- Englewood animal shelter has caring workers
- Resist the DREAM
- McCallin: loose cannon
- A DIFFERING VIEW/Farm Bill’s goal is to put affordable food on the table
- Environmental saviors
- Judge has a backbone
- Trick or treating etiquette
- Homelessness in Colorado
- Politics never meant to be a career option
- Term limits the answer for Congress
Things must be far worse in Iraq
They are now having to “require” diplomats and staff to go to Iraq, since few will volunteer. This situation is totaly out of control and some one—the Congress—must being it to a hault. We are only prolonging this disaster by staying any longer, and only for Bush pride, not strategic reasons.
This letter has not been edited.
The administration isn't going to talk because anything they say gets taken out of context OR people criticize and scrutinize anything said.
The point of all this is to say why should they bother, they can't win with ANYONE, not each other, not the media, and most certainly not the american people who have given up the good fight................
Posted by Heather on November 3, 2007 02:18 PMEven the AP and other anti-Bush media outlets are acknowledgeing that violence is down in Iraq and things are getting better. The fact that so many in the State Department are unwilling to risk more than a paper cut is more damning of their personal courage than a sign that it's too dangerous. The military has repeatedly met its recruiting and posting goals, so why can't the State Department cut it?
Posted by Neal5x5 on November 3, 2007 03:16 PMI hope that the next President, whoever that my be, will nominate G.W. Bush as America's in-country ambassador to Iraq. This would be a great reward for the man whose singular vision has made that country what it is today. I am sure he would leap at the chance.
Posted by Liam on November 3, 2007 03:39 PMHeather,
Neal's got it right.
The American people have not given up. The circumstances are improving on the ground.
There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure. Their desperation is a sign that we're doing better.
The Foggy Bottom has not produced America's best and brightest.
Posted by James Jones on November 3, 2007 04:00 PMjohn,The only answer I have for you is that you are a stupid idiot.
Posted by Keith on November 3, 2007 06:51 PMJJ said with the callous arrogance we've come to expect:
"There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure."
Name them JJ. Not everyone operates on the cynical level that you do. Project much?
Posted by Charles B on November 3, 2007 07:35 PMNeal 5x5 said
"The fact that so many in the State Department are unwilling to risk more than a paper cut is more damning of their personal courage than a sign that it's too dangerous."
I see, so now you're calling out the personal courage of our diplomats. Why do you hate America?
"The military has repeatedly met its recruiting and posting goals..."
More laugh out-loud nonsense from the man in the know...nothing. Sure, move the goalposts and they met their goals... What a sucker.
Posted by Charles B on November 3, 2007 07:46 PMCharles-
I can easily name them.
Anyone that backs the Democrat agenda which requires U. S. failure in Iraq.
And that means anyone voting Democrat.
That includes you unless you want to tell us again how you are not a Dem but back virtually every Dem policy.
Posted by Get Real on November 3, 2007 07:52 PMJ.J-
Good post as usual.
Posted by Get Real on November 3, 2007 07:55 PMCharles-
Yea sure,
The party that hates America is the party that backs the troops AND their mission.
And the party that doesn't bad mouth America at home AND abroad.
And the party that doesn't dismiss the idea of Islamofascism and the threat it poses to not only the U.S. but the entire world.
And the party that doesn't openly root for defeat and react with glee hearing any negative media reports on the war on terror.
And the party that doesn't try to portray our soldiers as ruthless torturers and baby killers.
And the party that doesn't embrace and defend rouge anti American dictators time and time again.
So who really hates America Charles?
Conservatives?
What color is the sky in you delusional world?
Posted by Get Real on November 3, 2007 08:17 PMThe administration isn't going to talk because anything they say gets taken out of context OR people criticize and scrutinize anything said.
Bush as victim. Touching.
I suppose to be sporting, those callous 75% of Americans should ease up on the little guy and start pulling punches while we wait out his remaining time in office.
GOP ideology must be on its last legs if these dregs are all that's left to make the case for the 'conservative' position.
