Jan 08 2007
What To Do About Iraq?
Update: The fiasco has begun, and it is Dems against Dems as some Democrats see the danger of quitting Iraq without good cause and without trying to win first:
Some of the other leading Democrats in Congress aren’t ready to echo House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s suggestion that lawmakers might hold up funding for additional troops in Iraq.
…
But Pelosi’s second-in-command in the House Democratic leadership, Steny Hoyer, told Fox News he doesn’t ”want to anticipate” that possibility. And the Democrat who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Joe Biden, says Congress doesn’t have the power to second-guess Bush’s military strategy — because lawmakers had voted to authorize him to wage war. Biden appeared on NBC’s ”Meet the Press.”
…
When asked about Pelosi’s remarks, a White House spokesman said Bush welcomes any ideas on Iraq that ”lead to success.”
Like shooting dead fish in the bottom of an empty barrel. Dems need to explain why they cannot find a winning solution. That should be fun to watch. And Biden, for once, is showing what it means to think things out. The Dems authorized Iraq in greater numbers than they did the first Gulf War. They cannot go back on that now. And Pelosi is pulling a Clinton – by not supporting our troops. People may recall that the entire reason the Black Hawk incident happened in Mogadishu was because Clinton’s Sec Def refused to authorize sufficient support for the mission. They tried to do the mission without heavy armor on the ground – and people died brutally because of that decision. And the decision cost the new Sec Def his job. Pelosi is making a bush league mistake. Clearly she did not mastermind the win of Congress as much as the Reps gave it away from their bad decisions. Right now there is not a huge resevoir of good will towards DC pols. So if the mistakes keep coming at this pace 2008 will not even be close.
– end update
In a word: “win”. The Democrats and the left are truly misguided. Dangerously misguided. Today Michael Barone (ever the gentleman) applauds the Democrats’ sincerity in calling for America’s defeat. Sincerity doesn’t equate to “correct” or “wise”. Most people are absolutely sure of themselves when they make mistakes. Why else would they make them?
Iraq is very winnable, and is actually being won. We have established the Democratic government through high turn out elections. And the ugly process of consensus (vs armed progroms) is working its way as the Islamo Fascists do what they can to tear the country apart. Personally I think, if Iraq is still together after all of the bloodshed and the election of a defeatist party in the US, the democratic country of Iraq will no doubt succeed. Many do not share this view – but that is also typical.
Too many people live in the “now” and become obsessed with their views having to be 100% right. I tend to the long view and I know nothing will transpire as I think it will – never has and never will. I can navigate and prepare and plan for a lot. But in the end fate rules and rarely exposes what is to come. Few understood the power of the world wide web (www) when it first appeared around 1990-91. Few ever thought the iron curtain would fall. Few ever thought 9-11 would happen. The fact people do not see something coming is not a good indicator it is not there.
The Democrats do not grasp the danger of giving Iraq to Al Qaeda. In their insane world of upside down obsession, it is now OK to give Iraq’s weapons technology, natural resources and highly educated population over to Al Qaeda – because Al Qaeda was never in Iraq when Saddam was in power. Try and wrap that kind of thought process in logic and you will hurt yourself. Al Qaeda was not aligned with Iraq, so we should never have gone into Iraq, and so we should now give the country to Al Qaeda – which is the reason we went into Iraq: to keep Al Qaeda out of Iraq. That is painful just to type.
But that is Democrat ‘logic’! I really did not expect them to push for something in the majority that they were afraid to push openly all those years in the minority. The Democrats were afraid to tell the public they wanted to surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda during the election because they would, rightfully, be seen as pulling the rug out form all our heroic men and women in the military. They would be seen as throwing all the lives lost in the conflict into the trash can of political expediency. If the Dems cannot stand up for the Iraqis who are striving to be free and democratic, they will not stand up for anyone.
