Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

All this and clarity of purpose and courage against his detractors.

These are the qualities of a leader. Right or wrong they take a stand and walk the line not wavering.

We needed a president in this mold because Congress as well as the Senate have become complacent in there thinking unwilling to tackle the toughest of issues this great Country faces.
Even as I write this our own Congressman and woman as well as those overly puffed up Senators bask in the Wealth of this Nation they weakin it because of inaction on a whole host of issues some foriegn and others domestic.The Greatest tragidy will be inflicted upon our Children because we have neutered them intellectually by dumbing down our school systems and creating dependants on this system. Will this country remain free and great when those we elect don’t have the courage of there convictions.

Amen

All Bush has done is kill the notion of relatively peaceful eras in our future. Along with putting our nation on an extremely shaky fiscal and economic footing. Just as he has insured our inability to act militarily anywhere without withdrawing from Iraq, he has insured we will not be able to counter economic difficulties, since our deficits and debts are already limiting our options.

A single focus President is what we have. And a myopic focus in the Whitehouse which is charged with the responsibility for taking the entirety of the nation’s health and welfare into account when moving in one direction or another, is a hopelessly incompetent approach. Whatever good Bush has accomplished, and there is some, it has been far overweighted by negative costs to our economy, our foreign relations, our individual liberties, and adaptiveness and agility to meet other problems coming.

I cannot see how it is possible that historians on any objective measure will be able to assess Bush’s presidency as anything but a failure on the whole.

Examples: Bush could have maintained the containment policy of Iraq at a savings to taxpayers and our economy of a trillion dollars or more.

Had he gone the route of containment in Iraq instead of invasion, we could be reaping the benefits of foreign ally cooperation in hunting down and fighting terrorists all over the world and maintained the respect and empathy most of the world’s people felt for America after 9/11.

Bush could have pushed for competitive bidding for Medicare’s Rx program saving tax payers 100’s of millions of dollars, and reducing our deficits.

Bush could have gone for a Patriot Act that was tough on foreigners without altering American’s privacy or freedoms. He chose to put everyone under the government’s microscope.

He could have demonstrated to the world that the US really does wear a white hat, and is a greater and more compassionate nation worthy of leadership by the simple act of ordering our military to comply with all laws and conventions for warfare. Instead he reduced America’s reputation to one just barely above that of terrorists in the eyes of a billion or more people in the world, who no longer trust American leadership or motives.

He could have brought Americans together here at home with a superordinate goal of reinstating American education to the status of the best in the world. Instead he divided America over education with vouchers, charter schools, and NCLB which replaces quality for quantification.

If you have a person in town you’re told will kill you in a week or two, and a man next to you with a pistol to your back, you shoot the guy closest to you and nearest to crossing the line.

Jack,
A british gentleman on a fox hunt; the unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible. That Oscar Wilde line applies to an apology for the Bush administration. (‘Apology’ is an interesting word, isn’t it?).

One original item to add to the discussion:

A nexus point will be October 15th, when the Iraqis will vote in a referendum on the constitution.

But two less obvious decision points will be faced next summer/fall:

1) The US military will reach a critical point in terms of a manpower shortage. Both the generals in their testimony on C-Span last Thursday, & Gen McCaffrey (ret) in his WSJ ‘I love Bush & the War in Iraq’ aricle on 6/27 noted, that critical point will occur. Remaining in Iraq at current troop levels will not be an option. We have one year.

2) If the Fed continues raising the Federal Funds rate, and the 10 year Treasurey Note remains @ 4%, we’ll see an inverted yield curve by the end of this year. Remember, this isn’t like predictions made by economists about the GDP. Bond traders vote with their feet, to the tune of trillions of dollars. And an inverted yield curve is a reliable indicator of approaching recession. We have one year.
For Iraq, it means the US will be going into hard economic times at roughly the same time troop level commitments will become untenable.

Fortunately, as Rumsfeld indicated in his testimony, we’re negotiating with the insurgents- and what do the insurgents demand? US troop withdrawal.

These trends- an overstretched military & the slowing domestic economy- aren’t liberal or conservative observations. The bond traders know it. The Bush administration knows it. The JCS knows it. And the Iraqi insurgent leaders may know it too.

Jack, kudos on a well reasoned, well written post. Well done! Will try to address specifics tomorrow…

Jack,

I for one don’t need Mr. Bush to apologize. I do however need a president that is capable of seeing the BIG picture.

The focus of too few men and too few resources in Iraq may be our downfall, or hopefully we may get lucky.
Yes we took over Iraq with lightning speed, we would have looked foolish with all of our tech if we hadn’t. A blitzkrieg (sorry about the word, but it fits) is only effective if you have the men and resources behind it to hold on to what you have gained.

If you were able to look into the Watchblog archives over a year ago, you would see that while I wasn’t for the gambit in Iraq, if we were going to do it we should do it right, and not screw around. Well, we have been screwing around.
I also stated that even more troops were needed, and that more troops not only would speed up the war effort, but would also lessen the loss of life. We cannot depend on technology when we need more boots on the ground.

How can we expect to demand the respect of the world if we can’t take over a country the size of California. Russia and China have to be laughing their collective asses off.

The blunders that this president has made, may or may not be irreversible, only history will sort that out.

The speech Tuesday night only showed me that we can only expect the same myopic vision that we have had inflicted on us in the past.

Bush may well be remembered as the Anti-Reagan or the Great lack of comunicator.

It always amazes me how the Bush Apologists will keep using the same excuses. They never mention the magic word: ACCOUNTABILITY.

However, it is as said. We have one year until it all falls apart. One wonders who the Republicans will blame for that?

ill bet my life savings that when my president(GEORGE W. BUSH JR.)has a funerel it will be greater than Reagans was

Just know, that you who voted for this President have the blood of thousands of people on their hands. If you truly believe that 9/11 and Iraq are connected, you just don’t read. Stop turning these issues into your opinions. Get the facts, so no more people have to die. It doesn’t make you unpatriotic to want to protect our men and womens lives.

Conservatives take note that a nice article was presented and then, Bush bashing in time zones that to any of us on the East coast or middle America are considered “middle of the night” ensued. Now that everyone is awake, I suggest we begin to submit our counter points as if shot from an AK47.

David

The Oil for Food scandal detailed how uncontained Saddam was becoming. Besides not working well, sanctions were hurting the wrong people and opposition to them was very strong. Many of the same organizations that now estimate high death tolls for the war were complained that 50,000 Iraqi children were dying each year from sanctions. Saddam was contained only because of constant U.S. and UK vigilance, which amounted to a continued air war. This was not a stable containment. It was more like a perpetual Berlin airlift. Saddam was tamed in 2002 only because of a massive U.S. military presence in Kuwait and Saudi. This presence could not be maintained. And recall Osama bin Laden’s chief complaint about the U.S. was that U.S. troops were in Saudi. They were there because of Saddam Hussein.

We know that cost of the war so far. We don’t know the cost of alternatives. Just like we did not achieve a best-case scenario in the war, we are unlikely to have achieved a best-case scenario in the armed “peace”. Remember also that the French, Russians and to some extent the Chinese were determined to oppose any U.S. efforts that would actually rein in Saddam Hussein. Remember also that the German elections featured a strong anti-Americans tone. The election campaign took place almost a year before the invasion. It is a myth that all was well before we went into Iraq.

Others

We still don’t know the outcome. As I wrote, some things have worked out better, others worse. U.S. casualty figures are lower than most pre-war estimates. Most of the oil wells remained intact. Saddam and his terrorist allies were unable to take the war to America as they threatened. The elections worked better than anticipated. The Iraqi government is more stable than we would have predicted. On the other hand, the insurgency remains capable to murdering civilians in large numbers. There is a danger that the Iraqi government won’t hold. Our troops are overstretched. Like most big events, it is a mixed result. It is not over and to declare it either a failure or a success is premature.

As for George Bush, his opponents have a way of underestimating him. Politically he has been phenomenally successful. He not only won reelection for himself, but he increased Republican strength in both the 2002 and 2004 elections. These kinds of gains have not happened since 1936 (then for the Dems). The economy continues to grow. Our position in the world has strengthened considerably since the election. Everyone keeps on predicting some kind of crash next year. It is always a year down the road. Sooner or later they will be right, but for now growth figures for the U.S. economy were revised upwards a couple days ago. Last month, the military exceeded its recruitment goals (after a couple months of not meeting them). Declaring Bush a success or a failure is also too soon to tell, but he is doing better than the rhetoric would imply.

Hey Vic,

your words:
Just know, that you who voted for this President have the blood of thousands of people on their hands.

By your reasoning, If you voted for Billy C. then you are responsible for 9/11.

You murderer !

Be pragmatic Vic how do you suggest that we “protect our men and womens lives” (again, your words) The only thing the dems did between 1992-2000 (while we were attacked 8 times) is give away nuclear technology to known tyrants. Whew, that’s some damn nice protection.

By Vic’s logic everyone who voted for Bush (53% of the population I believe) are accomplices to murder.

