When Did Congress Press for a WWII Exit Strategy? What Was the "Plan" to Win WWII?
A majority of both houses of Congress, a Democratic presidential administration, a Republican presidential administration, and numerous foreign nations agreed that Saddam Hussein represented a security threat that needed to be neutralized. After voting in 1998 to neutralize that threat by removing the Saddam regime, Congress voted again in 2002 to enforce its 1998 vote.
Now that the war has not proceeded according to what they had hoped 2-1/2 years ago, the Senate has changed its mind. Clearly, nobody in the Senate understands that a war plan changes constantly and never survives first contact with the enemy. To demand a rigid, inflexible plan is absurd. But the morons in the Senate persist.
What we have left is a post-war mission to help rebuild Iraq and see through the successful establishment of a democratic republic. We are also helping to rebuild the police force and the economy, while securing the population by eradicating the terrorists who are trying to fill the post-Saddam void.
I have no idea why anyone would want us to stop this mission. That republicans are helping the democrats sabotage our most important final phase in establishing a stable Iraq proves how corrupt the party really has become.
32 comments:
MZ,
I hate to diverge from your views on this one, but have you seen Hugh's postings at JW? He explains pretty lucidly why US should pull out of Iraq (his reasons are not those of the Dems, who are of course a thoroughly corrupt party). Jerry Pournelle is also pretty clear about how much good the money that is being spent in Iraq would do in the search for viable alternative energy forms.
No need to apologize, Another Infidel. As you have already seen, I am not running a monolithic website that insists on absolute allegience to the viewpoint of the host - even if I am always right!
;)MZ
And yes, I am very familiar with Hugh at JW's antiwar reasoning, and, as I've said before, I don't buy it for a minute. It's all just window dressing for pure concessionism...
I know you disagree, but I hope to change all that!
And another thing: The Republicans are nearly as corrupt as the Democrats...the way they so easily give into the RINO faction against the will of the conservative base makes me sick.
-MZ
I agree that MZ is always right. Except when he disagrees with me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyways the Dems are only against the war because they are hungry for political power.
They supported Clinton during his bombing campaign of Serbia and they would have followed Clinton into Iraq.
I do agree with MZ that partisan politics poisons politics and hurts our foreign policy. Therefore I follow no politician blindly, but follow the issues instead.
That is why a person who voted for Clinton in 96 and opposed Bush in 2000 is now supporting the administration during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Freedom Now
Kev and FreedomNow: Of course the Dems are Liars with a capital L. And of course they are doing their best to keep US border security as weak as possible, never mind that those whom they are aiding are trying their best to get dirty bombs in. But that is precisely why Hugh Fitzgerald's arguments at JW (I am assuming you know that site) are so convincing to me - that the men and materiel should no longer be wasted in Iraq - the Iraqis have their government and Sharia is just a short time away from getting imposed, as it has been in all Islamic countries. If GWB was serious about guarding the US, Norman Minetta would be gone, profiling would be in, the borders would be secure, there would be no illegal immigrant amnesty, Grover Norquist the convert would be persona non grata at the WH, as would be the various pro-terror groups he keeps introducing to GWB, CAIR would be under intense scrutiny if not outright banned, and GWB/Condi would not be busy binding Israel's hand and feet in yet another "brokered agreement" prior to it's throat being metaphorically slit. Full disclosure: I campaigned tirelessly for GWB in 2000 and even more so in 2004 to all who would listen - but I am now convinced that he is either a complete fool (unlikely) or in the pay of *them* - how else can we explain his and Condi's actions? The frustrating thing is that the USA is a two-party country and both parties are now rotten to the core. We need people like Tom Tancredo and Arnold to form their own party with a new vision, but somehow Americans only go for "brands". I hope to bring MZ around to my point of view, as he hopes to bring me around to his!
which arnold are you talking about a.i.?
Tazz...we do agree, but tell me how you really feel.
You know what, Tazzmax? We need to elect more rightwingers and fewer RINOS. Won't happen overnight, but it's the only way.