So why is it the Dems are emboldened now? Do they think the title ‘majority’ (as razor thin as it is) is some kind of special cloaking device that will fool the masses? Does Speaker Pelosi somehow think her historic position has bequeathed her with omnipotence and protection from ridicule? That seems to be the case. That which they dared not speak publically for years they now say openly because they think their new roles will protect them. Sort of pathetic really.
So let’s recap the Democrat surrender plan. Since Saddam was not in league with Al Qaeda (who are clearly trying to find a way to repeat 9-11) we should not have freed the Iraqi people and developed the first Muslim Arab democratic state. The logic here is also astounding. The only reason we would help establish democracy in Iraq is if Saddam had allied with Al Qaeda – otherwise no need. That is strange logic right there. And because Saddam was not aligned with Al Qaeda, we should surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda now and betray all those Iraqis fighting to be our ally. It truly is a wonder, that kind of thinking. A wonder this country will survive the next two years of Democrat ‘thinking’. Of course this all begs the question: if we surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda, will the Dems finally feel justified in having the US in Iraq and supporting the fledgling democracy? Will we then go back in to protect Iraq from Al Qaeda as was the original concern?
And we know more is coming from the Democrats (heaven help us). To protect us from terrorists Dems plan to stop listening in on terrorists as they make their plans, because we may accidentally listen in on an innocent American talking innocently to Bin Laden. And they will protect us by supplying enemy combatants with lawyers and trials, so we can never interrogate them on what bloody plots are in the works. And the Patriot Act will be repealed, so that terrorism is once again less of a threat than drug and crime lords.
Sadly, this upside down logic is all consuming for the Dems, since its genesis is anything Bush is for the Dems are against. Bush is for protecting this country from attack – he has said so many times. Therefore, the Dems are against his efforts. Which brings us back to what America will think of all this. If the Dem’s nifty logic pretzels don’t worry them, the fact the Dems are fighting our President and his efforts to protect us will surely be noticed. It seems the Dems are pushing to do more for Al Qaeda than for America these days. And they have sincerely come to the conclusion this is best for America. Winning in Iraq is best for America and anything else is a disaster.
“false, shaded and selective information by the “compromised†media is the reason we have the trolls, on this site,firing away like scatter guns.”
Macker, I think some lefty site asked all their trolls to come over and sell the lefty agenda on this site. Well boys, you tried.
But they shouldn’t have sent their mentally handicapped over here.
Just for the record Pres Bush got elected two times because he won the election two times. That’s our system. If you want a lefty in, get enough votes. If you don’t like the system, go live with your buddy down in Venezuela, he knows how to do elections.
Left by for Enforcement: today’s issue of the day really is if the Right to Life politico-wackjobs are going to oppose cloning using amniotic stem cells (with their usual blind but crusading earnestness) because it would be “near embryonic.” I’m hoping for an AJ editorial supporting amniotic cloning.
Terrye,, what’s wrong with Malkin? What position does she have that you don’t like?
“Too bad, once upon a time they were not such wusses.”
If that’s true, it was a long long time ago., like up until the end of WWII.
Search first and research before firing, Jerry.
The democrats ARE totally misguided! Just call them as they show them.
isn’t it funny how you accused me of overgeneralizing to all liberals above when that’s exactly what you’re doing with the democrats.
What does it bother you I am critical of the left?
it doesn’t. i am just trying to correct you when you misrepresent what members of the left think.
Why come here then?
for fun.
I am critical of the left and the right. Not like either side is instilling inspiration. They seem hell bent on seeing which one can screw up more.
no argument there.
If you want delicate hand applied to the liberals you are at the wrong blog.
where do you get the “delicate hand” bit? when did i say anything remotely like that?
all i’m saying is that a lot of your post is a straw man. the picture of “the liberals” or “the democrats” doesn’t reflect what all dems or liberals (or, as i would argue, most liberals) actually think. that doesn’t mean that both liberals and dems can be wrong sometimes, but if you’re gonna try to criticize their position, it’s better if you present an actual plausible liberal position, rather than some caracature of one.
