Dan asked the question in reference to this:
In her most dramatic statement on the Iraq war since officially entering the 2008 presidential race, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) called for ending the 2002 authorization resolution for the war.
Clinton joined with Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), a leading war opponent, in offering a proposal to “sunset” the 2002 use-of-force resolution by Oct. 11, 2007, the fifth anniversary of the Senate vote allowing President Bush to take military action against Saddam Hussein. Under the Byrd-Clinton plan, Bush would then have to return to Congress to seek new authority to conduct the war.
Michelle tells Hillary: Cindy Sheehan will still hate you.
Bryan says: Send ‘em a white feather. And stick a fork in Hillary!’s hawk credentials.
The Democrats are openly cutting and running now.
I’m putting this question to liberals on this article as well as another one that was posted earlier.
What should the terms of surrender for the US be? Don’t you think we should have a national debate on the consequences of leaving Iraq before we actually do? How will the world see us when we let the Iraqi’s down for the second time? Are we prepared to give up control of the worlds oil supply? Do we mind that genocide will result in our leaving and the world will have contempt for our country, our word?
San Fran, AKD, Toasted? Since you never answer the question on how you would fight terror and argue irrelevant points please answer this.
Yes, can you believe it? KKK Byrd wants to withdraw the authorization to use force in Iraq! Let’s recap:
1. They vote to authorize use of force.
2. Starting about two months after the invasion of Iraq they begin undermining Bush. Force us to use politically-correct Rules of Engagement, which hamstring our forces and result in even more U.S. casualties.
3. That expands and morphs into an all out propaganda campaign to undermine Bush and out troops morale and the resolve of the American people.
4. Encouragement and aid and comfort to the enemy to keep up and actually intensify his efforts.
5. Now they want to cut off finds and support to our military even as the fight rages.
The above is clear evidence that the BDS anti-war types like KKK Byrd, HilLiary Rotten Klinton, and others who are willing to subvert, sabotage, and ensure defeat for America because they think it will gain them domestic political advantage are the very lowest scum in the political slime pond. They are worse than evil, they are out and out traitors.
You guys completely missed the point:
“Under the Byrd-Clinton plan, Bush would then have to return to Congress to seek new authority to conduct the war.”
This is about humiliatling Bush. It is purely a political ploy, and in the end has nothing to do with the war.
4, Ted, it does and it doesn’t. The Democrats are politicizing the war for their benefit. Yes, the Democrats want to humiliate Bush any way they can, but this vote called for by Clinton and Byrd is the epitome of Cutting and Running. No authorization, no war, bring troops home immediately.
Ted, do you agree the Democrats are not really thinking this through?
I just called both Pelosi and Reids office. The staffer in Reids office said she had no idea about the legislation I was referring to but would take a message. My message was that I wanted to see news coverage of how much thought the dems have put into the consequences of pulling out of Iraq and surrendering. If anyone else would like to call and put forth that or any other question here are their numbers,
Pelosi, 202-225-0100
Reid, 202-224-3542
The demactaic donkey running away HEY LOOK AT THAT YELLOW STREAK DOWN ITS BACK:razz:
“Ted, do you agree the Democrats are not really thinking this through?”
I think they know exactly what they what they are doing.
They’re wrapping Iraq around Bush’s neck, using chains, as the sole owner of the ongoing occupation. The more he fights the will of the people, the worse he looks. This new proposed bill makes sense. “Here’s 2 months of cash, come back in July, show us your ‘progress’, and we’ll start the debate over again for releasing more funds.”
Or don’t republicans believe in accountability?
Tofu, you are confusing YOUR WHIMS for our will.
Again, if you are an honest person, you will admit the positions of Democrat Congressional leaders and Clinton that Saddam did have WMD. Also, you will admit that the Democrats voted for the war using the same information that Bush and the world had, else you are just a wanker wasting our time.
10- I don’t have to do anything of the kind. But even if I did, Congress has now seen this for what it was, as the american people have, and new road is to change strategy– whereas with Bush its still full-speed-ahead on a failed strategy.