-MZ
Hey, the rest I agree with Taz, but leave old Newt alone! He's still hardcore rightwing despite whatever he may have said about ol' Hilary...Besides, he wrote a book with lots of steamy sex in it!
Anyway, I like him.
-MZ
The American taxpayer should not have to pay for the rebuilding of Iraq. America should take all oil moneys until the cost fo the war is payed for.
Taz, Israel is plagued by the same disease we complain about here: Liberalism. To the majority of Israelis Judaism is not very important at all. Believe it or not, Israel is very secular. Perhaps not as secular as it used to be, but still...very secular.
Sorry Tazzmax, I posted before reading your comment.
Ah but that's the catch..there is no post-Saddam void (beyond the one manufactured by the MSM).
Everything is going far better than they will report, but eventually it will be too obvious.
Perhaps it will be when Saddam is hanging from a rope.
Perhaps it will be when the US and Iraq JOINTLY kick the shit out of Syria and finally eliminate the Baath party for good.
Who knows, but the MSM is more transparent all the time.
The commies and jihadis are losing, and losing BIG, so as a result, so are they.
I hope it hurts.
The traitors certainly deserve it.
As for the GOP, I was saying the EXACT same things you guys are saying in 99.
I was so disillusioned with them that I went RP and helped PJB btch slap Perot and take it from him.
Then, I was VERY plesantly suprised.
Sure GW left too many of Clintons lackeys and policies in place, sure he seems beholden to the hispanic vote, but after watching this guy closely since 2000, and watching how he has dealth with more adversity, tragedy, and treason, ALL AT ONCE, than any president EVER has, I see a master of misdirection and "sleight of hand" - yet one I can trust.
This guy has played the left like the babbling idiots they are, kicked the crap out of our enemies, restored military morale, and kept our economy on keel despite a senate strike that lasted from his 1st day in office until past 9/11 and the market bubble popping.
I've watched the DNC and the media practically self-destruct while bashing themselves against him like water against rock.
Despite my frustrations, he has let me see what I didnt think I would see in my lifetime - the left flailing and squealing and flopping about like fish in a net.
They have never been this frantic or self-defeating and the entertainment value is beyond price.
I think he is carefully waiting for the 06 elections to pass.
If the GOP can hang on to the congressional majority, he can then do more with less risk of handing power to the left.
In fact, he can get HARD right and whoever runs for the white house in 08 can present himself as "moderate" by contrast to counter any political loss caused by GW getting serious.
Wishful thinking yes, but no other president has ever made me happily say, "ah ha! so THAT's what he was doing!" nearly as much.
Have faith fellas.
He's a good man and has more to contend with than we can imagine (and I think Jeffords taught enough of us about RINOs to put a big damper on their future numbers - besides, when vying for political seats in leftyland, we have to expect em to be soft, or they wont be elected at all - take it from me, I live in Louisiana).
Nanc:
Sorry for the late reply, but I am in a AM shift and had powered down, so to speak. To answer your question, the Arnold I meant is the one in CA a.k.a. Terminator. I have this strong feeling (masculine intuition? :) that if he was the President, he would lead US to glory like Ronald Reagan. Yes, I know that under the current laws he is not allowed to be President, whereas rats renown for their treasonous activities can, just because they were born in the USA. Maybe we can go for Tancredo as President and Arnold for VP?
Tazz:
I strongly concur with your sentiments and greatly like your "muscular" comments : )
The RINOs need to be made an endangered - no, extinct - species - but sadly, that isn't going to happen via the GOP.
KK and RWM:
I used to think GWB was a good man doing the right thing etc., but seeing his handling of so many issues (I am sure that mine is not the only mind that the thought that W stands for Wimp has crossed!) I am now convinced of the opposite. For example, remember his comment on the Minutemen who were voluntarily patrolling the US border as being "vigilantes"?
BB:
My sentiments exactly - no free lunch (and dinner and supper) for the Iraqis - they have been freed and are now going to reap the benefits of the oil bonanza that Saddam and his cronies were the only beneficiaries of (also Kofi & Co.) - so why not pay the expense of freeing and rebuilding Iraq right back to the US + a reward to all the fallen and maimed heros'/heroines' families? And as I keep saying, that money is sorely needed to do actual R&D in alternate energy, space exploratione etc. . The way GWB goes on, you would think the US (taxpayer) is a bottomless well of money, but as we all know only too well, that is not the case.
