Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 04/13/2004 View Mon 04/12/2004 View Sun 04/11/2004 View Sat 04/10/2004 View Fri 04/09/2004 View Thu 04/08/2004 View Wed 04/07/2004
1
2004-04-13 Iraq-Jordan
Abizaid seeks more combat troops for Iraq
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve White 2004-04-13 12:07:31 AM|| || Front Page|| [11128 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Here is what happens tomorrow:

Shouts of QUAGMIRE from the left.

And the senate and houe will dither and abdicate their responsibilities towards the national defense.

There should have been a holy uproar over defeatist comments made by Ted Kennedy, and the outrageous innuendo advanced, not to mention the treatment of Ms. Rice, by Ben-Veniste.

Goddammitt, this nation is at war and the left thinks absolutely NOTHING of their own personal obligations towards the national defense to STFU and give the military everything they need to fight and win.

Condaleeza Rice by her simple grace and her own personal display of decency and intelligence under this haranging,, showed to the world what a pencil dicked, shiveled cajoned little girl-armed cockroach Ben-Veniste is.

Okay.

Sorry, I had a little Misha moment there for a sec, and had to vent.
Posted by badanov  2004-04-13 12:38:56 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org]  2004-04-13 12:38:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Well all and good! If Abizaid gets them, that means an increased capability to actually carry out "Operation Whack the Mullahs of Tehran" ...
Posted by Edward Yee  2004-04-13 1:00:30 AM|| [http://edwardyee.fanworks.net]  2004-04-13 1:00:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Oh Badanov-just because fried Rice was served up at the hearing--as she spun and lied her ass off--no reason to blame Teddy!
Posted by Not Mike Moore 2004-04-13 1:26:19 AM||   2004-04-13 1:26:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Anmd BTW Badanov--it was Rummy who didn't want more troops
Posted by Not Mike Moore 2004-04-13 1:28:02 AM||   2004-04-13 1:28:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Dr. Rice didn't lie--she didn't have to and wouldn't.
And Rummy is right--we don't need more troops; the ones we have there are doing just fine, no thanks to you, NMM.
Posted by Jen  2004-04-13 1:53:25 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com]  2004-04-13 1:53:25 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Watch this one. The same leftists who said "we didn't have enough troops!" will now say, "See, quagmire. Why else would we need more troops!"

Now let's see, how about a little Harper's Index fun, NMM?

Number of people viewing Rice favorably to unfavorably: 2-to-1

Number of people viewing Clarke unfavorably to favorably: 2-to-1.

Number of smoking guns found in August 6 memo: Zero.

Clarke to Gorton on chances of stopping 9/11 in advance:
Zero.

Probability that the left would have supported a preemptive attack on Afghanistan pre-9/11:

Zero

Probability that the left would support ANY defense of the United States:

Zero.
Posted by RMcLeod  2004-04-13 4:21:15 AM||   2004-04-13 4:21:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Jen, if Rummy is right...then you mean that Abizaid is wrong. I know who is more qualified in conducting military operations.
Posted by Igs 2004-04-13 9:52:53 AM||   2004-04-13 9:52:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Abizaid has asked for 2 combat brigades that can be used as a quick reaction force to move around the country quelling uprisings quickly. It appears that currently most of the Army has locked down to guard duty (you know, guard the Museum, guard the pipe lines, guard the hospital, etc). Now go back and read what Rummy is trying to transform much of the military into and tell me how wrong he is.

Secondly, notice how effecive the other coalition partners have been. I stated in the beginning we didn't want that many other countries in their because we would be spending all our time protecting them. Notice they all (except the british) got run out of their areas. The 1st armored is going back down their to re-take their areas of operations for them. The bottom line is without air assets the coalition partners are nearly useless.
Posted by Patrick 2004-04-13 10:53:50 AM||   2004-04-13 10:53:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 ..just because fried Rice was served up at the hearing--as she spun and lied her ass off..

Got any proof of that other than "she had to be lying" or "someone else told me she was"?
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-04-13 10:57:01 AM||   2004-04-13 10:57:01 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 11:59:11 AM||   2004-04-13 11:59:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Antiwar - what a potty mouth. Idiot
Posted by Frank G  2004-04-13 12:05:14 PM||   2004-04-13 12:05:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 12:09:25 PM||   2004-04-13 12:09:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 so if I leave out "war" and "invasion" I can call you a wanker cunt and you won't be offended? LOL
Posted by Frank G  2004-04-13 12:12:19 PM||   2004-04-13 12:12:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 I'm with Frank--there's no need for such a foul mouth, Antiwar.
The majority of the "thousands of Iraqis" killed were males of military age in that "Madhi's Army."
President Bush is one of our best Presidents and so far, hasn't been found wanking in the Oval Office with an intern young enough to be his granddaughter like your idol Clinton.
Sick or wounded Iraqi children are treated in hospitals that have been vastly improved and staffed since we liberated Iraq with lots of American dollars and personnel.

Does your lengthy armpit hair catch fire, fueled by your French-like B.O., with rage while you drive your SUV, nicknamed the Lezbo Mobile, to your PETA/Global Warming/ "Bush is Hitler" meeting?
Posted by Jen  2004-04-13 12:13:14 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com]  2004-04-13 12:13:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 12:15:57 PM||   2004-04-13 12:15:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 12:24:14 PM||   2004-04-13 12:24:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Anti, you've *got* to stop watching Al-Jazeera!
It's curdling what's left of your brain.