Are the non voting members of their families also guilty by association.

If I have blood of thousands on my hand then it is better the the blood of millions.

Just as Jack continues to post the Kagan piece, I seem to keep going back to this pre-war article by Fareed Zakaria and his possible results of success in Iraq. While the $10/barrel oil is not looking too good right now, many of the other changes are happening or can still happen. If, that is, we stop all of this arguing about whether we should be there in the first place. We are in Iraq, Bush did win re-election, impeachment of Bush will only bring the Cheney Presidency (or any other number of unacceptable Republicans). Yelling about it, Democrat and Republican alike (ask Graham about it), only gets you on the front page of AlJazeera.net.

Just as Fareed concluded before the war, “I’m still taking my chances with change.â€

Jack,

Very well written article. While I don’t agree with your opinion, I do want to compliment you on (a) stating it well, (b) arguing FOR your guy, instead of AGAINST the other guy, and (c) backing it up with sources. You are one of the few writers here who promotes discussions instead of flame wars. And not once did you claim that non-Republicans hate America. Thank you.

Now, on to my discent:

I will concede that our actions in Iraq will likely lead to improved conditions there. The Iraqis will be better off with Saddam out of power. If I have ever claimed otherwise (which I may have), I admit fault and error.

I will also concede that America will reap many benefits from a democratic Iraq. One that continually gets overlooked is that Iraq no longer sells oil in Euros, which helps cement the US Dollar as the world’s oil currency. (I truly believe that his was one of Bush’s main reasons for going in, and would have been fully supported by Clinton as well).

What I will NOT concede is that it was the “right thing to do”. I will not concede this because I refuse to believe that the ends justify the means. Our actions have cost us the moral high ground, as well as international support, and perhaps fiscal stability.

Allow me to continue your comparison to Ronald Reagan. Reagan did a great job of combatting Communism. But, in the process, he compromised principles that cost us in the long run. Much of what we’ve had to do in Iraq and Afghanistan has been the result of Reagan’s policies (Reagan’s response to Saddam gassing the Kurds, for example).

Bush had more options besides “invasion” or “status quo”. His goals were admirable, but there were better ways of accomplishing them.

James,

Well said! I can not for the life of me figure out how people like David, Rocky and Vic can actually believe the things they are saying. I am so sick of this Dem v.s. Rep thing. It seems that this constant looking for something to “jump on and run with” thing that the dems keep doing is destroying the very system we are supposedly arguing over. The speech that Bush gave on Tuesday is a prime example of that. Jump on 911 and run with it ok … TRY LISTENING. He did not say that what we are fighting now is the 911 fight or even the same person responsible. He said that we are fighting the murderers who follow the same way of thinking and the same goals as those from 911. 911 was not the begining of this thing - these murderers have been attacking Americans for years - THIS PRESIDENT had the heart to do his job. This war is not called the 911 war - it is the war on terrorism. These murderers in IRAQ that we are fighting ARE TERRORIST.

Blood on our hands??? How dare you even speak such words Vic. Bush inherrited this problem from your man Clinton. (And by that I do mean Hilary because Billy never made a decision during his term.) The TERRORIST (not insurgents as the LEFT has relabeled them) have said they will bring fear and terror to us here in the US. Do you think that if we had not taken the steps that we took - that there would not have been another attack here? Yeah right. This NOBEL President has done nothing but protect YOU from yourself and the terrorist. The media here in Atlanta follows the rest of the majority of the media and swings far left. If you only believe the media then you are not that intelligent. Let me ask you Dems a question… do you know anyone who is over there fighting right now?

You VIC are not “Protecting” our men and womens lives with your way of thinking. You are endangering it. Our military believe in what they are doing. They are dying for what they believe in and to protect your right to be against them protecting you if you want. By your lack of respect for this administration and what they are doing - you might as well be the one strapped with explosives trying to blow them up.

The Media only shows you the bad. WE ARE WINNING THE WAR - We ARE making a positive difference for peace and democracy. And I do mourn for those lives lost protecting us. But I assure you those who have died for us believed that their life was given for the greater good.

J

I have to comment because yours is the most rational comment I’ve read about Bush’s position and dilemma in some time. Let me preface by saying, I am against the Iraqi War. I was against the Iraqi War just as I was against the Kuwaiti War. I do not and did not believe that either war was in the US national interest.

Having said that, we Americans elected a guy who has made many, many mistakes. Chief among them is that he fails to recognize the sublety, nuance, or cultural differences of middle eastern thought,particularly by poor, young religious muslims. Next, he is overly loyal and too supportive of those who provide bad advice and who perform badly. Chief among these are Rumsfeld and Rice.

I think Karl Rove must have written Bush’s Tuesday speech. It was as masterful a pack of lies as has been constructed in some time. It was, however, plainly obvious from the speech that Bush or some grown up he’s finally brought into his inner circle recognizes , at long last , that he can’t keep saying the same thing in spite of overwhemling evidence that he is wrong.

1. there were never WMD; the stated reasons to attack Iraq were fabricated.
2. there was no “Mission Accomplished”; instead the ill conceived crusade kicked off a firestorm of bloody, suicidal insurgency which cannot be won but might be contained.
3. the Iraqi War was planned and executed well by the military.
4. the Iraqi “victory” was poorly planned and hopelessly mismanaged by the politicos who have screwed up the situation to a fare thee well.

If your guy Bush could have just said that and gone on to say to the US; Look I screwed up but what can we do now? If we give up and pull out, I will have made the terror war against us in America so much worse. We have to hang in there in Iraq to train what friendly Iraqis remain and then we can pull US troops out. After all, this has been the republican victory strategem for over 50 years ala Eisenhower in Korea and Nixon in Vietnam.

Sure Iraq’s a quagmire. It’s clear from his speech that even he now knows it. If Bush could just recognize his prideful stubborness, see all the facts as they are not as they are fabricated by press offices, admit his mistakes and then outline specifics of a plan to go forward, I would and I am sure that most American would support him.

But that’s not what we got; we got a new twisting of the old rhetoric and more TRUST ME, trust my people, we know best, it’s the critics fault. Blah, blah , blah,

Mr President, remember Abe Lincoln, he was a Republican so you can listen to what he said. He said “You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

David and Steve,
David
I totally agree with your points about Iraq, and

Steve, I agree that the blog seemed to turn into Bush bashing. I’ll admit that is easy to do, however, Bush isn’t the only one involved in making the decisions regarding the war. I had respect Colon Powell unti this fiasco. Our Congress, the FBI scew - up, the eagerness of one party wanting to show what they could so once in control of the government…..
Oh btw- I’m still looking for the money I should have gotten from Reagan’s “tickle-down” theory.

Linda H.

Jack:

What do you say to the 9 BILLION DOLLARS the US stole from Iraq after it took over?

When will we get an investigation over that?

Aldous,

“What do you say to the 9 BILLION DOLLARS the US stole from Iraq after it took over?”

Pocket change.
When are we going to get a return on our investment in Haliburton?

Aldous & Rocky - I will pray for you

DEMOCRATS’ PLANS FOR IRAQ… ALREADY IN PROGRESS
Democrats Continue To Unveil New Plans For Iraq That Have Already Occurred With Help Of President Bush’s Leadership
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Sen. Joe Biden’s (D-DE) Plan … Already In Progress:

Biden’s Plan: “We Have To Take Advantage Of Foreign Offers To Train Iraqi Security Forces Outside Of Iraq. Iraqi Recruits Could Then Focus Their Energy On Learning Instead Of Simply Staying Alive.” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The Jordanian Army In January [2004] Began Training Iraqi Troops, Officers And Special Operations Units As Part Of A U.S.-Led Iraqi Army Rebuilding Program. More Than 600 Iraqi Soldiers And Officers Have Completed Their Training In Jordan And Are Serving In Iraqi Army Units In Their Homeland.” (“Jordan Gives Iraq Weapons, Vehicles,” Army Times, 8/23/04)

Biden’s Plan: “[W]e Have To Develop Accurate Measures Of The Basic Quality Of Life And The Delivery Of Essential Services If We Want To Know What Difference Our Reconstruction Efforts Are Making…” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “At The End Of 2004 … 3,100 Schools Have Been Renovated, 364 Schools Are Currently Under Rehabilitation, 263 New Schools Are Under Construction And 38 New Schools Have Been Built.” (Department Of Defense Website, “Iraq Year In Review 2004 Fact Sheet,” http://www.defendamerica.mil/downloads/MNFI-Year-in-Review_2004-Fact-Sheets.pdf, Accessed 6/2/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “[T]he Ministry Of Higher [Education And Scientific Research (MHESR)] Accepted A Freshman Class 50% Larger Than The Year Before [2003].” (Department Of Defense Website, “Iraq Year In Review 2004 Fact Sheet,” http://www.defendamerica.mil/downloads/MNFI-Year-in-Review_2004-Fact-Sheets.pdf, Accessed 6/2/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: There Are More TV Stations Than Last Year And 20 More Independent Newspapers And Magazines. (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update,” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Biden’s Plan: “[W]e Must Focus Resources On Smaller Projects That Make An Impact In The Lives Of Ordinary Iraqis.” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Many Iraqis Today Are Wealthier Than They Were Before The Invasion …” (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update,” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Baghdad Is Now Choked With Traffic. Cell Phones Have Spread Like Wildfire. And Satellite TV Dishes Sprout From Even The Most Humble Mud Hovels In The Countryside.” (Karl Zinsmeister, Op-Ed, “The War Is Over, And We Won,” The American Enterprise Online, 6/20/05)

