 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fortdixlover
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 1476
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 pm Post subject: WaPo Editorial: "Not the 'Real Vote'" |
 |
|
Even the Wash. Post realizes Murtha is deranged
| Quote: | Not the 'Real Vote'
Or so Rep. John Murtha says of the House's Iraq resolution.
Washington Post
Saturday, February 17, 2007; A30
REP. JOHN MURTHA (D-Pa.) has a message for anyone who spent the week following the House of Representatives' marathon debate on Iraq: You've been distracted by a sideshow. "We have to be careful that people don't think this is the vote," the 74-year-old congressman said of the House's 246-182 decision in favor of a resolution disapproving of President Bush's troop surge. "The real vote will come on the legislation we're putting together." That would be Mr. Murtha's plan to "stop the surge" and "force a redeployment" of U.S. forces from Iraq while ducking the responsibility that should come with such a radical step.
We'll return to Mr. Murtha's plan, but first it's worth considering the five days of debate that he so breezily dismissed. It's true that nonbinding resolutions won't stop the troop surge, which is already underway. But after years of minimal debate and oversight of the war, the House Democratic leadership was right to allow scores of representatives to speak at some length on Iraq. Some of the speeches were little more than partisan rhetoric, but there were also intelligent and heartfelt interventions, especially from veterans of Iraq and Vietnam.
The House vote does matter: It ought to increase the pressure on Mr. Bush and the Iraqi government to follow through on their pledges to accompany the military campaign with tangible steps toward political accords and economic reconstruction. Senate leaders would be wise to reach an agreement today allowing a similar debate. And both chambers should aggressively conduct oversight hearings aimed at holding the administration to its promise to link continued U.S. troop deployments to Iraqi performance.
Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.
Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?
It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha's remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support. Does Ms. Pelosi really believe that the debate she orchestrated this week was not "the real vote"? If the answer is yes, she is maneuvering her party in a way that can only do it harm. |
note: Topic/post amended. When posting published material, please use an article title as the "Topic" of a post as opposed to personal commentary. Thanks/me#1
_________________
"Millions For Defense, Not One Cent For Tribute" - Thomas Jefferson on paying ransom to Muslim corsairs (pirates). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
carpro
Admin
Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:51 pm Post subject: Re: WaPo Editorial: "Not the 'Real Vote'" |
|
|
| fortdixlover wrote: | | Even the Wash. Post realizes Murtha is deranged |
| Quote: | Not the 'Real Vote'
Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.
|
President Bush will most likely ignore attempts by politicians like Murtha to micromanage the war.
Constitutionally, I don't believe Murtha can pull off his plan. Funding is his only weapon.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the 2006 campaign, Nancy Pelosi issued a 31 page booklet, A New Direction For America (pdf file) which says on page 10:
| Quote: | To Defeat Terrorists and Stop the Spread of Weapons
of Mass Destruction, we will:
Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist
networks like al Qaeda, fi nish the job in
Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the
Taliban.
Double the size of our Special Forces, increase
our human intelligence capabilities, and
ensure our intelligence is free from political
pressure.
Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by
combating the economic, social, and
political conditions that allow extremism to
thrive; lead international efforts to uphold
and defend human rights; and renew
longstanding alliances that have advanced
our national security objectives.
Secure by 2010 loose nuclear materials that
terrorists could use to build nuclear weapons
or “dirty bombs.”
Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons
development in Iran and North Korea. |
How do they propose "doubling the size of our Special Forces" after undermining and destroying the morale of those we already have?
To date, I haven't heard any words like "defeat terror," "win," "Victory" or anything remotely associated with them from the "New Direction."
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gmez2001
PO3
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Posts: 274
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LewWaters wrote: | In the 2006 campaign, Nancy Pelosi issued a 31 page booklet, A New Direction For America (pdf file) which says on page 10:
| Quote: | To Defeat Terrorists and Stop the Spread of Weapons
of Mass Destruction, we will:
Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist
networks like al Qaeda, fi nish the job in
Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the
Taliban.
Double the size of our Special Forces, increase
our human intelligence capabilities, and
ensure our intelligence is free from political
pressure.
Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by
combating the economic, social, and
political conditions that allow extremism to
thrive; lead international efforts to uphold
and defend human rights; and renew
longstanding alliances that have advanced
our national security objectives.
Secure by 2010 loose nuclear materials that
terrorists could use to build nuclear weapons
or “dirty bombs.”
Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons
development in Iran and North Korea. |
How do they propose "doubling the size of our Special Forces" after undermining and destroying the morale of those we already have?
To date, I haven't heard any words like "defeat terror," "win," "Victory" or anything remotely associated with them from the "New Direction." |
Lew; They're in the engineering business,that is,how can I engineer myself in office again,setting up more dependency programs,blame conservatives,raise taxes and appease away the terrorists.
Damn hard engrg business to be in where one has to lie non stop 24/7.
_________________
Tin Can Gunline Vietnam
2nd generation Navy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kate
Admin
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1891
Location: Upstate, New York
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Former POW, Rep Sam Johnson's remarks - called Murtha out on his 'slow-bleed' plan
To Our Troops We Must Remain Always Faithful
| Quote: | <snips>
We POWs were still in Vietnam when Washington cut the funding for Vietnam. I know what it does to morale and mission success. Words can not fully describe the horrendous damage of the anti-American efforts against the war back home to the guys on the ground.
Our captors would blare nasty recordings over the loud speaker of Americans protesting back home...tales of Americans spitting on Vietnam veterans when they came home... and worse.
We must never, ever let that happen again.
The pain inflicted by your country's indifference is tenfold that inflicted by your ruthless captors.
<>
Debating non-binding resolutions aimed at earning political points only destroys morale, stymies success, and emboldens the enemy.
The grim reality is that this House measure is the first step to cutting funding of the troops...Just ask John Murtha about his 'slow-bleed' plan that hamstrings our troops in harm's way.
<>
We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them. We must support them all the way...To our troops we must remain...always faithful.
God bless you and I salute you all. Thank you.
|
Full text of remarks by Rep. Johnson during the debate on the floor of the House of Representatives
real clear politics
Video on youtube
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZCXt6MD0qyA
_________________
.
one of..... We The People |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BuffaloJack
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 1637
Location: Buffalo, New York
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
How does "doubling the size of our Special Forces" make it better?
doubling the size of the special forces means reducing the requirements to allow more applicants to pass the rigorous entrance criteria. This is the Liberal solution to everything, like lowering the passing grade to get a high school diploma.
All this will do is put more people in special forces uniforms. It doesn't get the better people to fill those uniform; it just fills the uniforms with available bodies.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
That I also recall, Buffalo, SF is also ALL VOLUNTEER! Like Airborne, you have to volunteer for it and then pass rigorous training.
What next, lower the standards of Marine Recon and Navy SEALS to "increase the numbers?"
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| 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