Posted by on November 3, 2007 08:40 PM8:40
Your Moms calling for her sponge bath.Better get ready tiger!
08:40 PM: GOP ideology must be on its last legs if these dregs are all that's left to make the case for the 'conservative' position.
09:15 PM Your Moms calling for her sponge bath.Better get ready tiger!
Q.E.D.
Posted by on November 3, 2007 09:39 PMGo chafe yourself math boy. The dumocrats positions are all the G.O.P. needs to keep it ideologies going.
Hows Mom?
For once, I think I agree with Condoleeza Rice, even though by the standards of the dialogue on this letter I an America-hating liberal.
The State Department has determined it needs a certain number of diplomatic staff to cover its needs in Iraq. Volunteers aren't covering the needs. Therefore State Department personnel may find themselves on an-all-expenses pad trip to Baghdad and elsewhere when they didn't intend to go. Newspapers say it's right there in the fine print when these employees signed the dotted line that the State Dept can reassign them as needed. Before these people accepted government pay and benefits, they should have seriously thought about what they're getting into. Everybody would probably love to be assigned to the embassy in France, or Holland, or Bermuda or Japan. So the government is saying "You're going elsewhere!" If they don't like it, then either they can serve as required and grumble, or they can decide that the civil service and diplomatic corps is not right for them.
peterpi - you are right of course. If these State Department people had any sense of patriotic duty, they would quit whining and accept the assignment to Iraq ("Thank you sir! May I have another?" a la "Animal House") or do the truly patriotic, all-American thing and quit and go shopping. Like Jenna does.
Posted by Liam on November 4, 2007 12:38 AMHarry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
John Kerry
Teddy Kennedy
John Murtha
Steny Hoyer
Hillary Clinton
Barrack Obama
John Edwards
Shall I compose the entire list for you Charles?
Ruckman, what the hell are you talking about? You don't give one single fact to support your blanket statement. Here is one fact, roadside bombs are DOWN by half in the last 6 months. But don't look for the liberal media to report that. You and other liberal only focus on the negative. You idiots actually want us to lose this war. Reid set that tone by actually stating we've lost this war. What a bunch of anti-Americans!
Posted by on November 4, 2007 08:16 AMLetter writer Democrat John Rickman would like to think that "Things must be far worse in Iraq".The news comming from Iraq is good so Democrats have to spin whatever they can find to give aid and comfort to the terrorists.The Democrats have helped the terrorist in the past to stop the US from winning the war and it would appear that they are up to their old tricks.This time I think the American public will see through their ploy.Also the diplomates that fear going to
Iraq are probably Democrats that have always been cowards so this is nothing new.
Letter writer Democrat John Rickman would like to think that "Things must be far worse in Iraq".The news comming from Iraq is good so Democrats have to spin whatever they can find to give aid and comfort to the terrorists.The Democrats have helped the terrorist in the past to stop the US from winning the war and it would appear that they are up to their old tricks.This time I think the American public will see through their ploy.Also the diplomates that fear going to
Iraq are probably Democrats that have always been cowards so this is nothing new.
Well,gosh.Could be that the folks in the Diplomatic Service read the newspapers too.Maybe they figure the bad guys in the Mideast wanna take some more hostages.And maybe they figure they'll get the same help their predecessors got from James Earl.
Heather: "The administration isn't going to talk"
What a ridiculous statement. The administration sounds like a bunch of auctioneers, all trying to sell the American people something they do not want.
Posted by Truth on November 4, 2007 11:51 AMJones: "There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure."
When Jones posts, he casts common sense and reason aside and let's his sick emotions take over. There are people who rightly or wrongly think America would be better off turning things over to the Iraqis. They think that in the end America would be more successful than pursuing the present course. They may be wrong, but to say that they are heavily invested in our failure is to simply reflect Jones' lack of common sense and fairness. He is like a mad man who repeatedly says things that don't make sense.
