act” in their purses and wallets, in lieu of a copy of the Constitution.
“There are citizens of the United States, I blush to admit, . . . who have poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life . . . . Such creatures of passion, disloyalty, and anarchy must be crushed out.” - Woodrow Wilson, 1917
Wuptdo on April 23, 2007 at 1:08 PM
I guess its more important for the democrats to get their talking points from the enemy (Syria and Iran) then to get a briefing from the General in charge of Iraq.
Perhaps this is for the better - the less they know the less they can tell their bosses in Damascus and Tehran.
CrazyFool on April 23, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Why waste their time on the truth, they’ve already made up their minds.
Tim Burton on April 23, 2007 at 1:12 PM
Really nothing else to be said.
TheBigOldDog on April 23, 2007 at 1:15 PM
The Party of Sedition & Treason, will there be some accountability for their actions I wonder, I doubt very much anyone but those here and those in theater will even take notice of the reprehensible policies and actions of these traitors.
Viper1 on April 23, 2007 at 1:18 PM
The electorate has thrust these traitors upon us and now we must go to full mobilization to rid ourselves of them at the next elecction.
rplat on April 23, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Honestly, that’s not so crazy, Crazy.
shooter on April 23, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Our dhimmicrats - working diligently to expand the caliphate.
Connie on April 23, 2007 at 1:23 PM
why would you listen to something that might change your point of view?
Defector01 on April 23, 2007 at 1:29 PM
To everyone currently serving in the military I AM SO SORRY.
I did not vote for any of these people because I knew they viewed your lives as nothing more then pieces in a political chess game. What did they have the lose? The “polls” tell them that the military votes Republican so in their view it is a win win situation. They sacrifice your lives in order to gain power and at the same time get rid of a group that doesn’t vote for them. That is the real message.
There is nothing we can do for another 2 years. To the Americans who voted the Dems in or did so by default by not voting the blood of any service member killed since Jan is on your hands.
LakeRuins on April 23, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Great comment
My laughter is mixed with sorrow for our future!
abinitioadinfinitum on April 23, 2007 at 1:34 PM
I hope Allah highlights this email from a marineDrudge is linking:
Topsecretk9 on April 23, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Hey… they have more important things to do, like spreading word of the evil of Emperor buSHITler, i mean…come on, priorities people!
brak on April 23, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Maybe Cartman was right -
The more pertinent question that might explain their absence is “What’s in it for them?”
rw on April 23, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Its sad when you aren’t sure whether to take this as a joke statement or not…
Bad Candy on April 23, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Au contraire, mon ami! Why should the Dems listen to Petraeus? After all, Chimpy tells him what to say and Karl tells him how to say it. The road to Peace leads anywhere Bush isn’t. And, without giving any specific alternate strategies, they’ll ride that (silky?) pony ’till 11/08.
eeyore on April 23, 2007 at 2:07 PM
It’s quite obvious the Democrats in Congress are only interested in the fortunes of the Democratic Party. In more civilized days these people would’ve been tarred, feathered and ridden out of the country on rails never to be let back in.
Kevin R on April 23, 2007 at 2:12 PM
I hate to say it, but they have actually thrown there support behind terrorists. They are actively supporting the deaths of our soldiers and Iraqi people. They have caused more deaths than have been the result of military action.
tomas on April 23, 2007 at 2:14 PM
The Dems will do anything to keep from putting a military face on the surge. They refuse to attack anyone in uniform, instead prefering to go after Bush’s cabinet members.
BohicaTwentyTwo on April 23, 2007 at 2:23 PM
The Democrats are apparently getting their Iraq briefings from Syria and Iran.
crosspatch on April 23, 2007 at 2:36 PM
Why should they meet with him? Their minds are so firmly made up, what on earth could Petraeus possibly say that would change their opinions? Really, they’d only be wasting everyone’s time.
morganfrost on April 23, 2007 at 2:36 PM
That would be the Daily Kos, and yes, I’m sure they’re smoking something.
mojojojo on April 23, 2007 at 2:38 PM
When we leave, who will be the Iraq Khmer Rouge, and who will be their Pol Pot?
BacaDog on April 23, 2007 at 2:48 PM
The reason why the donks won’t attend the command briefings is simple: their attendance might lend credence to the proposition that this is America’s war, when the donks have already wagered everything on calling it a Republican war.