Sen. John Kerry’s (D-MA) Plan … Already In Progress:

Kerry’s Plan: “The President Must Also Announce Immediately That The United States Will Not Have A Permanent Military Presence In Iraq.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

President Bush Has Promised: “We Are In Iraq To Achieve A Result: A Country That Is Democratic, Representative Of All Its People, At Peace With Its Neighbors, And Able To Defend Itself. And When That Result Is Achieved, Our Men And Women Serving In Iraq Will Return Home With The Honor They Have Earned.” (President Bush, State Of The Union Address, Washington, D.C., 2/2/05)

Kerry’s Plan: “The Administration Must Work With The Iraqi Government To Establish A Multinational Force To Help Protect Its Borders.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Secretary Rumsfeld Stated, “Iraqi Security Forces And Iraqi Border Forces, [Began] Operations … To Disrupt The Flow Of Foreign Fighters And Terrorists Across That Border From Syria. That’s Been Going On For A Period Of Time Here.” (Secretary Rumsfeld, Press Conference, 6/27/05)

Kerry’s Plans: “If Iraqis, Particularly Sunnis Who Fear Being Disenfranchised, See Electricity Flowing, Jobs Being Created, Roads And Sewers Being Rebuilt And A Democratic Government Being Formed, The Allure Of The Insurgency Will Decrease.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Even Sunni Arabs, Who Provide The Largest Pool Of Recruits For The Insurgency, Seem Slightly More Hopeful Than A Year Ago.” (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Kerry’s Plan: “[T]he Administration Has Failed To Devote Equal Attention To Working With The Iraqi Government On The Economic And Political Fronts.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The Trade Bank Of Iraq Recently Issued 50 Visa Cards To A Handful Of Government Officials. In A Few Weeks, The Cards Will Be Available To The Public. … [The] Chairman Of The Trade Bank Of Iraq, Says The Visa Cards — The First Credit/Debit Cards In Iraq — Are An Important Step To Economic Recovery.” (Mona Mahmoud, “For First Time, Shoppers Will Have Access To Visa Cards,” USA Today, 6/3/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “New Iraqi Transportation Minister Salam Al-Maliki Welcomed The Restoration Of Domestic Air Travel As A Major Milestone For The Post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.” (David Axe, “Domestic Air Travel Back On Route, And Expanding,” The Washington Times, 6/6/05)

Sen. Ted Kennedy’s (D-MA) Plan … Already In Progress:

Kennedy’s Plan: “The President Should Do More To Make It Clear That America Intends No Long-Term Presence. He Should Disavow The Permanence Of Our So-Called ‘Enduring’ Military Bases In Iraq. He Should Announce That America Will Dramatically Reduce The Size Of The American Embassy - The Largest In The World.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

The President Has Said Since April Of 2003 That We Would Stay In Iraq, “As Long As It Takes To Complete Our Mission, And Then All Our Forces Are Going To … Come Home.” (President Bush, Remarks At Lima Army Tank Plant, Lima, OH, 4/24/03)

Kennedy’s Plan: “The United Nations, Not The United States, Should Provide Assistance And Advice On Establishing A System Of Government And Drafting A Constitution.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Kofi Annan Stated, “We [The United Nations] Have Set Up A Donor Coordination Mechanism In Baghdad, Deployed A Constitutional Support Unit, And Established An Active And Collaborative Relationship With The Assembly’s Constitutional Committee.” (Kofi Annan, Op-Ed, “There’s Progress In Iraq,” The Washington Post, 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Iraq Has Completed 80 Percent Of The Draft Constitution And Will Meet The Deadline Of August 15. “The head of the constitution drafting commission, Hammam Hammoudi, said an arbitration committee was formed to bring together differing views on what he said were complicated issues. … Hamman said … he expected the final draft to be finalized by August 15 for a national referendum vote.” (“Most Of Iraq’s New Constitution Finalized,” UPI, 6/25/05)

Kennedy’s Plan: “If Iraqis Wish To Negotiate With Insurgents Who Are Willing To Renounce Their Violence And Join The Political Process, We Should Let Them Do So.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The United States Confirmed … That It Was Talking To Insurgents In Iraq In Its Effort To Draw Sunni Arab Groups Into The Political Process.” (James Bone, “US Holding Talks To Bring Rebel Groups Into Politics,” The Times, 6/27/05)DEMOCRATS’ PLANS FOR IRAQ… ALREADY IN PROGRESS
Democrats Continue To Unveil New Plans For Iraq That Have Already Occurred With Help Of President Bush’s Leadership
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Sen. Joe Biden’s (D-DE) Plan … Already In Progress:

Biden’s Plan: “We Have To Take Advantage Of Foreign Offers To Train Iraqi Security Forces Outside Of Iraq. Iraqi Recruits Could Then Focus Their Energy On Learning Instead Of Simply Staying Alive.” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The Jordanian Army In January [2004] Began Training Iraqi Troops, Officers And Special Operations Units As Part Of A U.S.-Led Iraqi Army Rebuilding Program. More Than 600 Iraqi Soldiers And Officers Have Completed Their Training In Jordan And Are Serving In Iraqi Army Units In Their Homeland.” (“Jordan Gives Iraq Weapons, Vehicles,” Army Times, 8/23/04)

Biden’s Plan: “[W]e Have To Develop Accurate Measures Of The Basic Quality Of Life And The Delivery Of Essential Services If We Want To Know What Difference Our Reconstruction Efforts Are Making…” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “At The End Of 2004 … 3,100 Schools Have Been Renovated, 364 Schools Are Currently Under Rehabilitation, 263 New Schools Are Under Construction And 38 New Schools Have Been Built.” (Department Of Defense Website, “Iraq Year In Review 2004 Fact Sheet,” http://www.defendamerica.mil/downloads/MNFI-Year-in-Review_2004-Fact-Sheets.pdf, Accessed 6/2/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “[T]he Ministry Of Higher [Education And Scientific Research (MHESR)] Accepted A Freshman Class 50% Larger Than The Year Before [2003].” (Department Of Defense Website, “Iraq Year In Review 2004 Fact Sheet,” http://www.defendamerica.mil/downloads/MNFI-Year-in-Review_2004-Fact-Sheets.pdf, Accessed 6/2/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: There Are More TV Stations Than Last Year And 20 More Independent Newspapers And Magazines. (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update,” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Biden’s Plan: “[W]e Must Focus Resources On Smaller Projects That Make An Impact In The Lives Of Ordinary Iraqis.” (Sen. Biden, “A New Compact For Iraq,” The Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Many Iraqis Today Are Wealthier Than They Were Before The Invasion …” (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update,” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Baghdad Is Now Choked With Traffic. Cell Phones Have Spread Like Wildfire. And Satellite TV Dishes Sprout From Even The Most Humble Mud Hovels In The Countryside.” (Karl Zinsmeister, Op-Ed, “The War Is Over, And We Won,” The American Enterprise Online, 6/20/05)

Sen. John Kerry’s (D-MA) Plan … Already In Progress:

Kerry’s Plan: “The President Must Also Announce Immediately That The United States Will Not Have A Permanent Military Presence In Iraq.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

President Bush Has Promised: “We Are In Iraq To Achieve A Result: A Country That Is Democratic, Representative Of All Its People, At Peace With Its Neighbors, And Able To Defend Itself. And When That Result Is Achieved, Our Men And Women Serving In Iraq Will Return Home With The Honor They Have Earned.” (President Bush, State Of The Union Address, Washington, D.C., 2/2/05)

Kerry’s Plan: “The Administration Must Work With The Iraqi Government To Establish A Multinational Force To Help Protect Its Borders.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Secretary Rumsfeld Stated, “Iraqi Security Forces And Iraqi Border Forces, [Began] Operations … To Disrupt The Flow Of Foreign Fighters And Terrorists Across That Border From Syria. That’s Been Going On For A Period Of Time Here.” (Secretary Rumsfeld, Press Conference, 6/27/05)

Kerry’s Plans: “If Iraqis, Particularly Sunnis Who Fear Being Disenfranchised, See Electricity Flowing, Jobs Being Created, Roads And Sewers Being Rebuilt And A Democratic Government Being Formed, The Allure Of The Insurgency Will Decrease.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “Even Sunni Arabs, Who Provide The Largest Pool Of Recruits For The Insurgency, Seem Slightly More Hopeful Than A Year Ago.” (Adriana Lins De Albuquerque, Michael O’Hanlon and Amy Unikewicz, Op-Ed, “The State Of Iraq: An Update” The New York Times, 6/3/05)

