You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Pelosi: Baker Report Proves Bush Has Failed
2006-12-07
Let the Spin Begin!
Nancy Pelosi, the incoming Democratic speaker of the House, on Wednesday praised the Iraq Study Group's report on the Iraq war and said the report proves "that the President's Iraq policy has failed and must be changed."
The Arabs have failed.
Earlier, President Bush said the country "is tired of pure political bickering that happens in Washington." Bush said it's best for the country if Democrats and Republicans work together, and he expressed the hope that report "will give us all an opportunity to find common ground."
Dream on, W.
After blasting Bush's handling of the war, Pelosi pledged to work with him to end it.
The war - or the sedition?
"If the President is serious about the need for change in Iraq," she said in a statement, "he will find Democrats ready to work with him in a bipartisan fashion to find a way to end the war as quickly as possible."
As quickly as possible. The ISG talks about 2008, at the very earliest. Will that be okay with Her Highness who couldn't be bothered to read the report before flapping gums to the press?
Pelosi said Democrats "are committed to ensuring that the ideas of the Iraq Study Group, as well as the ideas of other thoughtful people inside and outside of the government, are given full consideration in that process."
Is she gonna make up shit about the ISG report as she did with the 9/11 Report?
Pelosi mentioned only one of the group's recommendations, which is to change the primary mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and support.
That's it. The Grand Plan of the DhimmiDonks.
I wonder what the troops are supposed to do if attacked?
What about if the Iraqi Trainees are attacked?
"Now that the Study Group has endorsed this proposal," Pelosi said, "I hope that the President will recognize that he must take our policy in Iraq in a new direction."
Like "Take a left at the Congressional Cafeteria?" Like that?
She did not address the group's other recommendations, which include forming a "support group" among Iraq and its neighbors in Iran and Syria and beginning to withdraw troops from Iraq "by the first quarter of 2008."
I didn't have time. I've been redecorating my new office. Don't spoil the ending for me.
Posted by:.com

#20  It's weird. They seem come out when the news is good, rather than bad - RC's Troll Law, IIRC. I guess the circle-jerk at DU on a bad day is more inviting, lol. I guess we get the real dregs on a bad day...
Posted by: .com   2006-12-07 22:46  

#19  Maybe the DU is slow today. We lost 11 lads today, I figured they'd be near mid-nut right about now.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2006-12-07 22:34  

#18  It's almost sentient. Let's see if it can sit up and beg - or merely roll over (under the bridge) and play dead, lol.
Posted by: .com   2006-12-07 22:30  

#17  Mods - Under Bridge Dweller on Aisle 16. May need to send swab and bucket for the inevitable spittle clean up.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2006-12-07 22:28  

#16  You're all idiots.
Posted by: Clelet Elmaise8359   2006-12-07 22:24  

#15  Mark Steyn was on O'Reilly tonight - he dubbed the report's conclusions to be "Chat 'n Run" - sounds like a bullseye to me. ;-)
Posted by: .com   2006-12-07 21:27  

#14  The ISG thing to me is just too damn silly. It's like needing a study group to tell you to wipe your arse after taking a growler. The only part of the policy that has failed imho is not being brutal enough on certain tribes (a deadhorse I've resurected and beaten back to death on here numerously) who support the islamo-nutz. Only GWB can declare victory.

Lost in Iraq? What a bunch of idiots. We won the ground war, won every major and minor tactical battle and realistcally own 85%+ of the real estate. That's a military victory by anyone's definition (minus lefty idiots who are not even f*cking Americans afaic). We are only constrained by our own ROE. (rant/off)
Posted by: Broadhead6   2006-12-07 21:24  

#13  Oh no, Shipman dear -- the S in your name definitely means that you're special. ;-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-12-07 20:53  

#12  Dang! S means strikeout, not special.
Posted by: Shipman   2006-12-07 18:02  

#11  The jihadist's and leftist are screaming total victory and the crushing of the USA.

Hell, I've had Huskies who thought they had the upperhand for about 10 minutes. Both turned out to be long-term pals.
Posted by: Shipman   2006-12-07 18:01  

#10  Been reading overseas stuff.
The jihadist's and leftist are screaming total victory and the crushing of the USA.

Pelosi and Baker are total traitors.
Posted by: 3dc   2006-12-07 16:33  

#9  We can't win if we retreat.

There is no substitute for victory. It is the only standard by which military conflict which involves the US should be resolved for the US.

The ISG reports the memebrs wants to avert defeat. If that is true then the commission should have at least stated that victory is the only standrad for military conduct. That didn't happen.
Posted by: badanov   2006-12-07 16:02  

#8  kelly - I have a remedial plan thingy.
Posted by: .com   2006-12-07 14:06  

#7  I see a big fall in this overaged piece of skank meat's future. She makes too many enemies...even among her own people.
Posted by: tu3031   2006-12-07 13:29  

#6  I really hate to say it, but it's been going thru my mind a lot lately.

I think the country would be better off today if the people who fought on flight 93 lost.

I deeply respect them for what they did, but I think the long term results have resulted in more harm than good. I think we would have been better off of most of these bastards had been killed and we had to start over with a new Congress.

I know this is crazy talk, but it's how I feel.
Posted by: kelly   2006-12-07 13:27  

#5  The authors of this report are the same losers who advised GHWB (Bush #1) to abondond the shiite and Kurd uprisings in Iraq following the first gulf war. These same losers are mostly responsible for Bush 41 being a one termer. So tell me why we should consider their opinion at this time? In my eyes, they are just slightly ahead of Jimmah Cahtah in terms of military or foreign policy success.

Send this entire group packing, ask the 3rd infantry brigade to show up on the hill in fatigues, round up the entire congress, senate,and supremee court - jail most, shoot some, and return others to work - start over!

When treason is acceptable to the government, then the government is no longer acceptable to the people - throw them out!
Posted by: Rob06   2006-12-07 13:19  

#4  From the AP (By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer)

WASHINGTON - Praised by some and panned by others, the report of a high-level commission on ways to wind down the war in Iraq offered no startlingly new ideas but said a U.S. defeat still could be averted.?

Defeat?
Posted by: CrazyFool   2006-12-07 08:29  

#3  Well, I haven't read it either, but it sounds to me a lot like Bush's plan with a timetable and some threats. I heard on the radio going home last night that the ISG report indicated W's plan had failed, and they said it twice in the span of 20 seconds, just in case you missed it the first time.

What plan failed? The one that was in effect when the ISG started their work? The one that was in effect halfway through the 'study'? Or the one that was in effect the day the report was released?

The strategy is unchanged - "stand them up as we stand down" - that hasn't changed in a while. The tactics should be changing all the time, as the enemy adapts. (Hey! I'm a civil engineer, not a military guy!)

And by the by, Ms. Pelosi - your people were elected a month ago and the price of gas started rising the next day. It's now skyrocketed 15% in one month. At that rate, gas will be $5.00 a gallon by summertime. Whatcha gonna do about that, sweetheart?
Posted by: Bobby   2006-12-07 05:56  

#2  Iraqization hasn't worked because Sunnis and Shiites want to murder each other. Blame Islam.
Posted by: Sneaze Shaiting3550   2006-12-07 03:32  

#1  Iff reports that the post-2006 elex Dems are offering=giving key Congresional positions to hardlineers, can only mean that the Dems are aware that Amer Hiroshimas loom on high for America, AND ARE TRYING TO PROTECT AND GUARANTEE THAT ULTRA-LEFTISTS SURVIVE + DOMINATE POST-HIROSHIMA(S) WASHINGTON. As argued time before, worse coming to worse, SAVING AMERICA + WORLD FROM DUBYA/GOP-CAUSED + BLAMED NEW 9-11'S = SURVIVING DUBYA/GOP-SAME, when it comes to POWER. REALISM-PRAGMATISM > keeping any and all Options open > Contingencies > ensuring that DEMOLEFISTS,
NOT GOP-RIGHTISTS, rule post-Hiroshima Washington = Amerika. Whether duly elected, or as stalwart Hiroshima "Survivor", HILLARY = CO-POTUS VEEP HILARY = POTUS HILLARY!?
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-12-07 01:03  

00:00