Donkey “logic” is easy to follow:
1. George Bush can do no right.
2. Therefore, if everything George Bush does is “wrong,” then what is “right” must be the opposite of whatever he wants.
3. Accordingly, if George Bush is for victory in a war, then as a matter of “principle” I’m against victory.
Note the careful choice of words: I didn’t say that donks are “for” defeat but “against” victory. This is important to them, because when their knee-jerk opposition to whatever we do to try to win places them shoulder-to-shoulder with the enemy, they can still convince themselves that they’re not “with” the enemy so much as “against” George Bush.
That’s how they can undermine their own country in a war, and still sleep soundy at night. It’s all for a higher cause, dontcha know.
Spurius Ligustinus on April 23, 2007 at 2:52 PM
The Dem’s are playing this so stupidly that I think the result of the 2008 election is already decided. Fred Thompson will be elected president and at least the Senate will swing back.
The only problem is to keep from pulling out before then. The Dem’s have now invested all of their political capital in “defeat”. The can’t afford to see us win and the next year and a half is going to be messy.
duff65 on April 23, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Not according to the polls. Using this current tactic the Dems should sweep all 3 branches of the legislative segment of our gov’t. I look forward to Mr Kucinichs’ Peace Dept with Cindy Sheehan and Sheryl Crow in charge of the EPA with Al Gore declaring war on Global Warming and Murtha as War czar repositioning our forces to best combat this threat.
LakeRuins on April 23, 2007 at 3:25 PM
SL wrote: “I didn’t say that donks are “for” defeat.”
If you won’t, I will.
Democrats: Traitors in 1864, traitors in 2007.
Potestas Democraticorum delenda est!
georgej on April 23, 2007 at 3:28 PM
Anne Frank? Oh THAT Anne Frank. She is in the attic.
Limerick on April 23, 2007 at 3:30 PM
It has never really been about Iraq anyway. Iraq is a wedge issue only. It’s payback for the Clinton impeachment and Gore’s loss. In other words, it is nothing but pure, unadulterated hatred.
Connie on April 23, 2007 at 3:45 PM
well well I smell compromise. Bush and Reid were quoted as saying to be looking a “way foward” but reid is calling on the Presidrnt to define victory which I don’t think is unreasonable. Is it just me or do I detect straight talk comming from Sen.Reid for once?
sonnyspats1 on April 23, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Here’s one for Reid, on Drudge’s current flash…
E-mail from Ramadi-based grunt
Freelancer on April 23, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Sonnyspats1 asks: “do I detect straight talk comming from Sen.Reid for once?”
No, sorry to say.
Reid is still lying through his teeth. He can’t help it — he’s a Democrat.
georgej on April 23, 2007 at 3:59 PM
Oh, I’d go a step further…since Reid has declared the war lost, he and the Democrats OWN what happens from here on out and get NO credit if we win despite the Democrats defeatist needs.
Topsecretk9 on April 23, 2007 at 4:02 PM
If this is not a clarion call, then what is?
Little Reaper and Ms. Pelosi are writing the ads for 2008, unwittingly also for the conservatives.
There is no one on the other side with strong cojones to set them straight now. Maybe a good thing as they keep on giving. Were this not so serious, it w/b fairly entertaining since Nov. 2006.
Entelechy on April 23, 2007 at 4:14 PM
I think THIS is what Drudge is referring to:
Topsecretk9 on April 23, 2007 at 4:21 PM
Gonzales should charge Reid with treason. Turn-about’s fair play.
Iblis on April 23, 2007 at 4:23 PM
Oh…in the WAPost version they said Reid had released “portions” of his speech - the link above is the entire speech I believe…BTW
Topsecretk9 on April 23, 2007 at 4:23 PM
Those are the same symptoms I have when I picture Hillary in the Oval Office.
BacaDog on April 23, 2007 at 4:30 PM
Yes Harry…the children were so much better off when Saddam dropped gas bombs on them or ferreted them off to dungeon child prisons.
Topsecretk9 on April 23, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Obama said today the “Bush falls short as world leader” - but we have to wait until 2008 to fill the ‘gap’.