KK:
Pakistan "working with" US?!? Who do you think was hiding UBL (most likely)? I grant you that Musharraf seems a good man, but how long before he falls to the dark forces around him? And which was the country again, that made the I-Bomb and gave it to Iran et al, and who was it again that granted a pardon to the great A.Q.Khan who did the deed?
Kev:
How about we conservatively-minded people (differences in staying on in Iraq aside) start egging on Tancredo and Arnold to start their own party - maybe the GOP will wake up and hear their base's voice loud and clear then? As it stands, GWB is too much of a ninny - and has made the GOP very weak by deliberately and knowingly keeping the RINOs - and his keeping Minetta the non-profiler may someday result in high losses somewhere - also, I am increasingly irritated of his sending innocent soldiers to die in impossible fighting conditions (careful, don't hit the child the "insurgent" is firing from behind, don't enter that place of worship, never mind the firing coming from inside it etc. etc.). Oh, and I forgot to repeat about not securing the borders - the ones over which the ROPers are trying to smuggle the dirty nukes. ABout the Dems supporting the Palis, so are GWB and Condi (witness the latest concessions Israel had to make on border crossings). Sorry, but GWB is no leader in anything in my eyes anymore!
a.i. - as a bible believing christian, i find it extremely difficult to stand by our president also. any blessings our family have are due to our ties to israel. i do not believe one can call themselves a christian and turn their backs on israel. there is a verse in the o.t. which alludes to destruction coming upon even those who remain aloof from her. as i stated at another site, there is no wonder the only place you can find america in the bible is "jerUSAlem" - uncanny. our family has vowed to support and stand by israel until our dying breaths. we have three children who practice and believe that all they have comes from love for israel.
Nanc: Good one, I never thought of that - jerUSAlem!
Kev: What, you don't like my choice of Arnold as VP : ) ? But you are right, a third party would take too long to grow. If only we could flood the Dem party with DINOs!
Actually, one viable solution may be to start demanding referendums, perhaps even referendums with consequences (e.g. don't want that serial killer to get the Death Penalty? Fine, those who want him around had better pay extra taxes for his upkeep in prison for X years, and then he gets to move in to their neighbourhood). Having referendums was an impossibility in the olden days, but I don't see why it is safe to shop on the internet but not vote on it. Democrats would scream a lot if anyone suggested this, of course (which would be an entertaining spectacle in itself), and GWB and the other RINOs would have to confront reality i.e. what people really want. The sad thing is, GWB did do a few good things e.g. sending John Bolton (who is a terrific guy) to the UN.
thanx a.i. - it's not mine, just something i heard along the way. but truer words never spoken.
i hope you don't mind that i disagree with the arnold idea. arnold as president gives me a sense of foreboding i cannot explain. i do agree that we need a new and improved party line - this one is taking us on a path of destruction. you must admit though, w was the lesser of two evils. i could not have voted for kerry if teraaaysa had a serrated knife at my throat spewing a bottle of ketchup for effect.
giuliani perhaps. my favorites are huckabee and santorum. santorum because he makes mincemeat out of hillary and for the fact he is family oriented. huckabee because he knows how to trim the fat! to my knowledge neither one are liars and that tells me most of what i need to know about a person.
before anyone gets on me about bush - i love him, voted for him and will stand behind him as long as i can, but not just for the sake of his integrity, but for the sake of mine.
Isnt Bush the best?
No matter how much crap he gets he never gets spiteful. Chirac would have crumbled years ago.
Thats real leadership.
Another great leader is Hamid Karzai. the guy did an interview with Le Monde Magazine and they were completely hostile to him, but he was as patient as Buddha in the face of their arrogance.
Nanc: well, I feel kind of lonely in my support of Arnold : ( - I like the way he worked is way up and kind of think of him as a genial giant. Much more importantly, he wants to secure the borders and actually set up fuel cell (or some other alt. energy) refuelling stations in CA, instead of just talking endlessly about the environment like the Dems.
