Dems already discount war report

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Dems already discount war report


washingtontimes.com

Congressional Democrats are trying to undermine U.S. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus' credibility before he delivers a report on the Iraq war next week, saying the general is a mouthpiece for President Bush and his findings can't be trusted.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 11:04 PM
link   
I just don't get the Democrats. Are the intent on losing the next election as well as Iraq?

Petraeus has always stated that first security has to be established before the political reforms will start to happen. What do we see? Slowly but surely the security situation in multiple parts of Iraq is improving. The Surge is working in that respect, I don't think many will deny that. Heck even Katie Couric is starting to say so.

The Democrats seem hell bent on just cutting and running for the most part. The talk of the Presidential candidates doesn't leave me with the impression that they want or expect Iraq to succeed.

It seems clear to me that as security gets more established that will will have to apply pressure to the Iraqi Government and all 3 fo the main factions in Iraq. The Petraeus plan is establish security so politcal reforms/compromises become possible.

The Democrat's have no real plan or alternative other than turtling up and withdrawing slowly, regardless of the political or security situation. That kind of policy could end up biting them come election time if things continue the was the General has planned. Defence has always been the achilles heal of the Modern Democrat, just ask the average American which party is Stronger on Defence.

washingtontimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
It the same old story...

The Libs can't possibly win the American People over using their "Raise Taxes, Limit Free Speech" platform, so all they have left is to make EVERYTHING the Conservatives do look negative...

With Hilary wanting to "Take Profits" from private companies, and the fact that No one knows what Obama is about, they have nothing but trashing the Republican party to go on...

Here is a synopsis of the Dem. Platform..

1. Surrender in Iraq
2. Raise Taxes
3. Repeal the first amendment for Conservatives
4. Take profits from private companies
5. Increase Welfare
6. Destroy the Economy
7. Create the One World Nation
8. Give more power to the UN
9. Allow unfettered Illegal Immigration
10. Promote Nuclear Proliferation among 3rd world countries
11. Hold White House parties for every megalomaniac in the world


I just hope the American people wake up and see how ridiculous they have acted ever since they won the last election and reestablish the core values of our Country...

Semper



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by semperfortis
 


I agree the Democrats are falling into the same old rountine. They would rather be "against" something that "for" their own platform. Time and time again has show the American Public doesn't want a "negative" President. They want a President optimistic and Positive.

One of my favorite things to ask Democratic leaning people is: What is the Democratic Party for? They say things like, getting us out of Iraq. I then say, "ok,how and what happens after that, to Iraq and our other friends in the Region?" Then I get the long pause of silence from them. That is the Democrats problem, they point out problems but not solutions. Anyone can find the things wrong, few know how to fix them.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 01:31 PM
link   
And you know what Pavil?

The same goes for the RINO's too...

(Republican In Name Only)

It really is starting to seem like a prevailing trend in the bid for an elected office. Instead of concentrating on WHAT the candidate wants to accomplish, they concentrate on WHAT the OPPONENT has done wrong...

Maybe this is a result of the candidate realizing they are not going to follow through with any campaign promises anyway, so why waste time making any...

The whole process is disgusting lately and I am actively involved... !!!!

Is honesty too much to ask for anymore?

Semper



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by semperfortis
 


Amen to that. I know what the issues and problems are; what I want to hear from candidates are their ideas for solutions. I'm tired unto death of hearing we need to get out of Iraq; well okay what then? Never an answer

Or we need to do something about welfare. Well yes we do, what are your ideas? Never an answer. It goes on and on. I'm tired of politicians playing the "blame game" quit blaming the other guy and tell me what you think should be done.

Frankly I despair of ever hearing honesty during an election or after from one of our fine politicians.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Im not suprised that they are doing this. What i thinking now is a new name for for the democrates... 'Spitting in the Face of Facts'... thats what they do, that is thier modus operaindum.

'I will not allow the law in my courtroom'

I have come to this realisation, we are living in a world, were poeple have been conditioned to belive whatever they want, ergo, what truely is, doesn't matter in thier minds.

Fact, in the minds of some, has become an opinion... one day it will all be so clear what is going on now...



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Well I hope that General Petraeus sticks it to the Dems . Iraq is really a sad state of affairs. The surge has been a military success but the increase in troop numbers cant be sustained forever due to a man power shortage. The surge will have made the calls for an end to the Iraq War harder to sell but I still think that there will still be enough anti Iraq War momentum to carry the Dems to the White House in 2008.

Really the Surge was just away of ensuring that Iraq becomes someone else's problem after Bush leaves office.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Good points by all.

I think Petraus has got a strategy that, if implemented fully, stands the best chance of sucess of any I have heard. He seems to be one of those Generals that see things on all the levels of the battlefield; tactical, political, and Strategic. Where was he earlier?

The biggest threat out there is that their are really two insurgent camps still. There used to be three but the Iraqi Sunnis seem to have co-opted out of the insurgency for the most part. The Al Qaeda branch is being hit hard by the surge, forced to run and hide. The Shia branch backed by Iran has just decided to lay low till the surge runs it's course. That will be the true test, curtailing the Shia militia's while bringing the Sunni's into the political fold. There is a window for a relatively bloodless success as opposed to the Rwanda style "payback" that will go on if reconciliation fails between the Shia and Sunni's of Iraq.

Quite honestly, Biden's proposal on Iraq has some good points in it. Not that it will fly with the Shia's. But even that entails a fairly strong US military presence in Iraq to be achievable.

I notice that many of the "get the US out quick" camp don't seem to mind that we will basically be walking away from a potentially and likely bloody genocide on both sides in Iraq. That part always shocks me. First they say look at all the death and destruction the U.S. presence brings and then they are willing to turn a blind eye to the likely probability that even greater carnage will happen if we leave prematurely. Some kinda disconnect going on there I guess. As long as US soldiers aren't there, it's ok I guess, for a genocide to occur. Weird IMO.



Just Imagine if a Presidential candidate spoke the truth. I do like some of Mcain's comments sometimes, at least he has convictions, Liberman too. I might not agree with them but at least those two seem to believe what they say, rather than say what others seem to believe.





new topics




 
2

log in

join