Where is the Leftie leadership today? Why wait? Perhaps because you are the ones who devide this country and the world…
Entelechy on April 23, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Correction - that “Bush falls short as world leader”…
Entelechy on April 23, 2007 at 4:54 PM
It can’t be that hard to reserve a confrence room on capitial hill. I say Gen. Petraeus should go and give his briefing to an empty confrence room. Capture it on tape with name placards right on the table in front of the empty seats.
Resolute on April 23, 2007 at 6:22 PM
In a normal time, Reid would be forced to step down as Majority Leader, if not expelled outright from the Senate. Remember what they did to Trent Lott.
And I agree that Reid (and Pelosi) should be charged with treason.
georgej on April 23, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Why listen to Gen. Petraeus, the dems all know he is a liar.
Wade on April 23, 2007 at 6:35 PM
The problem is that Dems are just as proud of those anarchists accused of treason and espionage in 1917 as they are of the Rosenburgs in 1950 and islamoterrorists today.
auzerais on April 23, 2007 at 7:18 PM
silenced majority on April 23, 2007 at 7:24 PM
oops, didn’t mean to quote my response.
silenced majority on April 23, 2007 at 7:25 PM
I have emailed both my senators expressing my outrage at Reids remarks and asked what they could realistically do to punish him for his irresponsiblity.
csdeven on April 23, 2007 at 7:30 PM
He just refuses to fight back. Why doesn’t Bush understand he IS LOSING THE WAR AT HOME. I don’t understand why he can not see the dems are the enemy of this country and are equally responsible for the deaths of our troops as are our enemy in the middle east.
What the hell is Bush afraid of? Knock off all the crap about people have a right to their opinions and you respect that. My ass, they are traitors.
Wade on April 23, 2007 at 7:39 PM
Reid needs to resign…immediately.
He is a disgrace.
Chad on April 23, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Nancy and Harry spend all their time masturbating their throats by speaking.
Griz on April 23, 2007 at 8:03 PM
Nail, meet hammer. I don’t see how most of them can say with a straight face anymore that they ’support the troops.’
Speaking of Pelosi, looks like she’s on her way to making the US look foolish on the world stage again, this time regarding our relationship with Turkey.
SisterToldjah on April 23, 2007 at 8:24 PM
I’d bother to do the same if my senators weren’t Babs and DiFi. ::groan::
Freelancer on April 23, 2007 at 8:26 PM
Read an analysis over at Mudville Gazette linked to story by Greyhawk tracking Dems defeat speeches or votes and violence in Iraq. Surprise, not really, Al Queda ratchets up the violence anytime a key vote or speech in favor of withdrawal happens. So since March there are about 700 dead Iraqi civillians that can be tied back to the Dems encouraging the terrorists. The Dems make the speeches and the Islamic fascists provide the support.
Word to the wise, I would shut down that main Baghdad market on the day Bush vetoes this pork laden surrender document.
LakeRuins on April 23, 2007 at 8:28 PM
Tragically for our troops in teh field, that is entirely true.
Yakko77 on April 23, 2007 at 9:26 PM
This is coming from a father of U.S. Army First Lieutenant (with Ranger tab) serving as a platoon leader in Iraq: don’t pull punches; the Democrats, led by Pelosi and Reid, are the party of treason; they should be treated as the low life scum that they are.
Phil Byler on April 23, 2007 at 9:42 PM
If a Republican had said something like this about gays he’d be out of office already. How come we can’t force these jerks out?
Why aren’t Republicans standing up and demanding he resign? What they’re afraid the Dems will do it to them? I gotta news flash boys, they already are. Its time to fight back, and here’s a hint, Reid and DiFi are low hanging fruit. Get EM!
Iblis on April 23, 2007 at 10:47 PM
This is hilarious. From a Foxnews article about the new retreat bill.
“The legislation includes an additional 60-day reporting requirement on Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of Multinational Forces in Iraq, to state how well Iraqis are doing on meeting Bush administration benchmarks.”
Resolute on April 23, 2007 at 10:55 PM
I would call Reid “Seyss” and Pelosi “Inquart” if I thought that that traitor was as well-known as he should be.
(Is history taught?)
Call them the Quisling Twins.
profitsbeard on April 23, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Did I miss something, the White House Press Core wants to know what the President thinks about “the finger” and Karl Rove, but little harry ried says “we lost”, and not even a peep?