Re: W being the lesser of two evils - not true! At that time, the choice was between pure evil and more-or-less good. If W would just get back on track ...!
Re: Guiliani - he is good but a wholehearted supporter of gay marriage - would you want him on the #1 or #2 spot?
Freedomnow: there is such a thing as being too forgiving. Enough with playing nicey-nicey with the Dems - W needs to talk to them in language they understand!
Am logging off for now, will be back later. Best wishes, all ('cept people who suck : )
no a.i. i didn't believe w was the lesser of two evils when i voted for him, however, he has proven himself to be so in the last several months. guiliani, only because he is so out front with his views and i disagree with his stance on gay marriage, but if given the choice between him and hitlery, you bet your hiney i'd not hesitate to vote for him. i stated my choices, but those two are toooooooo clean for the presidency. my wishful thinking.
my husband worked in alternative energy for a number of years in california, minnesota and iowa, wind turbines and boilers. he worked last for enron in sunny ca and has told me there is more energy to be had in alternative sources than our country could use. i believe him and agree with you on this. good day to you.
You had me until you got to the National Socialist at the end, Kuhnkat. Arnie is a moderate, yes, and he is no conservative, true, but when you say National Socialist you really are refering to the Buchananite paleos instead.
Arnold is no protectionist/isolationist, and certainly not an anti-Semite.
And I disagree with you about not supporting Arnold under any circumstances, because it is California, after all. If you compare him to Boxer or Pelosi it's Arnold all the way.
The rest of what you said, I agree with 100%.
Taz, America First protectionism and isolationism is pure big government socialism in disguise. You might have been blinded by the patriotic imagery, but think it through and you'll see I'm right.
Thanks, by the way, for the compliments!
-MZ
tazz - i answered your re-bar question a couple of articles down.
sorry tazz - i should have pointed it to freedomnow - but it was a joke:
why did Yeshua take a whip to the money changer tables (mt. 21:12) in the temple? because they had not yet invented re-bar!
you are far from dumb tazz - i have the same problem with fraud (fruad) and wierd (wired) and i'm a legal secretary who normally types as fast as a person talks (90-95 wpm) without mistakes. imagine sending a 30 page declaration to the d.a. with fraud spelled "fruad" 62 times - yikes! i am at the moment semi-retired rearing children and being talked out of this haven. yep they want me to come back to work, so i've figured i will learn to mispell and do poorly in communications and math. how am i doing so far? good evening.
Taz asked: MZ, I still don't get the idea that protecting our trade policies and not meddling too much in foreign policies?
Taz, what trade protection actually means is GOVERNMENT TRADE REGULATION. What does that mean, you ask? It means TARRIFS. What are tarrifs you ask? They are the government TAXING the goods that are sold to America. What does that mean, you ask? It means the products we all buy at stores ARTIFICIALLY COSTS US MORE.
Regarding foreign policy, well, if we want to be isolationists then we can just sit around like pacifists holding hands at Camp Cindy watching the moslems take over the world. You need to think back to the last time our country attempted isolationism: Pre-WW2, when Republicans were the leaders of the anti-war movement. While the Nazis were exterminating European Jewry, and anyone else they deemed undesirable, The America First Paleo movement kept us hiding under the covers at home hoping it would all just go away.
Then, on December 7th, 1941 (remember that day in history?) the America First Paleo movement, like the "Wigs" of a century before, was permanently laid to rest never to be a significant factor in American politics again.
And we all lived happily ever after.
-MZ
kuhnkat, i believe he said he would not take a salary, to which i believe he has not. but i stand with you in your other observations regarding arnold. my sanity is still in tact, but wondering why anyone would want him as a prez candidate.
p.s. madze - who picks the word verifications below? some of mine have been making suggestions and i just wonder if i am making something out of nothing?
Why nanc, are you being hit on by the word modification system?
there's just been some weird word combos and then the i's look like j's and w's running into each other - i probably need stronger glasses - ratz!!!
Post a Comment