Posted by Truth on November 4, 2007 12:00 PMYou'll find many sensible and fair minded people who claim that the following people have the wrong approach to Iraq"
Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
John Kerry
Teddy Kennedy
John Murtha
Steny Hoyer
Hillary Clinton
Barrack Obama
John Edwards
But you won't find any sensible and fair minded people who would accuse them, as Jack Bauer does, of wanting the U.S. to fail.
It's because of posters like James Jones and Jack Bauer that this forum is so lacking in credibility. They simply shut their brains downs and let their emotions run wild.
Posted by Truth on November 4, 2007 12:08 PMTruth,
This is what Senator Reid had to say last April; six months before the surge had been implemented:
"This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything, as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday", Mr. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill press conference with anti-war legislators.
Prompting this response from the Republican side.
I can’t begin to imagine how our troops in the field, who are risking their lives every day, are going to react when they get back to base and hear that the Democrat leader of the United States Senate has declared the war is lost,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said."
If we suffer a defeat in Iraq then Sen. Reid is in good shape. But if the surge is successful, Reid looks like a chump. It is very clear, Sen. Reid is vested in our failure in Iraq and he put himself in that position without the help of any of us wildly emotional Republicans.
Good call James..........
Posted by Heather on November 4, 2007 01:39 PMJones, before I mention my take on Senator Reid's statement, I want to make this clear:
You said that the Democrats, not Senator Reid but the Democrats, want the U.S. to fail. And you apparently seek to prove that by referring to a statement by a single Democrat. That is dishonest and reprehensible. Your statement was clearly an entirely emotional outburst and unfair statement and one not supported by reason, common sense or fairness.
You are the epitome of the guy who said that all Indians walk in single file. When asked how he knew, he said he saw three Indians yesterday and they were walking in single file. Even worse, you haven’t seen even one Indian walking in single file because your statement about Reid is clearly fatuous.
As to Senator Reid's statement, I think he, along with many others, including a number of retired military men, sincerely thought that the surge was not working and was not accomplishing anything of long term significance. However, in my opinion the statement was unwise because he couched it in such absolute terms (something you so often do on controversial issues) and he made it in too much of a political context. (By the way, he didn’t just say the surge was not working; he said he believed it was not working; should people who believe it is not working keep quite and, in their minds, let the U.S. walk the gangplank?)
There is no way to really know what the fall out from his statement was. But it seems to me to be the kind of statement that would get the attention of the Iraqi government and perhaps spur it to make stronger efforts at trying to achieve its very indispensable part of the strategy. The failure of the Iraqi government to do more than it has is the main culprit in the Iraqi quagmire. Anything that might possibly motivate it might be worth trying.
There were, and still are, many people, including an impressive array of retired military men, who criticize our efforts in Iraq and often opine that they don’t see it working. It is not irrelevant that both General Petraeus and Secretary of Defense Gates have acknowledged the possibility of failure and have said that there are plans for such a contingency. We cannot blindly assume that the surge will work. We need to have an ongoing debate about that and those generals and others who think it won’t work should be able to freely speak out without people like you suggesting that want the U.S. to fail. We have already had too much of this business of inferring that if you disagree with Bush you are being unpatriotic.
Today's Daily, 11/4 RM News; words from David M. walker, the nation's comptroller:
America's current liability $50.5 trillion; $400,000 amount a full-time worker in the U.S. owes toward that debt; $440,000 amount the average U.S. household owes toward that debt; $170,000 what a child born today would owe toward that debt in his lifetime, whether he worked or not. Find this in Perspective "The United States of Debt" so I ask again: Why is W. Bush's approval rating so high at 23 percent?
Deicide Corner: Why not Belamy's Pledge of Allegiance which alleges indivisibility as opposed to the Christian Pledge swiped from Belamy that alleges divisibility?
Posted by Richard Grimes, Deicide, sometimes misanthrope http://www.geocities/r22037/think.html on November 4, 2007 02:40 PMTruth,
My posts in this thread are notable for the complete absence on one word - Democrat.