Kerry’s Plan: “[T]he Administration Has Failed To Devote Equal Attention To Working With The Iraqi Government On The Economic And Political Fronts.” (Sen. John F. Kerry, Op-Ed, “The Speech The President Should Give,” The New York Times, 6/28/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The Trade Bank Of Iraq Recently Issued 50 Visa Cards To A Handful Of Government Officials. In A Few Weeks, The Cards Will Be Available To The Public. … [The] Chairman Of The Trade Bank Of Iraq, Says The Visa Cards — The First Credit/Debit Cards In Iraq — Are An Important Step To Economic Recovery.” (Mona Mahmoud, “For First Time, Shoppers Will Have Access To Visa Cards,” USA Today, 6/3/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “New Iraqi Transportation Minister Salam Al-Maliki Welcomed The Restoration Of Domestic Air Travel As A Major Milestone For The Post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.” (David Axe, “Domestic Air Travel Back On Route, And Expanding,” The Washington Times, 6/6/05)

Sen. Ted Kennedy’s (D-MA) Plan … Already In Progress:

Kennedy’s Plan: “The President Should Do More To Make It Clear That America Intends No Long-Term Presence. He Should Disavow The Permanence Of Our So-Called ‘Enduring’ Military Bases In Iraq. He Should Announce That America Will Dramatically Reduce The Size Of The American Embassy - The Largest In The World.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

The President Has Said Since April Of 2003 That We Would Stay In Iraq, “As Long As It Takes To Complete Our Mission, And Then All Our Forces Are Going To … Come Home.” (President Bush, Remarks At Lima Army Tank Plant, Lima, OH, 4/24/03)

Kennedy’s Plan: “The United Nations, Not The United States, Should Provide Assistance And Advice On Establishing A System Of Government And Drafting A Constitution.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Kofi Annan Stated, “We [The United Nations] Have Set Up A Donor Coordination Mechanism In Baghdad, Deployed A Constitutional Support Unit, And Established An Active And Collaborative Relationship With The Assembly’s Constitutional Committee.” (Kofi Annan, Op-Ed, “There’s Progress In Iraq,” The Washington Post, 6/21/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: Iraq Has Completed 80 Percent Of The Draft Constitution And Will Meet The Deadline Of August 15. “The head of the constitution drafting commission, Hammam Hammoudi, said an arbitration committee was formed to bring together differing views on what he said were complicated issues. … Hamman said … he expected the final draft to be finalized by August 15 for a national referendum vote.” (“Most Of Iraq’s New Constitution Finalized,” UPI, 6/25/05)

Kennedy’s Plan: “If Iraqis Wish To Negotiate With Insurgents Who Are Willing To Renounce Their Violence And Join The Political Process, We Should Let Them Do So.” (Sen. Kennedy, “Senator Edward M. Kennedy Discusses America’s Future In Iraq At The Johns’ Hopkins School Of International Studies,” Washington, D.C., 1/27/05)

Accomplishments In Iraq: “The United States Confirmed … That It Was Talking To Insurgents In Iraq In Its Effort To Draw Sunni Arab Groups Into The Political Process.” (James Bone, “US Holding Talks To Bring Rebel Groups Into Politics,” The Times, 6/27/05)

j,

That’s the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me.

BTW, I never said I was a democrat.
I do expect more from my leaders than retoric, I belive you should too.

j,

“When That Result Is Achieved, Our Men And Women Serving In Iraq Will Return Home With The Honor They Have Earned.” (President Bush, State Of The Union Address, Washington, D.C., 2/2/05)”

Then why is the only real construction progress happening in the green zone?

Why, after all this time, is there no reliable electricity?

Why are we building 12 new military bases in Iraq?

Why are we building 3 new prisions?

Why are the “last throes” of the insurgency going to take 6, 8, 10, 12 years?

DEMS be PROUD!
The previous leader of your party just went on National TV and said it is Bush’s fault that the new leader of Iran has been elected.
I didn’t realize Bush had so much control over their elections.
He also lied and said that Bush linked Iraq to 9/11 tuesday night.
Their must be some sort of disconnect in the nerve cells of the brain when it comes to diehard party followers.

Rocky,

Forgive me if I over fired - you do sound extremly left though. I do expect a lot from our leaders. I expect them to protect me even by not telling me everything there is to know. The media is one of the biggest problem in this war. If our president tells the American Public everything that he plans to do and when he plans to do it - If he sits down and explains every move that needs to be made to us then he can not protect us. That’s just it - this has been going on for years … It was time to stop talking about doing something and actually do it. We (in the general public) do not need to know everything - (and obviously we do not) If Bush plays politics and does things the media’s way we are toast. We the people entrusted our country to him - now we need to let him do his job. And by praying for you I am not being ugly. We should all pray for one another.

J

Aldous and Rocky,

I would like to hear more about the 9 billion that we “stole” from Iraq after we took over. I would question “took over’ as an apt description since that expression generally implies total contraol which, I don’t think we have yet.

However would the 9 billion not qualify as “to the victor go the spoils” or maybe that’s not a good one but, we certainly would be entitled to a few dollars for our trouble.

If President Bush is such a bad leader, why did he get elected twice?
If he is a poor commander in chief, why do the troups love him so much?
There must be a reason?
If the pollsters say his numbers are falling, yet he refuses to back water or change course, there must be a reason?

I wonder if America was just longing for a leader with a “full set” that doesn’t back water or worry about ankle biters?

Swagger on GW, there must be a reason!

I understand that even if the truth slaps you in the face you will never admit your wrong. That is what is so very sad. The hate fired from the Left is so strong against the Right that truth has nothing to do with anything. You just want to destroy - not build.

Thanks Beagle - you are right on

j,

I wish all well, I’m just not a prayerful kind of guy.

Let me tell you that I have not served in the military, but I have studied strategy extensively. We could have done this a whole lot better.

Beagle,

“If President Bush is such a bad leader, why did he get elected twice?”

Twice by extremely narrow margins.

Three words;
Karl Rove, Salesmanship

Hey, I didn’t like either Gore or Kerry, And after Rove eviserated McCain, and threw him under the bus, there were no other choices.

Ok Rocky - I agree that there are things that could have been done better but hind sight is 20/20 - There is no plan that ever goes exactly the way it is planned especially in war. No one - not one of us is with out fault. - This is my last post for the day. Let me just say that I do have someone over there on the front lines and I know that what we see, read, and hear over here in the states is not necessarily what is taking place on the ground. By arguing among ourselves we are defeating our own military. WE ARE IN IRAQ - WE ARE IN A WAR - Does not matter how we got there at this point - we have a job to do and that is to support the American Troops on the ground over there NO MATTER WHAT. They are protecting us NO MATTER WHAT.

J

When are you guys going to understand that being critical of Mr. Bush is not denigrating our troops?
When will you realize that the mistakes made by the Pentegon don’t reflect a lack of support for the rank and file on the ground?
When will you realize that the “media” isn’t the only source of news?

We were sold a load of crap before we went into Iraq that even Colin Powell is embarassed about.

It’s time somebody put their foot down and quit screwing around.
We have troops stationed all over the world.
Are we really that worried that Poland is going to invade Germany?

Here’s a novel concept.
Let’s start rebuilding the bridges that we burned before we went into Iraq. Let’s get the help from the rest of the world we eschewed when we decided to “go it alone”.

We don’t need to be in Iraq for 6, 8, 10, 12, years.

HEY J ,

IF YOU BELEIVE THAT ANY OF THAT STUFF YOU RECITED MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE TO ANYONE, LET ME ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS
1. DID YOU SERVE IN THE US MILITARY?
2. ARE YOU WILLING TO ENLIST AND PUT YOUR LIFE AND LIMB ON THE LINE FOR ANY OF THAT SHIT YOU RECITE AS A SUCCESS IN THE IRAQI WAR?
3. IF BUSH TRULY BELIEVED THAT IRAQ HAD AND WAS INTENDING TO USE WMD AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, DO YOU THINK THAT HE SHOULD HAVE JUST NUKED IRAQ OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH?

HAVING BEEN AN INVOLUNTARY(DRAFTED)INSTRUMENT OF MY GOVERNMENT’S UNSUCCESSFUL EFFORTS IN VIETNAM, I COULD GET BY MOST NIGHTS OF TERROR KNOWING I WAS FIGHTING COMMUNISM. I DOUBT I COULD HAVE HANDELED THE TERROR OF WAR WITH THE GOAL OF GETTING THE GOOKS CELL PHONES AND CREDIT CARDS.

OF COURSE , IN HINDSIGHT, BUSH PROBABLY GAVE THEM SOME WHEN THEY RECENTLY VISITED HIM AT THE WHITE HOUSE. HE ALSO PROBABLY NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT THE 58,400 SOME NAMES ON THAT BIG PIECE OF BLACK ROCK NOT FAR AWAY BUT THEN HE WAS BUSY FLYING OLD PLANES AROUND GEORGIA WHEN THOSE GUYS WERE DYING.

