Dec 26 2006
Biden’s Folly
Some things in life are near absolutes, and Joseph Biden making a political blunder of things is one of those sure fire results you can almost count on. Biden is trying to position himself for a Presidential campaign in 2008, and his plan to is run as the modern day Neville Chamberlain:
President Bush is expected to announce early next year that he wants more troops in Iraq; a burst of military force in hopes of stabilizing that country.
Senator Biden says it’s a recycled strategy from this past summer.
“We tried it, it’s failed, we need a political settlement,” said Biden, adding, “We should be drawing down troops putting pressure on the Iraqi government to settle their sectarian differences rather than putting more troops in.”
Maybe Biden should familiarize himself with Al Qaeda’s terms for surrender in Iraq – which mirror his own plans to a “T”. Sadly, I think Biden actually believes removing our troops will demoralize the insurgency and embolden the Iraqis who now fight at our side. Interestingly, some very strong liberals I ran into recently are frightened to death their new Democrat Congress will do just as Biden plans. They fear the repurcussions of a political party that stands for one thing – surrendering Iraq to Al Qaeda. And they should.
The Iraq Surrender Group’s terms of surrender are not the resounding success those wafflers in Congress thought the paid for. They wanted to hide behind a commissions call to end Iraq before Congress had to face the voters. That kind of self centered cowardice, when compared to those who are giving the ultimate sacrifice for our country in Iraq, is a sickening and pathetic sight. And it naturally repulses America. America did not vote the Dems into lose Iraq, they voted them in to win quickly, as is expected. Every Democrat who voted for the war in 2002 has an obligation to find a success, not give up because elections are coming. The Dems were seen as the lesser of two evils in 2006. What they cannot afford to do is confirm that they were, indeed not the lesser but the greater. They have one chance to show they are better than the Reps. One brief chance.
Ken
Tell that to the woman who was burned on the bus by the muslims.
I seem to remember several bank workers being slaughtered
in cold blood recently in benign Nebraska or Kansas by Hispanics.
Tend to your own back yard.
I don’t seem to recall any global Hispanic terrorist organization that is attempting to overthrow governments in order to establish a religious dictatorship. There are criminal murders every day, that isn’t what is being discussed here. The islamists have declared war and have engaged in acts of war. I recall no declarations of war from hispanics nor have I noted any acts of war.
As usual, Ken, your posting is pointless.
Your attitude prevailed in America from 9/11/2001 until the Iraq War proved to an unwinnable quagmire. Bush chose the wrong
first volley–should have stayed with Afghanistan alone, which was enough on his plate.
Now American’s realize scattered groups of jihadists “attempting to
overthrow governments” (but never coming close to doing so)is the business of that particular government operating in its own region.
You’re a paranoid busybody.
http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/nyt12_27_6_1.htm
Oh, AJ according to this piece the US is violating international law in not allowing prisoner visitation-and it is being suspected of not allowing the Iraqi government to run its affairs. Some democracy you’re proud of.
http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/nyt12_27_6_1.htm
why is the US government violating international law and not allowing the Iraqi government to run its own affairs?
As usual, attack the messenger when you can’t attack the message. As usual the French guy is resorting to name calling.
What is an “international law”, Ken? It says we have to allow visitation for prisoners of war. In this case it could be that those captured were “illegal combatants” and exempt from the Geneva Conventions. Also, there is nothing that says anything about the timing and frequency of visits. And besides, maybe those that were captured want asylum in the US and don’t WANT to talk to their people.
You jump to a lot of conclusions in your pointless assumptions. Well, I suppose you aren’t totally pointless. But if you keep that hat on, nobody will notice.
Crosspatch, it’s just that he is pulling for the Iranians so hard. He wants America to lose or be wrong or anything that is against America. He can’t help it, it’s genetic in Frenchmen.
Besides, that link was to the NYTimes, “the liberal rag flagship”
so for anyone that believes anything in the article, I’ve got some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale, cheap.
“Crosspatch, it’s just that he is pulling for the Iranians so hard. He wants America to lose or be wrong or anything that is against America.”
Quite the opposite ,senile one, you want so hard for corrupt American warmongers to be proven both right and successful, you are willing to give them a pass until the ignominious end. And Iran
has already won, the only question being the size of their victory.
For Enforcement the senile hypocrite sputters:
“Besides, that link was to the NYTimes, “the liberal rag flagshipâ€
so for anyone that believes anything in the article, I’ve got some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale, cheap.”
Passing over the fact the NYT began to tell the truth about the Iraq War six months into the debacle whereas Fox News continue to lie about the progress, I will just note the superannuated one also
brags about not reading MSM links.
This means FE must skip over most of Strata’s posts, as AJ himself
uses them freely.
first volley–should have stayed with Afghanistan alone, which was enough on his plate.
Whatever happened to your America Firster party? I thought the main theme of this party was isolationism? Now you say we should be in Afghanistan? Do try to keep your stories straight, won’t you?
I was talking STRATEGICALLY from the Empire’s point of view, dear. I myself opposed the attack, but did not delude myself that there wouldn’t be at least some form of hopefully narrowly focussed
retaliation.
A total introspective review of American foreign policy’s interventionist inflammation of Moslem sentiment would have been ideal after the WTC/Pentagon attack,which review would have
avoided the excessive reaction, but I did not delude myself that the ruling class was ready for introspection at this time.
Ken, AJ does use the liberal rags to quote from, He uses them to show how damn dumb the readers of those rags are to believe anything in them.
You’re smarter than that.
You’re only no. 4 on the dumbasses list.
In other words we should just back down and let them have their way and maybe they won’t hurt us anymore..
Just be nice to these people and they won’t hate us anymore. Bull. Bull. Bull.
I seriously doubt that these radical muslims are interested in gathering around the campfire and singing kumbaya.