Posted by James Jones on November 4, 2007 04:59 PMTruth,
Knowing you literal mind I will revise the above.
The word Deomcrat is found in my posts but not as usd by me.
I did not say "that the Democrats, not Senator Reid but the Democrats, want the U.S. to fail."
You made that up and attributed it to me.
Posted by James Jones on November 4, 2007 05:07 PMI stand corrected Jones. I was incorrect in saying that you said that the Democrats want the U.S. to fail. Likewise, I was incorrect in saying that you said Senator Reid wanted the U.S. to fail; it was Jack Bauer who said that. I apologize.
What you said was "There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure. Their desperation is a sign that we're doing better."
I assumed you were referring to Democrats, but you say you weren't. So what Republicans were you referring to? Or would you prefer to drop that matter because you are in a dilemma?
P.S. Despite your denial, I still have the sneaking suspicion that you were referring to Democrats, and to Senator Reid. Correct me if I am wrong.
Posted by Truth on November 4, 2007 07:17 PMTruth,
Of course I was referring to Reid. I made that clear when I produced what Reid said.
You attributed to me statements I never made. Then you accuse me of being dishonest and reprehensible for your inventions. I call you on it. You apologize. But tell me that's what I really meant. This comes in the midst of your complaint that this page isn't credible. All this is predictable and tiresome.
I have a suggestion.
How about if in the future you limit the name calling to what I have actually posted? That way you won't have to continue apolizing when I call you out on your nonsense.
Posted by James Jones on November 4, 2007 08:15 PM"Anyone that backs the Democrat agenda which requires U. S. failure in Iraq" is "deeply invested in an American failure." according to one of our resident far right wing mouthpieces.
by that logic, the VAST majority of americans are "deeply invested in an American failure."
McCarthy revisted.
The VAST majority of Americans favor the Dem's stances on nearly every single issue before America today.
Does that make American a nation full of America-hating traitors, by your far right wing logic?
Posted by jay on November 4, 2007 08:48 PMTruth, I know you see how this works with JJ and other right wing posters. When you corner them with logic they immediately change the subject to grammer, spelling or error in a quote, anything so they don't have to deal with the issue that has cornered them. That's what's really tiresome.
Posted by leftside on November 4, 2007 09:34 PMLeftside,
Actually what Truth said was:
I stand corrected Jones. I was incorrect in saying that you said that the Democrats want the U.S. to fail. Likewise, I was incorrect in saying that you said Senator Reid wanted the U.S. to fail; it was Jack Bauer who said that. I apologize.
Truth on November 4, 2007 07:17 PM
You read that and conclude this is all about grammer, spelling or error in a quote, anything so they don't have to deal with the issue that has cornered them?
Do you have any comprehension of how delusional you are?
Posted by James Jones on November 4, 2007 09:45 PMJJ your one of the "twenty-five percenters" I'd be careful calling other's delusional.
Truth admitted to and apoloigized for his mistake which in my opinion had nothing to do with the focus point of the argument. You have chosen not to let it go and take the argument in a diffent direction. Typical Republican "shell game".
Posted by leftside on November 5, 2007 06:29 AMApparantly the right continues to feel the 75% of us in America are traitors hoping we fail in Iraq? No we dont hope we fail, we simply believe this is an engagement that we cannot win and is not worth more American lives or more American dollars. I suggest that the 25% who support the war have no regard for American life or American soldiers. They could care less how many of our military die as long as one day they could pretend that we 'won'. The Right will send as many Americans as they can into Iraq in the faint hope they cane say they were 'right'. This same thought is what keeps Bush going, to preserve his 'legacy'. That 'legacy' for Bush and his 25% upporters will be the disredard for young Americans lives.
Heather, JJ and jack bauer why do you hate our soldiers so much that you care so little for their life? Is it really wrth 4000 dead young men and women to try and prove we were right in our invasion?
Typical JJ:
Utters nonsense that is meant to imply something specific.
Nonsense called out for what it is.
Backtracks using plausible deny-ability.
