I love to quote all the Democrats who, in 1998, talked about how we had to corral Saddam because of his weapons of mass destruction. Then again, there was a Democrat in the White House.
Here's another one from Senator Durbin, late of comparing our armed forces to Hitler's, Stalin's, and Pol Pot's henchmen--all at the same time!
By the by, what is our exit strategy for Bosnia? You remember Bosnia, the place where then-President Clinton said we'd have our troops home by Christmas? (and yes, he gave a year!) And what's our exit strategy for Europe, 60 years later?
Where did this stupid idea of an exit strategy come from, anyway? We should leave when the job is done, not a day before--and hopefully not a day after.
18 comments:
Based on this post, I guess you've come to accept the fact that public support has turned against Bush and the War in Iraq.
I understand why you're all sour grapes. It sucks to be wrong about something.
The truth is, all of your talk does not erase the magnitude of this mistake. Bush Sr. was smart enough to keep us out of Iraq. Bush Jr. should have been more like his dad. Heck, even Ronnie Ray Gun was smart enough to pull our Marines out of Lebanon after a single car Bomb. Clinton did the same thing in Somalia. Nixon did the same thing in Vietnam. Some things are worth fighting for. Iraq is not one of those things.
The truth is that the U.S. mission in Iraq has failed. Our country is hemorrhaging money every single day.
We will leave when the American Tax payer is either unwilling or unable to support this failed business venture.
The American public is very fickle about such things. Today they may be against it, tomorrow something interesting will happen and the polls will change. No biggie.
I'm glad we have a President who doesn't govern based on what the polls say.
But there is more to it than public opinion.
There is simply no hope for victory in Iraq. There are only different degrees of losing.
How much are you prepared to lose?
What would you consider a victory in Iraq? Just out of curiosity.
Are you asking me, or Leeroy?
Exit Strategy:
Not sure who coined the phrase, but Colin Powell gets credit for establishing the practice of stating up front a mechanism to determine mission accomplishment, a defined and measurable concept of victory, and planning for the post-MA phase.
Sorry, can't resist this one... quoting Jon Stewart here.
I'm glad we have a president who doesn't govern according to polls. Because, his pollster have told him that the people don't trust polls, so his polls say not to use them.
"Here's another one from Senator Durbin, late of comparing our armed forces to Hitler's, Stalin's, and Pol Pot's henchmen--all at the same time!"
Obviously an exaggeration on Durbin's part, I agree.
And yet, reviewing the actions of the good old U-S-of-A in recent and latter days, I *still* fear for the future of this nation when I reflect that God is just.
[Apparantly libs can play the rhetoric game just as well as 'tives, Mr. Miller. ;-)]
"And what's our exit strategy for Europe, 60 years later?"
Speaking of our armed forces in Europe...
"We should leave when the job is done, not a day before--and hopefully not a day after."
To the best of my knowledge, facism and communism no longer threaten peace in Europe.
Job well done? o_0
Just musing.
You're right, Andrew. Fascism and communism no longer threaten Europe. Why is that, again?
I have no problem with bringing home excess units from Europe. Or repositioning them in places (southeastern Europe, perhaps) where they'll be closer to the action.
What action is that? The new type of fascism we're fighting. Islamofascism.
"You're right, Andrew. Fascism and communism no longer threaten Europe. Why is that, again?"
Because we more or less destroyed the governmental manifestations of the former and let the latter collapse under the weight of it's own perverse lunacy?
I'm aware that America caused the fall of the dictatorships of Germany/Japan/Italy through direct action and was a major factor in the fall of the Soviet Union such as it was. And, as such, I wouldn't deny that America did those things.
Which is my overtly superfluous way of saying... what's your point?
Unless you were using that as an argument against my little hat-tip to Jefferson, in which case I see your "Brought about the downfall of communism and fascism in Europe" and raise you "slavery," "segregation," "genocide (perpetrated against the Native Americans)," "backing dictators with no other justification than 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend,'" and "Vietnam (see: the enemy of my enemy is my friend, also includes other assorted atrocities perpetrated in Southeast Asia; read: Laos and Cambodia)."
As you can see, I've been reading Hunter S. Thompson tonight and I'm in a heck of an interested mood.
Ahem.
"I have no problem with bringing home excess units from Europe. Or repositioning them in places (southeastern Europe, perhaps) where they'll be closer to the action."
I'm sure you don't, I was just innocently pointing out what appeared to be a pretty solid discrepancy in your post.
Really. ;-)
"What action is that? The new type of fascism we're fighting. Islamofascism."
And when that dies, we'll move on to confronting whole new form of fascism. Perhaps some new strain coming out of Africa or South America? They're more or less due to start getting violent and start blaming us for all their problems, aren't they?
Again, just musing. :-)
It's an interesting perdicament, no doubt.
Not that any of it has anything to do with what I was saying to begin with, I think I just went off on a tangent of your tangent.
No hypocrisy on my part at all. I've long thought we should be pulling our units out of Europe, now that the Cold War is over. And this President started doing that.
And he sent other units to the Mideast. :-)
I never said it was hypocrisy, just a discrepancy. Juuuuuuust a discrepancy
Mr. Miller, i finally agree with you. The US should not be allowed to leave Iraq. They dug themselves into this hole and now they will have to climb back out. I dont agree with the war in Iraq however the people of this country chose to reelect George W. Bush as commander in cheif, they must have approved of what he was doing. So now that the going is gettign tough, stop whining, especially the so-called supporters of the war. What did you think this was going to be? A picnic? Like i said, you dig yourself in and now you have to dig yourself out. Abandon the Iraqis now simply because it is costing too much money and i can guarenty that America will be scorned and ridiculed around the globe ofr decades to come. So suck it up and do what you promised to do.
PS i hope you're having a nice summer Mr. Miller
Wasn't it TJ himself who said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance?
Katherine, good to see we can agree on something of this magnitude :) When the going get's tough, etc....
And so far my summer's been great (which you'd know if you read my post about Salt Lake City!). Thanks for checking in.
I *so* did not put an apostrophe in "gets" in that last comment....
I would love for someone like Senator Durbin to answer these questions:
1. Which part of Chicago, New York, etc gets to become little Baghdad after the US unilaterally pulls out of Iraq?
2. What is the over/under of the number that will be massacred by the return of the Baathist?
3. Will any of the Kurd or Shia survive a return of that Baathist in Iraq?
4. How much are you willing to spend on refugee camps for the Kurds and shia that will have to flee Iraq after the return of the Baathist?
Now Superdestroyer, be nice. Durbin has apologized. Sort of.
You already know the answers to your questions. Durbin and his ilk would swear that they don't seek a return to Baathist power, that in the grand scheme it's good that Saddam is gone, but we've just done it the wrong way, blah blah blah.
Stay the course. If this were football, play all four quarters. When things look better, all the Dems will be jumping on board about how they supported this venture all along given that they voted for it....
Post a Comment