PinkyBigglesworth on April 23, 2007 at 11:14 PM
In some articles I read today, Dingy Harry was blathering on about Bush abandoning his veto threat, and that Bush should provide a plan then if he doesn’t like Dingy Harry’s slow bleed.
Fool doesn’t realize Bush has provided them with a plan continuously since day 1, it’s just they don’t like it.
91Veteran on April 23, 2007 at 11:42 PM
I hope the irony of that statement doesn’t do a fly-over here at Hotair.
csdeven on April 23, 2007 at 11:45 PM
May they both burn in Hell along with their lapdogs.
SouthernGent on April 23, 2007 at 11:47 PM
SOROS………
PinkyBigglesworth on April 24, 2007 at 12:13 AM
There can no longer be any doubt that Harry Reid be judged a traitor to America. He a modern day version of Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose combined.
The reason he is doing this is not because of country, as he suggests, but because of the party which, in liberal’s eyes, supersedes country.
The party is first, last and always, and its base must be kowtowed to. Power is the name of the game even if country must be humiliated in order to retain it.
A win in Iraq would be devastating to the Democrats because their base would no longer have a place to call home, and the ‘mother’s milk’ of their party would dry up leaving the party’s future in doubt.
Apparently, Reid doesn’t much care about his historic legacy, because if he is successful, historians will treat him with disgust as they do now with Arnold and Rose.
pocomoco on April 24, 2007 at 12:43 AM
They can say it because of their abiding faith in focus-group tested phraseology. They don’t attempt to understand how the focus-group interprets the phrase - they just mouth it.
It’s incantation. Verbal charms passed down from on high.
Seriously, look especially at Reid or Pelosi when they speak. Trance - A hypnotic, cataleptic, or ecstatic state.
Stephen M on April 24, 2007 at 4:50 AM
Liberals liberals liberals liberals liberals I hate them I hate them I hate them I hate them……. WOW I CAN ALSO WRITE LIKE A CONSERVATIVE ON HOT AIR. How intelligent you are. Reid should say more, because almost 80% of the Americans are pissed at Bush and are over the lies and the war. ENOUGH! Bush said, “Well congress should not tell Generals how to run the war.” Please Bush has not listened to anyone much less the Generals that he fired because they wanted 300,000 to 400,000 troops before the war. Than Bush says he has confidence in Gonzales because of his good performance testifying. Yea Gonzo said he didn’t recall having a memory of a recollection reportedly 45 to 71 TIMES! There is an up YOURS american people from Bush and the gang. Bush will NOT leave Iraq until he leave office because he wants to save his Legacy and GOP power by blaming the Dems. When he leaves with the war going, he can say the surge was working and it was the dems who surrendered. Right. He is incompetent, period. And you are worried about Reid? Unbelievable.
Harry Reid has said the same things: 10 Generals have said, the Backer-Hamilton Iraq study said and a HOST of highly respect experts, including many republicans (McCain for one), Iraq is SCREWED. THERE IS NO MILITARY SOLUTION TO A CIVIL WAR BETWEEN SUNNIS AND SHIITES YOU FREAKING IDIOTS. Do you rocket scientist even know anything about Sunni’s and Shiites. What was Saddam? What is al qaeda? What are the surrounding countries? Iran? Syria? Which one is in power in Iraq Gov? Which sect is the minority population in Iraq? What group did Saddam belong to again? If you don’t know SHUT UP. Bush and his arrogance has made a MESS and took a stabilizing force in the region, Saddam who kept Iran at bay, was anti al queada and had no 9/11 connection or WMD’s and made a black hole of brown steaming sh@#%. Bush was warned and warned and he ignored and ignored. We have one person to blame Reid? Pelosi? NO Bush, Get a Gosh darn clue. How can you be so intellectually dishonest.