PERSONALLY I WISH HARRY TRUMAN WERE STILL AROUND TO DEAL WITH TERRORISM. HE HAD THE GUTS TO SEND JAPS TO THE GRAVE INSTEAD OF AMERICANS. WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT THIS GUY IS A SUCCESS BECAUSE HE SENDS AMERICAN TO DIE SO IRAQIS CAN ENJOY CELL PHONES AND CREDIT CARDS. SHAME ON YOU.

Yeah your right Rocky - We should have just turned the other cheek on September 11 like Clinton did all those years before. That would have been better. Blow us all up Mr. Terrorist. because we don’t want to stand up to you and stop you if “Everyone else isn’t doing it too”.

You are dead wrong on this issue. And my loved ones are making sure you have that right.

Whoa - struck a nerve. Mr Jlison - First of all - Thank you for your service to our great country albeit involuntary. With all due respect this is NOT VIETNAM - on many different levels. I am a wife of a man who is fighting in Iraq AS I TYPE - My father served in Vietnam too. This is not about cell phones and credit cards. If you let someone attack you and do nothing about it you are bound to be attacked again. I am not about to try to tell you anything about War. You have been there and for that I am sorry. But I have to believe that if we would not have struck Iraq in the manner that we did, we would have had more die here from additional attacks than we have lost on the battle field.

So I answered the question you posed about my status in the military. As for your second question, if it meant protecting the lives of my loved ones yes I would enlist. And as for #3 I think Bush did what he had to do. You can wait for Iraq to come and knock on your door but I would rather deal with them there. Again, I am sorry for what you have been through - this is a different enemy though and they have to be dealt with.

j,

Last I checked, nobody here is questioning our response to 9/11. We’re questioning the actions in Iraq. Please don’t confuse the issues.

JLISON,

I recommend you lay off the Caps Lock… and maybe the caffiene, too.

Jack - Excellent post - you know there is room for you on our team. The red team would be hurting without you.

David - You said it!

JLISON,

You do know that Truman screwed over Ho-Chi-Min at the end of WWII in favor of the French and thereby started the Vietnam war…right?

You do know that we had 3 more bombs and could have taken the world right then, but fore Truman was a pussy.

Didn’t truman have patton murdered ? Or was that Ike ?

Macarthur was a man amoung men, there would be no North Korea today if Mac would have been allowed to nuke China’s ass.

“If President Bush is such a bad leader, why did he get elected twice?”

Twice by extremely narrow margins.

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/greatestamerican/greatestamerican.html

Named the 6th greatest American
Clinton? number 7
Al Gore 2000 opponent - ah, not on the list
John Kerry 2004 opponent - ah, not on the list

Winner Ronald Regan

Alan Winship,

“Winner Ronald Regan”

Why is it that most of the 100 finalists were from the last 75 years.
Michael Jackson made that list too.
Gee that kind of puts it in perspective.

Rocky~

“When are you guys going to understand that being critical of Mr. Bush is not denigrating our troops?”

OO, OO, pick me, pick me!!!!! Probably right at the same moment “you guys” realize bashing the U.S. all over the news is putting our soldiers at risk.

Traci,

“Probably right at the same moment “you guys” realize bashing the U.S. all over the news is putting our soldiers at risk.”

Oh please give us some original thought.

Traci,

What puts our servicemen and women at risk is a lack of understanding of those we fight.

What puts our troops at risk is not going in with overwhelming force.

What puts our troops at risk is the inabliity to completely secure an area before moving on to the next.

What puts our troops at risk is building an opulent green zone before supplying Baghdad with the basics of reliable electricity, clean water and sewers.

What puts our troops at risk is the croneyism in contracts and the tremendous waste of money.

When Iraqis want clean water, elec, and sewers they will stop supporting terriorists that keep blowing them up.

We can stay for years to whack them a few at a time, or they can understand that President Bush will be in office untill Jan.2009 and wont change his mind.
They can hang on untill 2009 hoping for another whuss to get elected, but the people in Iraq know they may get more of the same.
Even if some of those in this country refuse to deal with the prospects of reality, they likely will.

Jack:
“President Bush knew that there was no evidence of an operational link between Iraq and Al Qaeda on 9/11.”

Bush on Sadaam Hussein:
“This is a man who continues to murder his own people, a man who has gassed — used gas on his own citizens, a man who has used chemical weapons on his neighbors, a man who has invaded two countries, a man which hates — who hates America, a man who loves to link up with al Qaeda, a man who is a true threat to America, to Israel, to anybody in the neighborhood.”
—Sep. 28, 2002

“The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda, because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.”
— Jun. 17, 2004

“I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”
— quoted right after 9/11 in “Bush at War” by Bob Woodward, Washington, D.C., Nov. 19, 2002

Yes, we’ve noticed you feel that way, Mr. President.

Jack:
“He knew that Osama bin Laden’s first complaint against the U.S. was that it stationed troops in Saudi and he knew that troops were stationed in Saudi to hold Saddam Hussein in check.”

REPORTER: “You, yourself, have acknowledged that Osama bin Laden was not a central focus of the administration in the months before September 11th. “I was not on point,” you told the journalist, Bob Woodward, “I didn’t feel that sense of urgency.” Two-and-a-half years later, do you feel any sense of personal responsibility for September 11th?”

BUSH: “Let me put that quote to Woodward in context. He had asked me if I was — something about killing bin Laden. That’s what the question was. And I said, compared to how I felt at the time, after the attack, I didn’t have that — I also went on to say, my blood wasn’t boiling, I think is what the quote said. I didn’t see — I mean, I didn’t have that great sense of outrage that I felt on September the 11th. I was — on that day I was angry and sad. Angry that al Qaeda had — well, at the time — thought al Qaeda — found out shortly thereafter it was al Qaeda — had unleashed this attack. Sad for those who lost their life.”
— Prime Time Press Conference, White House, Apr. 13, 2004

Jack:
“President Bush knew that taking action against Saddam was a risk, not only for the country but also for his presidency.”

The President:
“You said we’re headed to war in Iraq — I don’t know why you say that. I hope we’re not headed to war in Iraq. I’m the person who gets to decide, not you.”
— Discounting the role of Congress to a reporter, Crawford, Texas, Dec. 31, 2002

Rumsfeld:
“It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.”

Air Force Gen. Richard Myers: “What you’d like to do is have it be a short, short conflict… . Iraq is much weaker than they were back in the ’90s,”

Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz: “The Iraqi people understand what this crisis is about. Like the people of France in the 1940s, they view us as their hoped-for liberator.”

“Our president made mistakes.”

Yes, so very many.

“History will record that some things went better than anticipated and some worse.”

Trust me, history will not be kind to this president.

“George Bush will be called a president who presided over a transition.”

He will be remembered as the first president to lie the American people into war, as well as the first to wage one electively and pre-emptively.

“I believe that he will be seen in the mold of Ronald Reagan,”

Ah Jack, one can always dream, I guess.
I believe he will be seen as a mold on America — that ate away at the Constitution, and fermented hatred and disrespect for America around the world.

Why is it that most of the 100 finalists were from the last 75 years. Michael Jackson made that list too. Gee that kind of puts it in perspective.

As for Wacko Jacko, yeah he beat out Gore and Kerry also thats for point that out.

Alan,

To be fair, Michael Jackson also beat out Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Karl Rove.

If there isn’t room for President Bush on Mt.Rushmore, People will likely construct something like the spinx, except animated, so it can swagger across one of the deserts in calif., eating fruits and nuts, spitting the seeds to fall where they may.
In the fight for truth and justice….Ahha…back to reality, the Dem. party will need more than bashing Bush to regain power.

I dont want a one party system, but whatever it is will be based on issues that most can agree on.

Rocky~

Once again a political quagmire where, you say tomayto, I say tomahto!What puts our servicemen and women at risk is a lack of understanding of those we fight.

“What puts our servicemen and women at risk is a lack of understanding of those we fight.”

Ive known quite a few hillbillies that have beat the crap out of complete strangers:)

“What puts our troops at risk is not going in with overwhelming force.”

That would have went over like a lead ballon(the left would have stroked out)

“What puts our troops at risk is the inabliity to completely secure an area before moving on to the next.”

Nope only a greater power (God) can “completely” do that.

“What puts our troops at risk is building an opulent green zone before supplying Baghdad with the basics of reliable electricity, clean water and sewers.”

“What puts our troops at risk is the croneyism in contracts and the tremendous waste of money.”

I guess it all depends on your view. I say potayto, you sah potahto!

Traci,

“”What puts our troops at risk is the inabliity to completely secure an area before moving on to the next.”

Nope only a greater power (God) can “completely” do that.”

Then God needs to be running our Miliatry, cause he couldn’t make half the blunders these guys did. It’s called how you fight to win a war. With the tactics that we have used in Iraq, we would still be fighting WW2.

Seriously, if we had gone in with overwhelming force, if we had secured what we had gained, we would be light years beyond where we are now.
And the risks to our troops would be significantly less.

