 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
msindependent
Vice Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 891
Location: Colorado
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| frist just shot himself in the foot, he is never going to be president. the wimpycans need to stop looking at the polls. the polls were wrong about kerry. w is so dang stubborn that i really do believe we will be out when iraq has a working army. it's not like we are going to occupy for pete's sake! it's my gut feeling the majority will be out before 08. but duh, we can't tell the enemy that. i'm sure it makes the troops feel all warm and fuzzy that the house and senate place their precious jobs above theirs. remember the republicans that can't support a president in war time and vote them out in the primaries. our country needs to move forward, not backward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Frogg
Ensign
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 64
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Senate already gets regular reports and they darn well know what the exit strategy is for Iraq. They also alredy get reports about the status and goals in Iraq on a regular basis. Maybe they don't read them. The Dems wanted this because they know the hill has been hurdled.....and, that after the December elections it would probably not be too much longer before some of our troops started coming home. I think it was General Casey (?????) who not so long ago said he thought things were going so well in Iraq with the Iraqi troops that we might be able to reduce troop levels starting in the Spring. Rumsfeld pretty much said the same in a radio interview this afternoon. The Dems are afraid of a successful Iraq. They want to be able to try to claim some credit for the military lead strategy Bush supported.
But, why would Repubs play this game? It must just be politics.
But, I wonder if something "good" might come out of this? If all the "good news" is put into print in a report to the Senate every 90 days......maybe the good news will finally get out!
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GM Strong
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
Posts: 1579
Location: Penna
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Senate is a cesspool. I am losing all respect for all Senators, especially for a lack of leadership. McCain has the run of the place and the Republicans kiss his butt. His bills are destructive and should have been junked or vetoed. He smoozes the Liberals and all the so called majority partry does is wring hands and tut-tut. Meanwhile Chester the Cheerleader Lott plots to return to his linguini spined leadership post and the McCain 7 threaten to go home and not come out to play. Liberals throw bricks, bombs and excrement at the Republicans and they take it without any response. To hell with them all. They all seem to be more interested in posturing for runs as POTUS, to which none will be elected, while the business they were elected to do goes neglected. A pox on the whole crowd.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jwb7605
Rear Admiral
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 690
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
good grief, GM:
quit pussyfooting around and tell us what you really think.
sounds like we might agree on a couple of things, but it's really hard to tell ...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greasepaint
Seaman
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 177
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
since the topic is Iraq,
with the resources at the command
of the US military,
what is the reason that the
Iraqi border is not sealed off? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
McCain gets it right. As far as I'm concerned, any Senator who voted for this amendment is persona non grata for POTUS in '08...
| Quote: | AIDING & ABETTING
By JOHN McCAIN
New York Post Op-ed
November 17, 2005 -- IRAQ is today in the throes of another critical moment in its post-Saddam history. There is both great hope and great difficulty, with a new constitution and an ongoing insurgency, with parliamentary elections in a month and violence plaguing many areas.
At home, the American people wish to see us succeed in helping bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people, but express increased uncertainty among the way forward. Now is the last time we should send a message that withdrawing troops is more important than achieving success.
Unfortunately, the Senate considered two amendments this week — one of which was approved with 79 votes — that did just that. In the version that passed, 2006 is designated as "a period of significant transition to full sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."
These words are likely to be examined closely in Iraq, by both friends and enemies. They suggest that the Senate has its priorities upside down, and I voted to reject them.
Anyone reading the amendment gets the sense that the Senate's foremost objective is the draw-down of American troops. What it should have said is that America's first goal in Iraq is not to withdraw troops, but to win the war. All other policy decisions we make should support, and be subordinate to, the successful completion of our mission.
If that means we can draw down our troop levels and win in Iraq in 2006, that would be a wonderful outcome. But if success requires an increase in American troop levels in 2006, then we must increase our numbers there.
Morality, national security and the honor our fallen deserve all compel us to see our mission in Iraq through to victory.
But the amendment suggests a different priority. It signals that withdrawal, not victory, is foremost in Congress' mind, and suggests that we are more interested in exit than victory.
A date is not an exit strategy. To suggest that it is only encourages our enemies, by indicating that the end to American intervention is near. It alienates our friends, who fear an insurgent victory, and tempts undecideds to join the anti-government ranks.
And it suggests to the American people that, no matter what, 2006 is the date for withdrawal. As much as I hope 2006 is the landmark year that the amendment's supporters envision, should it not be so, messages like these will have unrealistically raised expectations once again. That can only cost domestic support for America's role in this conflict, a war we must win.
The sponsors may disagree with my interpretation of their words, saying that 2006 is merely a target, that their legislation is not binding and that it included caveats. But look at the initial response to the Senate's words: a front page Washington Post story titled "Senate Presses for Concrete Steps Toward Drawdown of Troops in Iraq."
Think about this for a moment. Imagine Iraqis, working for the new government, considering whether to join the police force, or debating whether or not to take up arms. What will they think when they read that the Senate is pressing for steps toward draw-down?
Are they more or less likely to side with a government whose No. 1 partner hints at leaving?
The Senate has responded to the millions who braved bombs and threats to vote, who put their faith and trust in America and their government, by suggesting that our No. 1 priority is to bring our people home.
We have told insurgents that their violence does grind us down, that their horrific acts might be successful. But these are precisely the wrong messages. Our exit strategy in Iraq is not the withdrawal of our troops, it is victory.
Americans may not have been of one mind when it came to the decision to topple Saddam Hussein. But, though some disagreed, I believe that nearly all now wish us to prevail.
Because the stakes there are so high — higher even than those in Vietnam — our friends and our enemies need to hear one message: America is committed to success, and we will win this war.
Sen. McCain (R, Az.) is one of only 19 U.S. senators — including just 13 Republicans — to have voted against a Senate resolution Tuesday pushing for an eventual draw-down of U.S. troops from Iraq.
NY Post |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
msindependent
Vice Admiral
Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 891
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| McCain sure did get it right. He's back on my list and Kay Bailey Hutchison is off. McCain did well on Greta's show tonight, don't agree with his adding more troops, but that's okay. I'm going to darn sure remember the 13 with some guts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