Accuses others of misunderstanding his clear meaning.
Repeat.
So transparent.
Posted by Charles B on November 5, 2007 07:09 AMTruth Says
"I stand corrected Jones. I was incorrect in saying that you said that the Democrats want the U.S. to fail. Likewise, I was incorrect in saying that you said Senator Reid wanted the U.S. to fail; it was Jack Bauer who said that. I apologize."
PLEASE TRuth twll me where I said that? where anywhere? I provided a list of Representatives. That is all.
Truth that is another lie straight out of your twisted mind- libs, most particularly you, are getting good at that.
Here is my entire (and only other) post on this topic
"Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
John Kerry
Teddy Kennedy
John Murtha
Steny Hoyer
Hillary Clinton
Barrack Obama
John Edwards
Shall I compose the entire list for you Charles?"
Posted by Jack Bauer on November 4, 2007 07:53 AM
Truth you are fraud
07:28AM was mine
Where is my apology Truth? or are you too much of a hack to admit when you falsly put words into others mouths?
Leftside
"Truth admitted to and apoloigized for his mistake which in my opinion had nothing to do with the focus point of the argument. "
Really? Tell me more about this this - Typical Republican "shell game".
Here's the statement that has been under discussion:
"There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure."
Now apparently you think 75% of the population falls into that catagory. That's silly of course but you will think whatever you like.
But why should I be careful about delusion when you would put the number much higher than I would?
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 07:56 AMJJ.
The 75/25 split as been common knowledge for over a month now.
The 25% have always accused those against the war of not supporting the troops and wanting the US to fail in Iraq. Once again common knowledge.
As far as being delusional, you cast that first stone at me. If you can't take it coming back don't cast it.
Posted by leftside on November 5, 2007 08:15 AMJack Bauer ridiculously claims that these people want the U.S. to fail:
"Harry Reid
Nancy Pelosi
John Kerry
Teddy Kennedy
John Murtha
Steny Hoyer
Hillary Clinton
Barrack Obama
John Edwards
Shall I compose the entire list for you Charles?"
It is typical Bauer that he provides no support for that statement. It was clearly an emotional outburst from a man whose biases are more active than his brain.
Now, Bauer might claim that he published that list because he was campaigning for their re-election. However, the reason he posted it was in response to an inquiry as to who the people are that Jones wrongly and ridiculously claims want the U.S. to fail.
We've had way to much of this crap that Jones tries to peddle by claiming that those who disagree with Bush are unpatriotic. It is a sick line being touted by sick people. There are many people who think that the surge will not work in the long run, including many military men. The idea of saying that people like that want the U.S. to fail is disgraceful and insulting.
Posted by Truth on November 5, 2007 08:18 AMJust so there's no confusion from the far right on this one:
ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Oct. 29-Nov. 1, 2007. N=1,131 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. Fieldwork by TNS.
"Which political party -- the Democrats or the Republicans -- do you trust to do a better job handling the situation in Iraq?" Options rotated
Democrats 50%
Republicans 34%
Both (vol.) 2%
Neither (vol.) 10%
Unsure 4%
"All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benefits to the United States, do you think the war with Iraq was worth fighting, or not?"
Worth It 35%
Not Worth It 63%
Unsure 2%
"Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?"
Keep in Iraq Until Stabilized 42%
Bring Home As Soon as Possible 54%
Unsure 4%
Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Oct. 17-23, 2007. N=2,007 adults nationwide. MoE ± 2.5
CBS News Poll. Oct. 12-16, 2007. N=1,282 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"
Approve 26%
Disapprove 67%
Unsure 7%
"As you may know, the U.S. has sent a troop surge to Iraq. From what you have heard or read, would you say the troop surge is making the situation in Iraq better, making it worse, or is it having no impact on the situation in Iraq so far?"
Better 33%
Worse/No Impact 54%
Unsure 13%
CBS News Poll. Oct. 12-16, 2007. N=1,282 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).