“Ive known quite a few hillbillies that have beat the crap out of complete strangers:)”

Why am I not suprised?

Traci,

BTW I say potato

Those of you who were in Vietnam might remember Murphy’s Rules of Combat. One of them said “The battle plan goes out when the first shot is fired.”
Why wouldn’t be any differant in Iraq or any other war?
Yeah, some things didn’t go as planned, so lets all shoot the people that made up the plans.

Rocky,
It was the kind of shit that’s taking place right now that helped get alot of those 58,000 KIAs killed in Vietnam.

Ron Brown,

“It was the kind of shit that’s taking place right now that helped get alot of those 58,000 KIAs killed in Vietnam.”

That’s bullshit and you know it.

Those 58,000 kias happened because the people that were running the war were more interested in body counts than fighting charlie.

The big popularity difference between WW2 and Viet Nam and The Gulf war and now was in the way they were run.

Had Viet Nam not been run half ass, opinion wouldn’t have turned against it.

The same applies in Iraq. Those that are running the war are doing a half ass job of it and people are dying. Rumsfeld’s head should be on a pike right now. If they can’t do the job fire them and get some one that can.

I am not saying that we should get out of Iraq,as I said before I wasn’t for going there, but we are there lets quit screwing around.

Rocky~

“Why am I not surprised?”

I’m not quite sure? Are you judging me and fitting me into some kind of catagory? Racism takes many forms ya know!

Traci,

I have been accused of many things here, but racism hasn’t been one of them.

Rocky~

You may want to look into it….because you sure like to catagorize people into neat little boxes!

Traci,

Thanks for the personal assessment.

Did you want to add anything more to the discussion?

Rocky~

Nope quite finished…heading off to start my holiday weekend w/ a bunch of hillbillies!

Enjoy! Ciao!

Traci,

Are those guys from the Alps?

Rocky - and others as it applies - you are very wrong. You never answered my question from earlier today. Are you in contact with someone who is currently on the ground over there?

You just flat out do not know what is or is not happening over there unless you do.

Jack,
Hear that sound? Another nail pounded into the coffin. The Fed raised the rate to 3.25%, which everyone expected; however, the policy of continued ‘measured’ increases was left intact. The stock market tanked when the realization sank in; a raise to 3.5% is a given, and 3.75% likely.

We have a year to get it right in Iraq. The economy & the situation with manpower make it extremely difficult for the US to maintain a presence at present levels beyond one year.

Will Bush be remembered for inspiring a movement of democracy and freedom in the Middle East?

He has not addressed the issue of Israel successully. Compare this to Jimmy Carter and the Camp David Accord. It’s difficult to spread democracy & freedom without finding an answer there.

Globalization & western culture will continue to spread through the Middle East. But it will be the nature of the economy & western legal system that will spread democracy & freedom through the region- NOT military invasions, which, as we have seen, have precisely the opposite effect.

The Bush adminstration continues to play ‘the fear card.’ Note the 11 references to 9/11 in the most recent speech, the repeated references to terrorism, and the near ommision of any mention of Iraqi insurgents.

The cultivation of fear does not do the American people credit. We’re all adults. We all understand the slight possibility of another attack within our borders somehow, someday. Life is full of risks. So let’s take measured steps to protect ourselves. The ones taken to date have prevented attacks within US borders. We’re doing fine. Let’s become optimistic, and grow again, and generate jobss.

Let’s open the borders to legal immigration. Let’s encourage legal immigration of Mexicans, Haitians, Chinese, and yes, Muslims. We need to move forward, & regain our optimism.

Let us put the Bush legacy of fearfulness behind us.

j,

I read blogs from all over the world. One of them happens to be an Iraqi woman that lives in Baghdad.

I hope that meets your exacting qualification.

As I said before, you assume too much.

Jack,
To continue… Almost every president offers visions of freedom, democracy, and human rights spreading because of their policies. In past centuries, nearly every monarch envisioned glory, gold, and souls because of their policies.

However, whether a democracy or monarchy, such visions of success abroad rely upon a healthy economy at home.

The Bush legacy is one of jaw-dropping debts and deficits. As this occurred, Bush cast not one- not one- veto. His relations with Congress are the worst since… well, it’s hard to compare. Bush has no relations with the Republican Congress. Presidential leadership of Congress is nearly non-existent.

Tax cuts would count as a victory if they were accompanied by economic health. Yet this administration’s policies do not create jobs. And you cannot have a healthy economy without job creation. Worse, the tax cuts have been accompanied by a veritable orgy of spending, all this in a time of war.

As a result, we are in a terrible position; enormous deficits, a skyrocketing debt, trade deficits, all occurring in a period of recovery when job creation should be, but is not, taking place.

Yes, I keep harping about an inverted yield curve & job creation. To relate the point to your post:

A successful foreign policy begins with a succesful domestic policy, in particular a good economy. If the economy goes south, we are in a terrible position, every one of us, liberal & conservative alike.

The result of this downturn for foreign policy will mean a drawdown of troops from Iraq sooner, rather than later.

j,

“Yeah your right Rocky - We should have just turned the other cheek on September 11 like Clinton did all those years before.”

I don’t have a freaking clue to what you’re talking about.

He knew that Osama bin Laden’s first complaint against the U.S. was that it stationed troops in Saudi and he knew that troops were stationed in Saudi to hold Saddam Hussein in check.

And recall Osama bin Laden?s chief complaint about the U.S. was that U.S. troops were in Saudi. They were there because of Saddam Hussein.

jack, I hope you’re right that Bush will ultimately be seen as right about history’s direction toward democracy. I think most American presidents have believed this, though some have been a little more deft at the whole “transformational thing.” But I’ll leave that to history.

For now, I want to point out that twice you’ve mentioned OBL’s desire to see the U.S. out of Saudi Arabia. In both instances, I’v winced because you make it sound as if we invaded Iraq in order to appease the terrorist Osama. I trust that’s not what you really mean to say.

Reality check:

Islamic radical terrorists have been waging a war against the United States, her citizens, and her interests since 1968 (Robert Kennedy assassination), this war has as its epicenter, the Middle East.

The best way to fight a war is to fight it on the enemy’s soil, not on your own; bomb their cities, disrupt their economy, make them worry about their homes and families.

Iraq is a beach head, a target, and an ops center for our war against Fundamentalist Islamic terrorism; let the Jihadists take on our troops instead of massacring our citizens.

If we were to wage a war in the Middle east, then the most logical first step was to take out the strongest enemy, with the biggest Army, and whose hatred for the U.S. was a matter of record. Hussein had to go, and I for one don’t see the downside to his removal.

I just read someone’s comment about the thousands of dead people that Bush is responsible for…the number of U.S. troops killed since this war began is still a fraction of the number of people killed prior to the invasion of Afghanistan, from the assassination of Robert Kennedy at the hands of a Muslim radical, to the bombing of the U.S. barracks, the Iranian hostage crisis, the Achille Lauro, the first World Trade Center bombing, and September 11; doing nothing in the name of peace cost the U.S. many more lives than doing something in the name of war.

I’ll take doing something over doing nothing every single time.

The best way to fight a war is to fight it on the enemy’s soil, not on your own; bomb their cities, disrupt their economy, make them worry about their homes and families.

I thought we were there to liberate Iraq. Luis says they are the enemy and it is best to fight the enemy in their country. If Iraq is not the enemy is it still ok to use their country as a battlefield?

the number of U.S. troops killed since this war began is still a fraction of the number of people killed prior to the invasion of Afghanistan, from the assassination of Robert Kennedy at the hands of a Muslim radical, to the bombing of the U.S. barracks, the Iranian hostage crisis, the Achille Lauro, the first World Trade Center bombing, and September 11;

Yeah, the fraction is about 1/2. And only because you include only US troops in one group and all
people in the other. If you compare apples to apples the numbers really undermine your point.

Luis,
Such specious logic and gross misunderstanding of the situation leads you to advocate invading countries and killing innocent people.

Many acts of terrorism can be traced to the conflict between Israel & the Palestinians. The US finds itself a target of terrorism to the extent it supports Israel. This doesn’t excuse terrorism; but if you don’t understand what is happening, you will leap to disastrously bad conclusions.

Most Middle Eastern nations support the Palestinian cause, yet nation-states rarely support Palestinian terrorism in an open fashion. Afghanistan was a rare exception. We did the right thing and took down its government, primarily because it provided haven for OBL.

As emotionally dissatisfying as it may be, fighting terrorism is, for the most part, an intelligence operation.

You don’t see the downside to taking out Saddam Hussein? Consider civil war between ethnic groups for moment. Consider the replacement of a brutal, secular dictator with a Shia Islamic Republic allied with Iran in the south, a failed state in central Iraq, and a Kurdish state at war with Turkey in the north.

The Iraqi insurgents- not the foreign jihadists- the Iraqi insurgents fight the US because they will not accept a government dominated by their enemies, the Shias. Democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, doesn’t matter- they will not accept being dominated by their long-time, traditional enemy.