Just as for an irresponsible and wreckless teenager, the parents (Congress in this case) have the right to take away the car keys.
Tofu, you are the teenager throwing a tantrum. Let me ask you this since you live in fear already, what are you going to do if Democrats like you cause the US to surrender in Iraq and AQ does attack and the people get the correct idea people like you invited the attack with your cut and run agenda and decide to make you pay?
“They’re wrapping Iraq around Bush’s neck, using chains, as the sole owner of the ongoing occupation.”
Yes they are, which is one reason why they will lose the Presidential election in 2008. It reminds me of the fixation on Clinton the the Republicans had during his tenure.
“Just as for an irresponsible and wreckless teenager, the parents (Congress in this case) have the right to take away the car keys.”
If this is the way you see the governement as being configured, it surely explains your lack of clarity regarding the topic.
There is no “parent-child” relationship here. They are co-equal branches.
However, you are correct in one regard- Congress does have the authority and right to withdraw the 2002 use of force resolution. But if you honestly think that will end the war in Iraq, then you are direly mistaken.
13- “There is no “parent-child”relationship here. They are co-equal branches.”
Call it whatever you wish, parent-child / investor-corporation / whatever. The money is ours, not Bush’s. The people have a right to dictate to what our money goes towards and that is one of the duties of our elected representatives. If the American people believe Iraq has become a bad investment, in both lives and treasure, it’s the responsibility of Congress to effect change.
“However, you are correct in one regard- Congress does have the authority and right to withdraw the 2002 use of force resolution. But if you honestly think that will end the war in Iraq, then you are direly mistaken. “
It won’t in itself ‘end’ the war but it will further polarize Bush against public opinion. The Bush Whitehouse will be framed as a ‘rogue’ administration. I think Bush best understand the impact such a bill would have if it passed (which, FYI, I don’t think has any chance of happening) because the Republican politicos have a lot more to loose than just the White House next year.
15.
Interesting that you ignored the firwst part of the post.
“It won’t in itself ‘end’ the war but it will further polarize Bush against public opinion.”
No it won’t. At this point, people support him or they don’t. The interesting part of this statement to me that your genuine focus is on Bush and not the war itself.
The same mistake was made by the Republicans, as I pointed out.
Also intersting is the conglomeratazation of the topics of support for the war and support for Bush. Bush has, to this point failed on the battle raging in Iraq. I am severely sipleased, as we’ve founght it half assed. That point is something that I won’t dispute. However, I still support the war and the effort, and realize that we need to win this war. If we don’t, the end result will be dire- something that you and your short sighted friends seem to never want to address.
“Interesting that you ignored the firwst part of the post.”
Not really, I just am not seeing the parallel is all.
“No it won’t. At this point, people support him or they don’t. The interesting part of this statement to me that your genuine focus is on Bush and not the war itself.”
Sorry, my bad. I meant to correct your statement in my last posting from ‘war’ to ‘occupation’ and I did not. The Iraq ‘Occupation’ and the Bush Whitehouse have become synonymous. As I said in my last comment, the Democrats are wrapping Iraq around Bush’s neck. He best pull a magic rabbit out of his hat if he expects his legacy in the history books to be anything but an arrogant failure.
“However, I still support the war and the effort, and realize that we need to win this war. If we don’t, the end result will be dire- something that you and your short sighted friends seem to never want to address.”
This country, and the world as a whole, has a lot of emerging threats we will have to face in the coming decades. Al-Qaeda, and similar terrorists, are just a little taste of what is to come. If Iraq has taught us nothing else, it should be that you can’t squash ideology with military force.
This country, and the world as a whole, has a lot of emerging threats we will have to face in the coming decades. Al-Qaeda, and similar terrorists, are just a little taste of what is to come. If Iraq has taught us nothing else, it should be that you can’t squash ideology with military force.
Well said, now without ignoring the problem how do you propose to solve it?
Perhaps as a sign of Peace, we can ask for Leftist/Liberal/Democrite volunteers to go over and tell the terrorists that we really want to be their friends. We’ll send a bunch of Leftist lawyers over there too (we have way too many of them!).