"Thinking ahead to the next presidential election, do you think a Democratic or a Republican president would do a better job resolving the situation in Iraq?" Parties rotated
Democratic 51%
Republican 31%
Depends (vol.) 6%
No Difference (vol.) 8%
Unsure 4%
I don't know whether to despise Keith or feel sorry for him; Keith is so limited in his vocabulary; it is a vocabulary I have been active in dissuading from being used so as never to compel the moderator to cancel this blog out of disgust.
Posted by JVB on November 5, 2007 12:01 PMleftside
"The 25% have always accused those against the war of not supporting the troops and wanting the US to fail in Iraq. Once again common knowledge."
Have I done that?
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 01:59 PM"There are people in the US who are deeply invested in an American failure."
James Jones
Posted by jay on November 5, 2007 02:55 PMjay
There is a difference between saying that there are Americans invested in American failure and saying that ever American who is against the war wants us to fail.
You are conflating "invested in" and "opposition to" in the hope of obscuring the truth.
That's known around here as a Republican shell game.
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 03:06 PMTruth,
The dealI offered was that you read my posts and stop telling lies. You returned with another lie about something I have never said.
Bauer asked you for an apology and you answered with more insults.
I have a new offer. You go on telling lies and maligning everyone who has the temerity to mkae a point that displeases you.
I will pretend that you don't exist.
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 03:13 PMQueenie,
Good of to drop by and tell us you don't read this board or look at my posts.
Obviously.
So what did you think of that Reid remark? That guy's really something don't you think?
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 05:14 PMGlad we cleared that up JJ...so...considering that the VAST majority of americans think 1) the war was a mistake 2) isn't worth the blood and treasure we're spending on it 3) want dems in charge and 4) want us out regardless of the conditions on the ground....what portion of the country do you believe is hoping that America will fail?
Posted by jay on November 5, 2007 05:15 PMTruth,
If you would read a newspaper or website other than moveon, dailykos, et all you'd realize that those whom I listed have all said disparging remarks about our troops possible success or lack thereof in iraq -at times almost with glee.
Not that they want our troops killed - but that they think the surge had failed (prior to implementation) and that it would fail once it began.
James jones posted the text verbatim of what Senator Reid said but you ignore these things because they don't align with your agenda. Deny all you want - the democratic party is riding their success in 2008 on the failure of the policy in Iraq - surge success or surge failure.
It is truly amazing how you are so condescending and arrogant about your so called knowledge of situations and when called on the carpet, you put words in peoples mouth to prove your so called intelligence.
And another thing, this discussion really isn't about patriotism even though you drop that in there- I'm sure you are patriotic and that the people whom I listed are, but the facts are what they are no matter what you believe in your pathetic little world. They have all been subliminally and verbally rooting for the policy to fail and one even said success would be problematic for democrats (James Clyburn ring a bell?)
Posted by Jack Bauer on November 5, 2007 05:51 PMjay,
"what portion of the country do you believe is hoping that America will fail?"
Generally the people who put their political interests ahead of the interests of the nation. Outside of the Democrats in the House and Senate - not many. Nearly everyone at Moveon.org, NY Times, the networks, CU faculty rooms, the leftists on this page and so on but they are a tiny fraction on the population.
Most normal Americans want to see us succeed in Iraq despite any misgivings about the invasion itself. At a rough guess, I'd put the number at about 98%.
Surely you have some poll you can adduce?
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 06:40 PMJack Bauer,
For all the current huffing, I don't think the election in 2008 will be about Iraq. By that point we will have pretty clear resolution.
The War on Terror however will not be over and the next President will have to carry the fight forward. This will be an important election.
It hasn't seemed to occur yet to the leftists on this page that Bush will not be a candidate. It will be interesting to see what happens when they come to terms with that one.
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 06:49 PMJames Jones,
In your opinion, WHO needs to come to terms with the end of the Bush dynasty more -- Republicans or Democrats?
Posted by Inquisitor on November 5, 2007 08:23 PMDemocrats.