Let’s talk logic for a moment. A Saudi terrorist doesn’t sit at home and wonder if he should buy a plane ticket and launch an attack in the US, as opposed to going to Iraq. It’s not an either/or proposition.

However, the experience a terrorist gains by fighting in Iraq might make such a terrorist dangerous to the US later. Remember the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, fighting the Russians in the 1980’s? Remember Osama bin Laden?

Oh yeah. Him. Most terrorists do not think in strategic terms, which is precisely what makes OBL so dangerous. He masterminded a symbolic attack against the US military, political structure, and economy. He did this by targetting the Pentagon, White House, & World Trade Centers. There was nothing symbolic about the Americans who died.

The deaths of innocent Americans does not justify our killing innocent Iraqis in a total warfare scenariio. Our actions have already resulted in the deaths of far more innocent Iraqis than all the terrorist attacks against the US put together.

The choice is not whether to do nothing or do something wrong.

Why not do something right?

We cannot go back & undo the disastrous decisions of the Bush administration. We’re in Iraq now, and there are ways to succeed. But if people do not understand the situation, we are doomed.

Just a thought:

What happens if the Iraqis don’t want a Democracy?
For all I know they may want a bevelovent dicator!!!

Hey, right now I don’t want a Democracy - I want what the Constitution put together, A REPUBLIC!
And yes there is a great deal of difference.

In his latest podcast (American Dissent Radio), Chris Cronin made a comparison to the tactics used during the Cold War with the current conflict between the United States and the fundamentalist Islamists. He used the idea of House Rules, the tactic used by casinos to create games in which some people will win big, but in the big picture, the casino comes out on top by far. Cronin then discussed the Cold War, specifically the tactics of the arms race. Reagan and his predecessors created an arms race whereby they could intimidate but not necessarily attack the USSR. However, the most important aspect of the arms race is that the USSR would run out of funding, thereby ruining their economy and country, by building nuclear arms before America did. Thus, America won the Cold War.

Cronin then discusses the current War on Terror. He says that in this case, Osama bin Laden created the game, not America. Bin Laden knew that a huge superpower, when unexpectedly attacked by a known enemy, would attack back with brutal and overwhelming force. This was exactly our reaction after 9/11, going after Afgahnistant, and then Iraq. However, just as the USSR depleted its resources in the arms race, America too is using all of its resources, to almost no outcome, in the War on Terror. On the other hand, Bin Laden’s most powerful resource is young, religious, impressionable Muslims. By attacking Afgahnistan and Iraq, we are inevitably causing more young Muslims to be drawn to the other side, as obviously seen in the current Afgahni and Iraqi insurgencies. While America has a very huge price to pay for its military endeavors, bin Laden uses rather inexpensive attacks performed by an almost unlimited pool of impressionable young Muslim men.

Thus, Cronin hypothesizes that Osama bin Laden has created a war game that America can not win, at least in the current way we are fighting it right now. I had never thought about the situation in this way, and this makes the whole thing sound really scary, although the argument obviously comes from a biased source.

Luis,

Are you talking about a war IN the Middle East, or a war AGAINST the Middle East?

Ryan,
No question, due to poor leadership, the US walked right into the trap. OBL is an extemely intelligent & formidable enemy. Like most terrorists, a primary goal is to polarize. Polarization destroys the moderate, compromising middle, and forces everyone to extreme positions & actions. Sadly, Bush walked right into it with a ‘War on Terror’ and especially the invasion of Iraq. Bush played right into OBL’s hands.

If the President had all of this information about the dangers of The Iraqi regime, why all the fake intell. Remember the Ice Cream Truck? (I mean mobile chemical lab)What about the aluminum tubing?(I meant rocket parts to deploy chemical weapons and WMDs)If what you say is true why not come at the American people with the same angle? I’m more pursuaded by your argument tha any Bush used.I’ll tell you why.Bush and his regime made it up and you folks keep buying it.G.W. really should send thank you letters to all of his sheep.

“Having said that, we Americans elected a guy who has made many, many mistakes. Chief among them is that he fails to recognize the sublety, nuance, or cultural differences of middle eastern thought,particularly by poor, young religious muslims.”

“…poverty wasn’t what caused a group of middle-class and reasonably well-educated Middle Easterners to fly three airplanes into buildings and another into the ground. It was, rather, resentments growing out of the absence of representative institutions in their own societies, so that the only outlet for political dissidence was religious fanaticism.”

” thought we were there to liberate Iraq. Luis says they are the enemy “

I said that Saddam Hussein was the enemy, let’s debate what I actually said, not what you think I said.

“If Iraq is not the enemy is it still ok to use their country as a battlefield?”

Would you feel better using ours?

Luis Gonzalez,

And while we are telling the truth, lets tell the whole truth. These weren’t just middle class Middle Easterners. These were mostly well educated Saudi’s.

But I digress.

Every army needs cannon foder, do you think that OBL recruits mostly ideological rich kids to fill out his ranks?

“Such specious logic and gross misunderstanding of the situation leads you to advocate invading countries and killing innocent people.”

You have no idea o about what I know, or don’t know for that matter.

“Many acts of terrorism can be traced to the conflict between Israel & the Palestinians. The US finds itself a target of terrorism to the extent it supports Israel. This doesn’t excuse terrorism; but if you don’t understand what is happening, you will leap to disastrously bad conclusions.”

In other words, terrorists want the U.S out of the way, so they kill our citizens in the hopes that we weaken in our resolve.

“…yet nation-states rarely support Palestinian terrorism in an open fashion.”

An you are accusing me of not understanding what goes on…

Syria openly supports terrorism and houses Islamic Jihad, Saddam Hussein paid cash to the members of the families of suicide bombers, Hezbollah is still operating out of Lebanon, the world’s foremost State sponsor of terrorism is Iran.

I’m not the one who doesn’t understand what’s going on here.

Luis,
“You have no idea o about what I know…”

That’s true. I can only see what you write.

“… Terrorists want the U.S out of the way, so they kill our citizens in the hopes that we weaken in our resolve.”

There’s truth to that, too. The US underwrites Israel and arms it. Not everyone opposing this is a terrorist; but it certainly generates a lot of ill will and opposition. The Palestinians resort to terrorism as a form of asymmetrical warfare in their fight with the overwhelming firepower of Israel.

The Palestinians and many Arabs want the US to stop supporting Israel. The Israelis have been allies for years; we feel we owed them for what happened in WWII, and they owe us for the existence of their state.

Yet their state displaces & disenfranchises Palestinians. It’s the toughtest, thorniest problem in the Middle East.

Do we continue supporting Israel? Even if it means imposing an injustice upon the Palestinians? Or do we change policy? Is it right to support a Jewish state, yet oppose an Islamic state? We can’t undo the decisions made by the Bush administration, which includes putting us in a position of appearing to give in to terrorists if we back away from Israel.

“Syria openly supports terrorism and houses Islamic Jihad, Saddam Hussein paid cash to the members of the families of suicide bombers, Hezbollah is still operating out of Lebanon, the world’s foremost State sponsor of terrorism is Iran.”

Again, good point, but there’s more to it than that. For example, Islamic Jihad supposedly consists of a political wing which is separate from the military one. No, I don’t believe it either; but politically, the fiction gives Syria plausible deniability.

I’m not sure Hezbollah qualifies as a terrorist organization. As a matter of policy, they generally attack military targets, which isn’t really a terrorist act. This includes the killing of US marines in Lebanon while Reagan was President; attacking a military target is not an act of terrorism. (Think about it- ask yourself- what exactly is terrorism?). And by the way, Iran’s support of Hezbollah is where the tag ‘the world’s foremost State sponsor of terrorism’ comes from.

There is hope that Hezbollah can be co-opted in southern Lebanon, renounce attacks upon the Israeli military, & peacefully participate in a Lebanese government.

Saddam Hussein did pay families of suicide bombers $25,000. He also provided safe harbor to Abu Nidal, leader of the PLFP, leader of the Achille Lauro affair, & the murder of a elderly, wheelchair-bound US citizen, Leon Klinghoffer.

Was Saddam worthy of condemnation, and worse? Absolutely. Was it worth $150 billion and counting, over 1700 US soldiers dead, over 10,000 innocent Iraqis dead (never mind dead Iraqi soldiers)?

Iraq went from paying $25k to families of suicide bombers & harboring an essentially retired murderer, to becoming the ‘central front in the war on terrorism,’ with literally hundreds of foreign jihadists pouring into the country.

What’s done is done. We’re dealing with two separate problems, terrorism & insurgency. The question is, where do we go from here?

