Democrats Backing Off Of Iraq Pullout.

reply to post by Vitchilo


There's a bigger difference between the Republicans and Democrats than I think you're willing to see. Just because the Democrats are starting to be realistic/intellectually honest, in the fact that you can't just pull out of Iraq(much as the anti-war folks would like to believe), doesn't mean there's no difference. The direction each of the parties they'd like to lead the country in is markedly different. There's huge differences in the views on social issues, and fiscal issues(between conservatives and liberals anyway). One doesn't have to be Sean Hannity to feel this way.

Originally posted by itguysrule
President Bush may indeed have given the Democrats the "big warning." Rather than some kind of threat he may have just let them in on the latest developments. I think that recent events are driving the changes in their actions - not just the politics.

That is an EXCELENT point and you are probably on to something. I think I jumped the gun on with the assassination warning.

But it would sure be nice if the American people had some of this keen insight that only hopeful politicians were privy too. I suppose, "we can't handle the truth."

Thanks for your objective reply to my post without bashing me. I need to be more like you.

regards...kk

I agree with a couple of previous posters, what is happening here is the Democrats are finally seeing that we are making noticeable progress in Iraq. They have built their entire campaign thus far on us losing in Iraq. They are completely and totally vested in defeat.

Now that things are turning around and they see that we can, and must win, they are changing around "again". The democratic party has become a bunch of pacifist cowards who will say whatever it takes. Americans are once again realizing that this is a war that we dare not lose.

Originally posted by nyk537
. . . the Democrats are finally seeing that we are making noticeable progress in Iraq.

Could you possibly site any examples of progress for us?
Oh, perhaps you mean there were "only" 62 US deaths this month so far?
That is 62 too many. Source: icasualties.org...

They have built their entire campaign thus far on us losing in Iraq. They are completely and totally vested in defeat.

No, they have built their campaign on getting us out of the quagmire that is Iraq. How did we get there again?

Now that things are turning around and they see that we can, and must win, they are changing around "again".

How are they turning around? Could you please substantiate your baseless claims. An article or two?

The democratic party has become a bunch of pacifist cowards who will say whatever it takes.

Umm let's see, what would I rather be? Pacifist Coward or Braggadocious War Monger? Peace Dude. And let's face it, most politicians will say ANYTHING to get elected. I seem to recall Boy George saying we would not become involved in "Nation Building."

Americans are once again realizing that this is a war that we dare not lose.

Please tell me how we could win this war when, as I've stated before, it has been declared un-winnable?

I know your style from prior threads and must realize you enjoy making outlandish and asinine posts to inspire responses like mine.

regards..kk ( queitly reciting Serenity Prayer )

reply to post by nyk537


I'm believing you mean progress In Iraq based on the troop surge, The troop surge is doing nothing but controlling the violence, it's not a long term solution.
You'll find as soon as troops are recalled the violence will escalate or the Freedom fighters will regroup and attain new tactics. This war is Unwinnable simply because the Americans have lost the people of Iraq, it's as simple as that. If you don't have the people on your side your doomed to fail.

[edit on 28uFriday07/27/20 by paul76]

Originally posted by paul76
If you don't have the people on your side your doomed to fail.

That, or you have to scare the crap out of them. Where were all these "freedom fighters" when Saddam was in power? They were scared, and if we were the monsters so many claim us to be, we wouldn't need the people on our side. Maybe instead of a troop surge, we should just bring in a couple human paper shredders, or cut off tongues and throw people off rooftops.

[edit on 28-9-2007 by 27jd]

Could you possibly site any examples of progress for us?

I don't need to. General Petraeus outlined all the examples of progress in his report. Although I'm sure you are one of the Move-On .Org'ers who would refer to him as General Be-traeus.

No, they have built their campaign on getting us out of the quagmire that is Iraq.

Typical left-wing jargon. You're a broken record. I'm so sick of hearing the word quagmire. I'm guessing next you'll be pulling out the Vietnam comparisons....