Posted by James Jones on November 5, 2007 08:40 PMjay,
How many Democrats where oversampled in those polls. Cut and paste that info or STFU.
FLAWED POLLS ARE MEANINGLESS
If things are so great in Iraq, why do we have to pay Blackwater for securety?
Posted by rick on November 6, 2007 03:56 AMSee James...now you're tin foil hat is showing.
You need to lay off the Rush.
By the way...things are just as bad as they seem in Iraq:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21650614/
Jay thinks if the majority of Americans want slavery we should bring it back.
Posted by An American on November 6, 2007 11:04 AMAA...don't pout. This is a simple equation.
Had the Republicans done a good job...they would still have Congress. Had they done a good job, they'd keep the WH. Had they had any success at all during their historic three branch majority....they would still be favored as the party to deal with the issues before the country.
Unfortunately for all of us...they didn't...and now they have to pay the bill for their incompetence.
Posted by jay on November 6, 2007 11:25 AMI think from An Americans postings on this page and others we can clearly see what a total coward and chickenhawk he is. I would say he is a hateful man, except that to call him a 'man' is a slight to every man in the room. He has been asked repeatedlly to state his military experience (NONE) and to state why he hasnt enlisted. It should be apparent he is too much a coward to enlist, he 'pretends' to support the war but hides under his bed instead of joining our military.
His cowardness makes it obvious that he hates America and hates freedom. His lack of intelligence and his total cowardice shows in every post. If you cant tell us why you are too chicken to enlist can you tell us why you hate this country so much? I encourage every real American in this room to spit on this spineless excuse of a man.
Interesting, if the war is lost, as some people say , then the troops can come home.
If the war is won, and here I can not point to anything specific to back this statement up, then the troops can come home, except for a small garrison kept behind.
JJ, post at 6;40 got you just a bit closer to saying something meaty, but not yet. However the word normal is cute.
So if I boil JJ down, I`m sorry, if I boil his argument down, and here I am shamelessly paraphrasing, he thinks that Democrats in Congress and the Senate, and others, unnamed, but alluded to, want the U.S. troops in Iraq to fail in order to make liberals, secularists, humanists, Democrats, lefties, etc look good. Or to prove that we, yes we, were right, and are always right. Or something like that. I fully admit that JJ has not told us specifically who in government actually wants us to fail, or more importantly why, however, he must have some folks in mind. Who? Why?
It escaped some people, not named or alluded to, but people who are heavily invested in turning this country into a Christian theocracy, but I would never say who for fear of being challenged, that Reid was speaking from horror and sorrow concerning our troops. For all we know the man is an alarmist, the opposite of saying, too early, mission accomplished or standing in front of a banner and letting us be mislead. Saying the conflict is Iraq is over, however Bush said it, was also over the top.
Jack, as to the "what the Hell was that for then" list of Democrats, are they traitors? People who want the U.S. troops to fail in Iraq? Or just your personal list of folks you don`t like?
Get real, name the party that roots with glee when we falter. Be a big boy now, do you mean the Democrat party? All of us? Then say so.
right now things are a bit calmer, and that makes me nervous. Those people never quit improvising ways to hit our troops. This calm gives them a chance to regroup, get more outside funding and supplies and men. I just know something awful is coming in Iraq unless the tribal leaders have banded together to fight the foreign terrorists in their country.
Posted by Sharon B. on November 6, 2007 03:52 PMSharon B,
JJ "thinks that Democrats in Congress and the Senate, and others, unnamed, but alluded to, want.. ."
I fully admit that JJ has not told us specifically who in government actually wants us to fail, or more importantly why, however, he must have some folks in mind. Who? Why?
Here's my post:
This is what Senator Reid had to say last April; six months before the surge had been implemented:
"This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything, as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday", Mr. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill press conference with anti-war legislators.
Posted by James Jones on November 4, 2007 01:03 PM
That help?
Posted by James Jones on November 6, 2007 05:39 PMJJ, no. Say it loud and proud. Is Mr. Reid one who wants us to fail, or just one who points out in his opinion, which is subjective by the way, that we are failing?