AJ, You must be doing something right! If you were not being noticed for your reasonableness and logic, the left wing nuts wouldn’t be trying so hard to knock you down. Keep up the good work!
Jerry. cloning? of humans? for what? spare parts? Kill one human so another one can add 10 years to their life? Murder anyone?
I don’t know what the “right to lifers” position is. I am pro life myself but I also think women should be able to get an abortion “under certain circumstances” I mean the pro life position certainly has to be superior to the anti-life position. Doesn’t it?
I don’t speak for AJ, he certainly does a fine job for himself, especially on stem cells. But I’m sure you’re not gonna see his position paper on cloning humans for spare parts “UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES”. any time soon.
“near embryonic” has no meaning. It is either embryonic or it’s not. But the issue is cloning from anywhere, and for what reason.
If someone can take an amniotic cell and grow a kidney from that and implant a kidney, that’s one thing. but to grow a human, kill it and harvest a kidney, that’s murder, anyway you slice it.
Up Straw Man?
“all i’m saying is that a lot of your post is a straw man. the picture of “the liberals†or “the democrats†doesn’t reflect what all dems or liberals (or, as i would argue, most liberals) actually think. that doesn’t mean that both liberals and dems can be wrong sometimes, but if you’re gonna try to criticize their position, it’s better if you present an actual plausible liberal position, rather than some caracature of one.”
“Caracature of one.” ???
When every story printed in the formerly MSM is liberal democrat drivel, when all the lefty commenters on CNN, MSNBC, CNBC,AND FOX, all spew the same lefty liberal democrat drivel and when all you read from people like you is lefty liberal demcrat drivel, then it becomes fairly easy to lump most democrats in that category.
MOST democrats hate America, want to lose in Iraq, want to give al Qaeda a pass, wish Saddam were still dictator, have their white flags ready to run up, think Pres Bush planned the WTC destruction, think Hugo Chavez is their hero, think a person that volunteered for military service during war time is a draft dodger(pres Bush), Think Bubba who was a draft dodger and went to Russia during the war was a hero. When this is all you hear, unless you are tone deaf, you begin to get the idea that it is okay to generalize that all democrats are left wing nut jobs. (as they are, of course, generally speaking)
Actually there’s no argument for anything else.
Up, oh yea. Who do you believe is a reasonable, moderate Dem that doesn’t hate America? Don’t take over two days to try to think of one.
This actually summarizes my feelings about the war quite well:
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/shared-blogs/ajc/luckovich/entries/2007/01/08/onward_ever_onw.html
As long as every terrorist supporter is allowed to run loose inAmerica, it’s going to be impossible to win in Iraq. That’s what happened in Vietnam. The North Vietnamese, by their own military leader’s admission after the war, would not have won had it not be for the support of Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark , John Kerry and his band of communist liars. Walter Cronkite and his media cohorts packaged enemy propaganda and called it news. Now we see the same thing in Iraq,
enemy propaganda packaged up and called AP news. Senators flying to Syria to keep the enemy fully informed. Hundreds of terrorist supporting messages all over the Internet every day. Iraqi terrorists will never defeat America. It will be America’s left defeating us again, and destroying another sovereign nation, just like they did with South Vietnam.
MOST democrats hate America, want to lose in Iraq, want to give al Qaeda a pass, wish Saddam were still dictator, have their white flags ready to run up, think Pres Bush planned the WTC destruction, think Hugo Chavez is their hero, think a person that volunteered for military service during war time is a draft dodger(pres Bush), Think Bubba who was a draft dodger and went to Russia during the war was a hero.
this is a perfect example of what i was saying. do you really believe that most democrats “hate america”? i am a registered democrat and yet i know that i don’t hate my country. this whole thing devolves into the absurd when other people start telling me what allegedly goes on in my own head. the bottom line is that this is a loser argument for you, because i simply know better than you what i hate or don’t hate. and most people are grown up enough to recognize that people with different political beliefs than you do not hate their country, but rather just have a different idea about policies and issues that face our country.