Umm let's see, what would I rather be? Pacifist Coward or Braggadocious War Monger? Peace Dude. And let's face it, most politicians will say ANYTHING to get elected. I seem to recall Boy George saying we would not become involved in "Nation Building."

There is nothing close to being a "war monger" just because you want to see your country succeed in a conflict. And bringing GW into this has nothing to do with it. I don't recall ever saying I supported Bush or his decisions in this war. I support our military, and don't want to see them pull out and have everyone who has sacrificed thus far die in vain.

Please tell me how we could win this war when, as I've stated before, it has been declared un-winnable?

Just because a bunch of fanatical left-wing nut jobs and Move-On.org have declared this war un-winnable does not make it so. I would rather take the word of a general who has actually been there, than some politicians who have no clue.

I know your style from prior threads and must realize you enjoy making outlandish and asinine posts to inspire responses like mine.

Yes. I live for that...

[edit on 28-9-2007 by nyk537]

The Democrats were willing to say anything they needed to say in order to win the 2006 elections. They have accomplished nothing since taking over; they truly are the "Do Nothing Congress".

But why don't they just keep on lying until they win the WH in '08? I think they are trying to distance themselves from MoveOn.Org because of that Petraeus ad in the NYT that went over like a lead balloon. Most of America now sees them for the loons they are. They certainly didn't do the Democratic party any favors with that ad.

And some of it has to do with GWB letting them in on some insider info about the region, I'd bet. Someone here asked, why is it that we the people aren't privy to this inside info? Simple - we can't handle it. If the NYT got hold of it, they'd have it on the front page of tomorrow morning's edition.

reply to post by kinda kurious


Well so much for drafting a post, and then cooling off a bit to see if I really meant it. What the heck? I pressed Save As Draft and it posted directly to the board and won't allow me to edit.

Oh well, at least I earned my first official "foe" from an amped out neocon, so it was well worth it.

Word to the wise...don't trust the "Save As Draft" system.

regards...kk

edited for jsobecky to remove following line: I suppose the short yellow bus just dropped the kiddies off from school.


[edit on 28-9-2007 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by kinda kurious


Thanks for the info on the "Save as Draft". I *knew* there was a reason I've never used it!

But you could've made your point just as well without the reference to the school bus.

Originally posted by carewemust
Perhaps history will find that the USA did the right thing by taking over that country and installing democracy (eventually).

I don't think so. What US is doing in Iraq, is called occupation, and is seen as such in most of the world (including the 'ordinary' people in EU). Not liberation or anything like it. Though I didn't like Saddam and believe he got what he deserved, it seems Iraq was a safer place (at least in the last few years of Saddam's rule) to live in under his rule then todays Iraq, occupied by the US with few allies (which are about to withdraw, as it seems).

Second thing, democracy is not some piece of hardware - you just take it and install it where you like it. It just doesn't work that way. You must understand the mentality, tradition and culture of these people. What seems normal for us 'westerners' is not normal for them. Sometimes it's just the opposite. So, copy/paste will not work there It will take many many years for democracy to flourish there. And when (and if) such times come, it will not be because the US did it, but because people there start accepting democracy as their own way.

Oh and by the way, the military is not the appropriate 'tool' for 'spreading the democracy'. Just the opposite.

As for the Democrats - like somebody already stated - they're politicians. And politicians are not being notorious for being true to their word. The opposition is always full of rhetorics, they're talking what people want to hear until they win the elections, and after the elections you see the old story go on and on, only under different motto, different excuses, different rhetorics. Real changes are often rare and symbolic. Frankly, nothing major changes.

Goddamned doublepost

[edit on 28-9-2007 by Duby78]

reply to post by Duby78


Wow! awesome post and a star from me. What you offered in just 4 paragraphs represents my thoughts exactly. I really like your analogy about "installing" democracy like hardware and also the idea that the people of Iraq must create democracy, not the US military.

Which I had more to offer but you said it all.

Thanks...kk

i'd hate to say i didn't see something like this coming, but i did.

what a joke of a democracy we have now


promising things just to make a few campaign dollars and turning their backs on their supporters the next minute