How could he talk about the surge and violence in Iraq yesterday, six months before the surge had been implemented?
James, your 6:40 answer to Jay "outside of the Democrats in the House and Senate...not many. Meaning not many, outside elected Democrats, hope that America will fail.
Did I get it this time?
Posted by Sharon B. on November 6, 2007 06:16 PMSharon B,
Let's just say the circles are getting smaller.
Posted by James Jones on November 6, 2007 08:06 PMJames Jones, well let`s just say "A wet bird never flies at night".
Now that we have wondered into Zen land, you are making even less sense.
Posted by Sharon B. on November 6, 2007 09:03 PMSay "Goodnight Gracie"
Posted by James Jones on November 7, 2007 06:54 AMIsn't it funny that ALL the Democrat opinions on the war give aid and comfort to the terrorists and attack our troops !!!!!
Posted by An American on November 7, 2007 08:27 AMJay ,someday when I have the time I will educate you on the issues but until then you will have to keep making a fool of yourself.
Posted by An American on November 7, 2007 08:34 AMJames Jay:
So Reid stated what seems obvious and in your estimation that constitutes investment in failure?
In my world that's called "dealing with failure". It's what grown-ups do.
"Goodnight Gracie". (laughter and then applause)
Posted by Charles B on November 7, 2007 10:54 AMAs always An American dodges the questions of his military service ( again none0 and why he will not enlist ( cowardness). From An Americans postings on this page and others we can clearly see what a total coward and chickenhawk he is. I would say he is a hateful man, except that to call him a 'man' is a slight to every man in the room. He has been asked repeatedlly to state his military experience (NONE) and to state why he hasnt enlisted. It should be apparent he is too much a coward to enlist, he 'pretends' to support the war but hides under his bed instead of joining our military.
His cowardness makes it obvious that he hates America and hates freedom. His lack of intelligence and his total cowardice shows in every post. If you cant tell us why you are too chicken to enlist can you tell us why you hate this country so much? I encourage every real American in this room to spit on this spineless excuse of a man.
Charles B
'So Reid stated what seems obvious and in your estimation that constitutes investment in failure? In my world that's called "dealing with failure". It's what grown-ups do.'
Your posts make it pretty obvious that adults don't inhabit your world. Here's a better analysis from an real, live adult.
I can’t begin to imagine how our troops in the field, who are risking their lives every day, are going to react when they get back to base and hear that the Democrat leader of the United States Senate has declared the war is lost,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said."
Keep up the audio aids - that a real sign of maturity.
Posted by James Jones on November 7, 2007 12:51 PMJaymz Jeigh regurgitated the following bile:
"I can’t begin to imagine how our troops in the field, who are risking their lives every day, are going to react when they get back to base and hear that the Democrat leader of the United States Senate has declared the war is lost,” Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said."
Another reason to think Mitch McConnell is a moral midget and an intellectual dwarf. The statement is meant to cast aspersions upon dissension rather than discuss the merits of the continued occupation. It's an appeal to emotion and is disingenuous.
If the troops were to come back home or be re-deployed to a safer destination then I'm sure they would be overjoyed.
There has been no political reconciliation in Iraq which is the only benchmark that counts. Our generals have said over and over that there is no military solution to the problem. Our soldiers increasingly understand the same thing if the polling information is to be believed.
By challenging the policy and admitting the obvious, we are showing the troops the respect they deserve.
You and Mitch McConnell are the perverse creatures who think sending soldiers into a meat-grinder with no achievable purpose is somehow "honoring" them, and that ever admitting defeat or failure is somehow "defeatist" and will cause some sort of psychological harm to the troops.
How condescending can you be? Soldiers understand better than you certainly how our system works. There is civilian political leadership in charge of choosing their mission. They understand we have adversarial parties and branches of government. They don't see debate as an affront. They see a lack of debate as an affront.
Give them some credit.
Posted by Charles B on November 7, 2007 02:00 PM