honestly, it’s people like Enforcement who give conservatives a bad name. i know a lot of liberals who dismiss all conservatives as raving lunatics who dismiss any opposing views as “treason.” personally, i have a lot of friends all along the political spectrum and try to point out that there are crazy people and reasonable people with all kinds of political beliefs. but with enforcement raving like this–telling liberals what goes on in their own mind–then all it does is make conservatives look unhinged.
again, this is only what i think. as long as you rave like that and tell other people what they secretly believe, you’re not gonna be taken seriously. please take this as simple advice.
Up, oh yea. Who do you believe is a reasonable, moderate Dem that doesn’t hate America?
every single democrat in the senate and house does not hate america. that’s why they went into public service. they might be misguided about what is right for america, but it really is stupid to pretend to be a mindreader and to claim that they secretly hate the country.
likewise, even as a liberal, i believe that conservatives do not hate america too. even when they are wrong, they still honestly believe that they are advocating for what is right.
Pagar, you are so right, and just look at that link by Jerry just above your comment. AJC !!! if there is one newspaper in the country more liberal than the NYT, it is the AJC. I’m from Georgia and there is no way I would read anything in that newspaper. I just love it when libs quote the NYT and formerly MSM outlets such as that as any authority on anything other than how to be a traitor.
Jerry all kidding aside, you don’t believe ANYTHING
in that paper do you?
Sorry, it got truncated somehow.
UP your
First, where did I say I was a conservative? Talking about jumping to conclusions……….
Then, you said”
“this is a perfect example of what i was saying. do you really believe that most democrats “hate americaâ€? i am a registered democrat and yet i know that i don’t hate my country.”
You made a long spiel there about telling people what they believe, what you believe and all that crap.
Actions speak louder than words.
I don’t know what you think. I only know what you write. And I guess I miss the distinction of not hating America in your mind while everything you SAY and DO screams that you hate America. That you WANT
America to lose. Please explain why every one of your actions are against America, but you DON’T hate America.
I’m just missing something in that fine line there.
I didn’t say all Dems, I said most.
answer to pagar
So we are not winning in Iraq because 70+ % of the American population believes the war is a mess??
No pagar you have this argument upsidedown. 70+% of the American population do not support the war any longer because they are tired of TAL;K .
Is time for your crowd to pull up or shut up.
It is not Liberals the ines that have Iraq in a mess…. It is the idiotic policies you support. I remind you that Democrats for all their complaints have not made any policy when it comes to Iraq… That is your idiotic crwod baby entirely.
Americans are tired that’s all.
Gil, I think you misunderstood what Pagar wrote. I think his point of view was exactly the same as yours. re-read it.
but both of you are wrong about why we are not winning in Iraq. Because we are, it’s just a matter of time. Why do I say that, because losing is not an option, no matter how much the dems would like it, it won’t be allowed to happen.
Pagar,
Good Viet Nam recap. The left learned the wrong lessons from that period of history
upyernoz,
Your Party is home to all of the elements you object to being associated with. The Dems may be a “big tent” but that tent houses some pretty strange “creatures.”
Saying the left “hates” America refers to:
• its consistent positions that hurt America ( ie calling for surrender and publishing information helpful to the enemy)
• its consistent belief in every rumor of American wrongdoing (ie Murtha and Durbin) and every false statistic (ie Iraqi death count)
• its tiresome use of words like “imperialist” and “unilateral” to describe the opposite kind of policies (ie, “liberation” and “coalition of the selfless”)
.
• its venomous language to describe obviously intelligent and courageous leaders doing a thankless job.
A loyal Americans don’t side with corrupt European leaders and corrupt international organizations to undermine a lawful US policy that has already liberated 50 million human beings in two countries.