Luis,

Thank GOD someone in here has brains. Rocky you would argue with a wall I do believe. Terrorist ARE the enemy - they are making their stand in Iraq and Iraq is where they will die. I don’t want to have to worry about those bastards blowing up my daughter while she is at school here in the states. So if it’s all the same to you we will continue to fight them there. And when all is said and done and this is in the history books I am sure you will claim you were behind it all along. You are not a reasonable advesary. You said not to assume you were a liberal … you here what you want to hear not what is said - you twist every valid point to look like something it’s not and think because you talked to someone who said they were on the blog from Iraq that you know what the hell is going on over there on the ground. Sounds pretty liberal to me. As I said … my husband is on the front lines over there fighting for your right to be such an ass. I hear people like you tell everyone what is being done wrong but I never hear what people like you would do instead. We had two choices … Fight over there or look the other way and die over here. I only originally looked at this site because it said it was :Republican … If I knew people like you were here I would have saved my self the waste of time.

“The Israelis have been allies for years; we feel we owed them for what happened in WWII, and they owe us for the existence of their state.”

We support Israel because it is important to support the existence of a Democracy in that region of the world. President Bush supports the creation of an independent Palestinian State (I don’t know where you got the notion that “we” do not support an independent Palestine) because he understands the significance of a Muslim Democracy co-existing side by side with Israel, outside terrorists do as well, which is why they continue to feed the fires of hatred via terrorist attacks and try to derail the process.

Who is active in Gaza, the West Bank and Israel?

Hamas, an off shot of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt, Hamas’ current leader is believed to be living in Syria.

Hezbollah NOT a terrorist organization?

They reportedly fund 70% of the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade cell in the West Bank.

“We will starve terrorists from funding, turn them against one another, drive them from place to place until there is no refuge and no rest, and we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe heaven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.”

I guess Saddam should have booted Abul Abbas out of Baghdad, and quit sending checks to the families of the “Martyr’s Brigade” after he heard that speech.

Was it worth 1,700 deaths and $150 billion?

Libya capitulated, dismantling its chemical, nuclear, and biological WMD’s, Syria is leaving Lebanon and the Lebanese people held their first ballot free of Syrian domination in almost three decades, Saudi Arabia held its first elections ever in February 2005, and Afghanistan held its first elections in the history of that ancient nation.

Was the presence of U.S. troops in the immediate region the cause for these stark and sudden changes?

I don’t think that anyone with any level of intelligence will deny that it was the catalyst.

Was it worth the loss of American lives?

I watched the men and women of Iraq vote, lined up in the midst of uncertainty, with shells exploding around them; they dared death in order to cast their vote, and I can tell you that I’ve never been prouder of being an American, more grateful for the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, or more certain that our cause is just.

Let freedom ring!

“…my husband is on the front lines over there…”

Please convey my heartfelt gratitude to your husband for his service, and accept my humble thanks for your sacrifice.

Luis,
Israel a democracy?
1) There is no Israeli constitution.
2) Israel is defined as a Jewish state. Note the flag is a Star of David.
3) Israel gives special rights to Jews who seek to immigrate. It does not offer these rights to others.
4) Non-Jews are restricted on how much land they can own, where they can own it.

There’s much more. But to summarize: Israel is a democracy only if you are Jewish. And that, Luis, is not democracy.

The US supports a Palestinian state, but only as long as it is in places the Israelis do not claim as an integral part of their state. South Africa had its Apartheid. In the US, Indians were confined to reservations. Both the reservations & the Apartheid states consisted of the least desirable land. The Palestinians find themselves in an analogous situaion.

You make some good points, but it’s getting late. There have been successes such as Libya. Syrian troops withdrew. I’m holding my breath to see if the Lebanese re-establish what was once a fine democracy, or revert to the chaos of their civil war. But moving right along…

The Sunnis who did vote- and there weren’t many- did show courage. Unfortunately, the election should have been a referendum for partition. The Sunnis refuse to fight side by side with US troops against their fellow Sunnis in significant numbers, and why should they? Why should the Sunnis fight to establish a political system that places the Shias in power over them?

j,

Pheew, I don’t know where to start.

“Rocky you would argue with a wall I do believe.”

Sometimes it does seem that way.

“Terrorist ARE the enemy - they are making their stand in Iraq and Iraq is where they will die. I don’t want to have to worry about those bastards blowing up my daughter while she is at school here in the states.”

Here’s a question. Do you know what a terrorist looks like, does anyone?

“So if it’s all the same to you we will continue to fight them there. And when all is said and done and this is in the history books I am sure you will claim you were behind it all along.”

I belive that I am on record here wanting to put more troops into Iraq.

“You are not a reasonable advesary. You said not to assume you were a liberal … you here what you want to hear not what is said”

Have I attacked anybody here? Have I been rude?
I have put forth “valid points” and not gotten any worthwhile dialouge back from you other than you say I am wrong.
Where is your proof?
You said that anyone that is getting their news from the media doesn’t know what is going on.
Fine, there are a lot more reliable sources of information than the networks.

“you twist every valid point to look like something it’s not and think because you talked to someone who said they were on the blog from Iraq that you know what the hell is going on over there on the ground.”

There are literally tens of thousands of weblogs all over the world where Iraq is discussed, can I guess from your statements that they are all invalid?

“Sounds pretty liberal to me.”

Maam, I supported McCain. Does that sound like a liberal to you?

“As I said … my husband is on the front lines over there fighting for your right to be such an ass.”

And I thank your husband for that priviledge.

“I hear people like you tell everyone what is being done wrong but I never hear what people like you would do instead.”

Here’s one. Can we add more troops to completely secure the areas that we take?

“We had two choices … Fight over there or look the other way and die over here.”

Here is where we disagree. There are always more than two choices.

“I only originally looked at this site because it said it was :Republican … If I knew people like you were here I would have saved my self the waste of time.”

I am truely sorry that you feel that way, this is a discussion group. Everybody mingles and puts forth ideas and opinions.
At the top of the page there are three collumns, everybody posts on all three.

I think we can all agree that Saddam Hussein was not a nice guy. I agree that seeing Iraqi citizens defying the terrorists to vote was a beautiful site.
I think we can agree that the soldiers are doing their best to help Iraq rebuild.

It does not change the facts that we were lied to by our president about Weapons of Mass Destruction. We were given misleading information about Saddam’s ties to Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden. We gave billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to a company based on their own research that used to be run by our Vice President. Oil companies that back this administration are also profitting from the war. He has changed documents and pressured other countries to get his way. He ignores scientific facts in order to support one particular religious group or industry. This administration is responsible for the United States crushing debt. They have killed our image in the eyes of the world. He has cut funding for health care and education. Under his watch we have displayed the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. troops for the Muslim world to see and for terrorists to use as recruiting tools.
These things matter to us.
If some people want to argue that Bush is a great guy that is their right. Just don’t expect alot of people to agree with you.

Comment deleted by WatchBlog Manager - Andre’ if you get email which bothers you, reply to the email, DO NOT BRING such things here to WatchBLog agaig. —WatchBlog Managing Editor

Luis and j,

I have to ask the question, were you guys this paranoid before Sept. 11th?

I think that OBL’s whole point was to change America’s way of life, and from listening to you two talk, it appears that his plan worked.

Look, I appreciate the things that our military does. I am just appalled at the the way that they have had to do it. Their job is hard enough with low pay and with benefits being cut, I think that their leaders should give them that which is nescessary to do the job right.

We have the best the most technically advanced military force in the world, but they are being stretched beyond their limits.

Rumsfeld said that you go into a war with what you have.

Well then why did we have to go into Iraq when we did? Saddam wasn’t going anywhere, OBL was on the run, we were doing well in Afganistan.
The company that is supplying the armour for the HumVees said that they hadn’t been asked to step up production so it wasn’t like they were swamped with orders.

We have had nearly 2000 good men and women die in the last two years in Iraq. By Viet Nam or even WW2 standards that is infantesimal. The problem as I see it is that could have been even less.

We went into Iraq when we did by choice, not by nescessity, but, we’re there now so let us make the best of it, we broke it now we will have to fix it.

j,

Just because I don’t have a loved one on the ground over there doesn’t mean that I don’t care. I want our military to have the best, and they should be treated appropriately, and I have said so in virtuall every post on this thread. To add to that thought, I don’t think cutting veterans benefits is in the best interest of the country, and it can’t do much for military morale either.

During WW2 people in Americans were asked to sacrifice nylons, tires, gasoline, and food amoung other vital items. We, in 2005 on the other hand, have been given three tax cuts, and asked to watch our neighbors. That just doesn’t seem right.

Do you understand the meaning of the word “scuttlebutt”?
The men and women on the ground in Iraq pretty much know only what they see and read, and very little else about what is going on in the rest of Iraq, other than scuttlebutt.

There are plenty of places to find information, please don’t tell me that I need to be there to know what is going on.

I really don’t expect you to answer this, but I just had to say it.

I believe in the war in Iraq. If I were in charge we would be fighting it far more agressively. Yes I am aware that would lead to more deaths of “innocent” people. I reconcile that with the fact that nobody seems to know who is “innocent” and who is “harmless”. Women and children have been made into walking bombs.

It is wonderful that we paved the way for Iraqis to vote. I wonder however how meaningful that vote was at this point. How many candidates were there. At one point there were over 100.

I believe that there are and are WMD, we simply have