PS, I’m watching the news, 9 more US soldiers killed and 20 wounded today from a base in my state, and you are pissing and crying and whining like little babies about nit picking Reids words. You are terrible people or americans or both by hurting the nation with your petty BULL. IF YOU DON’T WANT THE DEMS TO succeed in Transition the Mission (yep slogans are not just for republicans) than shut up. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED GOSH DARN IT, DID YOU NOT HEAR. Saddam and sons are dead and there is a democratically elected government in place. OH BY THE WAY, we, I mean Bush and the military has stopped training Iraq forces. The WHEN THEY STAND UP PART, IS OVER! They gave up so the jig is up. There is no chance they will defend them self. The best we can do us back one side and let them kill each other while keeping Iran out. May be support a coup and place a military dictator in power, like we usually do. What ever we can do to stop losing more than the +3,300 soldiers (25,000 wounded, 10,000 seriously/grievously) and $1-Trillion dollars so far. 85 US killed this month. The surge is producing more violence. “Stay the Course”, its a civil war not the Titanic. While you are sitting there with your manufactured outrage about Reid or Liberals, blaa blaa blaa, pulling you puds, writing about your true love for Mary K Ham, WE HAVE BIGGER PROBLEMS. 9 soldiers dead 20 wounded? Gonzales? Wolfowitz? WHO is wolfowitz? Oh Fox news did not report that? Yea you know, another loser appointee of the Decider. Wolfowitz the architect of the Iraq war who left and got a cushy job at the world band from Bush for $400,000 a year and got his girlfriend a position for almost $200K a year plus a few other friends for the same big cash. Gosh darn, ain’t that beautiful, record surplus (Clinton) to record deficits with Bush. And you are talking about Reid is a traitor? FOOLS.
gmcjetpilot on April 24, 2007 at 5:06 AM
Reid/Pelolsi = Baltar from classic Battlestar Galactica
They think they can fix what they screwed up once they’ve taken out their domestic political opponents. But they think wrong.
With no plan for victory in Iraq, no plan to sustain efforts in Afghanistan, and no plan to deal with the emerging threat of Iran, I have no plans to support the Democrats. Ever.
itzWicks on April 24, 2007 at 6:30 AM
gmcjetpilot: I am glad that you got all of that out of your system.
As a retired Army guy, and as a student of history, I would submit to you that you couldn’t be more wrong. Victory can still be harvested from the current mess.
It’s going to take time (a whole lot of precious time), but it is also going to involve some things that nobody has talked about yet: the real application of the Powell Doctrine (overwhelming numbers of troops and firepower) and the complete closing of the Iraqi borders.
Cutting off the supplies of foreign fighters and equipment from Iran and Syria, while starving out the terrorists, insurgents, and thugs from within are the way to win. But to get there from here, we are going to need more than a surge, but the introduction of even more Army brigades and firepower to not only surround the capital city, but the country itself.
Speaking for myself, I’m willing to invest whatever it takes for the Iraqi government to suceed. What about you, gmcjetpilot?
If we are not willing to commit the boots to make it happen, our only alternative is to erect great walls between Iraq and Iran. Maybe in a few decades there may be a climate in which it could come back down, but until then, to stop the flow of logistical support from enemy states, we gotta be practical.
Of course, since we haven’t shown any type of real resolve to secure the borders of our own country, I suspect that my ideas will remain nothing more than just ideas. *sigh*
itzWicks on April 24, 2007 at 6:58 AM
I suggest we send Snake-eyes Pelosi to negotiate “peace” with the Taliban. Drop her off in the mountains and let her go to work. Half of our country’s problems will be solved. Bye bye Snake-eyes.
lynnv on April 24, 2007 at 7:36 AM
I think we are overstating how bad things are in Iraq…In terms of war it is bad but not the mess we all seem to be stipulating to now days. These are people who have Iran next to them, al quaeda and 35 years of a violent dictator as an example…christ they are doing a great job…they care about there country and it isn’t like different places in history…they won’t be able to change on our political time table. We must realize this and stay the course.
tomas on April 24, 2007 at 8:39 AM
I believe that is the same stat that was Briton’s during the German bombing. Guess Churchill should have surrendered.
Hey Reid, what kind of trauma is there when your dad is taken from the house in the middle of the night and never seen again, or your mom is raped and then stoned to death.
right2bright on April 24, 2007 at 9:07 AM
Proof, as if any were needed: Liberals live in an alternate/parallel George Soros/MoveOn.org/Media Matters/MSM Universe.
You can bet a dime to a dollar, “gmcjetpilot” doesn’t want to hear from Gen. Petraeus, either.
franksalterego on April 24, 2007 at 9:10 AM
They are both traitors to their Country, nuff said.
NRA4Freedom on April 24, 2007 at 9:28 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »