Submit your comments on this article |
Home Front: WoT |
Democrats push for Iraq withdrawal |
2006-11-13 |
![]() President George W. Bush has insisted that US troops would not leave until Iraqis could take over security for their country, and has repeatedly rejected setting a timetable for withdrawal, saying that would only embolden the insurgents. However, the White House said Mr Bush was open to new ideas and the President would tomorrow meet the bipartisan Iraq Study Group expected to recommend alternative policies in its final report. |
Posted by:Fred |
#10 So, are the Democrats gonna buck the UN resolutions? Should be interesting to see how they |
Posted by: JohnQC 2006-11-13 12:40 |
#9 If I remember correctly the US and the other coalition members , as per a couple of UN resolutions,are responsible for Iraq's security until such time as they can do the job themselves. So, are the Democrats gonna buck the UN resolutions? |
Posted by: Deacon Blues 2006-11-13 12:31 |
#8 So mebbe the Donks will adopt the Trunk position, but call it something else? Mebbe. The democrats can read polls as good as anyone. The voters may have 'thrown the bums out', but they have doubts about the 'new' bums. Gonna be interesting in 2007. |
Posted by: Pappy 2006-11-13 10:32 |
#7 ...I had the thoroughly unpleasant experience of dealing with SEN Levin about 22 years ago while I was stationed at Wurtsmith AFB, MI. He not only treated my troops and as if we were something to scrape off our shoes, he spoke to our wing commander with utter, absolute, and undisguised contempt. Yet he had the balls to be surprised and angry when DOD decided not to base the B-1 at Wurtsmith, primarily because of his attitude towards the military. Mike |
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2006-11-13 09:23 |
#6 Ah, yes, a useful |
Posted by: wxjames 2006-11-13 08:28 |
#5 Carl Levin has a history of being a tool of the Pal voters in the Detroit area. CAIR loves him. |
Posted by: 3dc 2006-11-13 08:04 |
#4 I heard on the radio this morning a Dem saying we must redeploy (and I swear he said) after the sectarian violence is controlled. So mebbe the Donks will adopt the Trunk position, but call it something else? |
Posted by: Bobby 2006-11-13 06:28 |
#3 WND.com > Joseph Farah article CONSERVATIVISM'S DEATH THROES > America is sliding towards SOCIALISM + IMMORALITY [Amorality? Un-Morality?]. Agree in part, disagree in part. Farah fails to recognize that the Lefties are more than willing to resort to wilfully confusing, across-the-board multi-level, vertical = horizontal = oblique, dialecticism + hypocrisies to get its way. 2006 Elex > the Dems have all but formally acknowledged their [ULTRA]CONSERVATIVE, TRUE FUTURE AGENDA - MODERATE/CENTRIST FOR NOW, ULTRA = TOTALITARIAN AS TIME GOES ON. Right now, ALTERNATISM > feel-good, wavy gravy, PC Leftspeak for LIMITED GOVERNMENTISM-WELFARIST ABSOLUTISM. In reality, ALTERNATISM is dead and gone forever, and thats politely presuming that the Left actually believed in its own Altern agenda to begin with. For a while yet, the [potemkinist]Waffle = Egg = Toast Bread luvin' Left will deliber refrain from using the labels SOCIALISM, CONSERVATIVISM, GOVERNMENTISM + ABSOLUTISM + AMERIKAN RED ARMY = PEOPLE'S ARMY when in front of the MSM. |
Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-11-13 04:24 |
#2 Bush is the CINC, DhimmiDonks and the Iraq Study Group notwithstanding. I'd say he has precisely zero reason, now, to placate them. Last 2 years of his last term with an opposition-held Congress which can't afford to be seen shorting the troops and a public which demands good news or else, but soundly against cut 'n run. Must be a wild time for the historians... So many books and lecture circuit tour dates in the offing. Interesting and deadly times. |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-13 03:42 |
#1 Democratspeak: New Direction == Retreat |
Posted by: badanov 2006-11-13 00:23 |