Surely the delegation will be treated as honored guests and peace will ensue!
If not, and they are all beheaded, well at least perhaps the Left will learn a lesson…
As I said in my last comment, the Democrats are wrapping Iraq around Bush’s neck. He best pull a magic rabbit out of his hat if he expects his legacy in the history books to be anything but an arrogant failure.
And perhaps the the Democtite leadership and the anti-war Left will be remembered as traitors.
Would you like to see the future of Iraq if we withdraw too soon? Take a look at Somalia and Lebanon. If we withdraw I guarantee Iraq war part 3 within 5-10 years with an even higher body count.
That’s an understatement Drake. It would also cement for us a reputation of cutting and running when the casualties start to add up. That should be good for our international reputation. We used to have citizens and politicians who understood that casualties were a part of war and the only way to minimize them was to obliterate anyone who stood in your path. That’s no longer considered politically correct.
A German General in WWI said that he knew that WWI was lost when the Americans joined the fight because while the French and British would fire 10 salvos and send 1000 men over the wire into the waiting German guns, the Americans would fire 1000 salvos before sending 10 men over the wire toward the German lines. A Japanese Admiral, upon learning that the declaration of war had not been delivered prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor said, “I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant.” We beat the Germans by shelling them into submission. We beat the Japanese by cutting off their weapons supply (destroyed weapons factories) and then bombing them into submission.
Collateral Damage and casualties are ugly realities of war. That is the reason why spreading Democracy is so important. Democracies do not wage war on other Democracies. The people simply will not stand for extended casualties without a good reason. While many have died and more will die in the war to preserve the new democracy in Iraq, many more will die if it devolves into a lawless state ran by a radical Islamic group like the Taliban did in Afghanistan or the Islamic Courts Union tried to do in Somalia until the Ethiopian Army went in and routed out the Islamists. It is sad that the Ethiopian Army can route out the Islamofascists, while the Democrats don’t believe our Army can. I guess the difference is that the Ethiopians realize what a threat the Islamists were because they could see the refugees from the Islamists face to face and hear first hand accounts of their brutal enforcement of Sharia law. Perhaps Nancy and Harry et al should take a little trip to Ethiopia and talk to the Somali refugees about the benevolence of their former Islamist conquerors. I doubt it would do any good, nor would the MSM report their findings, but at least they wouldn’t be able to homestly claim ignorance on that topic.
Actually the Ethiopian army went in with our support, air, naval and rumoured to be some special forces involvment. They probably decided to get involved because the Islamic courts group proclaimed that they would “return” the Somali region of eastern Ethiopia to Islamic, or their own rule and have basically declared war on them.
You may have heard recently about the abduction of Chinese oil workers in Ethiopia, that was one of these islamic militant/separatist groups in that region. The civil war that split Ethiopia into Ethiopia and Eritrea was also basically a Christian/Muslim war, and it has been said that Eritrea is supplying and funding the Islamic courts.
Drake, I’m perfectly happy that we supported the Ethiopian Army in Somalia. My comment was about the fact that the Dems think we can’t win while the Ethiopian army, with or without our support, did. I think the big difference is that the Ethiopians realize how great a threat radical Islam is because it is on their doorstep. When you have Democrats claiming that Global Warming is a greater threat than Islamic Terrorists, you just have to ask what have they been smoking.
If I remember correctly, it was the Ethiopians who sent their armor in to help our guys get out of hostile territory during the Blackhawk Down incident in Mogadishu. It’s been a couple of years since I read the book, but we didn’t have armored Hummvs in Somalia and a failure to pass along vital directions and coordinates seriously hampered our rescue efforts when the initial rescue convoy got lost en route. Of course a few A-10 Warthogs and a few Apaches or Super Cobras might have made a world of difference in those rangers getting stuck without any means of extraction and minimal resupply. Of course certain medical supplies that are standard issue now weren’t even in existence then, or the casualties would’ve been substantially less.