And where's your pity for the little girl that was killed on the plane that crashed into the WTC on 9/11 along with her mother and her mother's best friend?
Or the dozens of Israeli babies and toddlers that the Paleos have blown up?
This is war.
I hope no little children are killed, but sometimes they are.
And these Islamist killers have no scruples about putting babies in front of bullets.
Posted by Jen  2004-04-13 12:28:15 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com]  2004-04-13 12:28:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Antiwar isn't antiwar. Only passive. Once her ass (eek) is threatened she'll be right there demanding something be done to protect her way of life helping the homeless. It's that "where is a cop when you need one" thing.

Antiwar. Should sadr's leetle army be in charge. Should sunnie mafia be in charge? Should Iranian mullahs be in charge? Who should be in charge, how?

Posted by Lucky 2004-04-13 12:34:27 PM||   2004-04-13 12:34:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 12:36:30 PM||   2004-04-13 12:36:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I know what Al-Jizz is saying: they try to make the U.S. look like "baby killers" (just like John Kerry says) and themselves look like innocent victims, while just the opposite is true:
The Islamists are the ones who slaughter men, women, children and the elderly without mercy or warning or pity.

And I resent you calling me a KKK member and demand you apologize: I'm from the South and we don't joke about that kind of thing and I respect people of all colors and races, thank you very much.
I AM SICK TO DEATH OF THE LEFT CALLING CONSERVATIVES NAMES.
Posted by Jen  2004-04-13 12:47:10 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com]  2004-04-13 12:47:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 C'mon. Antiwar is a troll. He's probably some smug 16 year old laughing his ass off at all the grown ups getting peeved at him.
Posted by 11A5S 2004-04-13 12:54:43 PM||   2004-04-13 12:54:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Heck, I thought the article was about more troops in Iraq. For what it's worth; if Abizaid think's he needs them then send in more - really not a big deal. Another Regiment of Marines would prolly fit the bill real nice. Move them on up to Najaf.

"the Coalition forces are doing well killing thousands of Iraqis."

>efficiency is a beautiful thing :)
Posted by Jarhead 2004-04-13 1:02:23 PM||   2004-04-13 1:02:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Jen, Dont let that asshat antiwar get under your skin -- that is what she wants and gets her jollies from. Its not worth the effort. She is probably some pimple-faced kid who gets her jollies from getting people worked up -- just want to drag everyone else down to her own level.

Just consider the source.
Posted by CrazyFool  2004-04-13 1:09:13 PM||   2004-04-13 1:09:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar TROLL 2004-04-13 1:41:49 PM||   2004-04-13 1:41:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 You're right Lucky. She's not antiwar she's just on the other side.
Posted by Shipman 2004-04-13 1:52:48 PM||   2004-04-13 1:52:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 # 22 Jarhead: Yeah. And the situation changes all the time. Gotta go with what's needed as things change. I agree. No big. And lol! Look out, Najaf!

To Operative Antiwar , I mean Antipeace:

It's telling that you don't live up to your own "name."
I think you should change it to "Anti-US/Coalition-WAR. Or better yet, PRO-Islamic-jihad-anywhere-on-the-face-of-the-globe-WAR. We're patient. We'll wait for you.

I think it's telling how you make your own little "war" as you address Jen as "Jennie" --in an attempt to diminutize her. How aggressive of you.

I think it's telling that you do not seem as equally offended by the words "war" and "invasion" when applied to Arabs.

I think it's telling that you refuse to acknowledge and denounce the barbarism (the war) perpetrated against women and little girls as a matter of course in Arab countries, by Arabs.

I think it's telling that you refuse to acknowledge and denounce the acts of terror (i.e., murder, i.e, killing, i.e., war) perpetrated by the Islamofacists against men, women, and children around the world. Everyone bleeds the same, Antipeace.

I think it's telling that you refuse to acknowledge that the US military goes out of their way NOT to endanger civilians as standard policy, while the Iraqi terrorists conveniently use their wives, sisters, mothers and children as human shields. How many of them are in "ill-equipped Iraqi hospitals?" And how many supplies were stolen out of Iraqi hospitals by Iraqis, thus making them ill-equipped? You never complain about those acts of war either.

I think it's telling that you never address issues of substance.

I think it's telling that you never have answered a single of my questions over the course of many weeks.

When are you going to get serious? Your charade is up. You love war. You want war. You just don't want the right side to win.

Note: Pimply-faced kid, smug 16-year-old, confused Aussie with a mid-life crisis dating an Arab, or pro-Arab operative--it doesn't matter. Your posts just give a chance to organize our arguments, strengthen our resolve, and practice our typing skills. Think about it--in a small way (peck, peck, shift, peck) you've made the "other side" (the real anti-war contingeny at Rantburg) a little stronger.
Bet that sucks.

Cheers!
Posted by ex-lib 2004-04-13 1:56:14 PM||   2004-04-13 1:56:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 It is always amazing to me to watch the left (Antiwar) - as soon as they are faced with indisputable facts, they revert to name calling. We as conservatives view people like you, Antiwar, as misguided or misinformed whereas you see us as Evil. If your views are so pious and righteous (of course in a secular sort of way – wouldn’t want to offend you) why don’t you back up your name calling with some fact or perhaps start your own blog we could all visit to become better informed? As far as speculation on Antiwar’s age – my guess is that he or she (wait, is gender identification PC?) is college educated, perhaps with a post grad work, not a 16 year old boy. The 16 year old boy would have a much wittier vocabulary.
Posted by Topanga Hippy 2004-04-13 1:56:55 PM||   2004-04-13 1:56:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 just why do we reply to miss anti-war. she never has any intelligent points to debate. just rubbish.
Posted by Dan 2004-04-13 2:17:21 PM||   2004-04-13 2:17:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 PS: antiwar is supposed to be a 30-something Aussie female.

1. Have you ever noticed what time (s)he posts at? In the middle of the night Aussie time.

2. Has antiwar ever once used a British spelling or Aussie slang?

(S)he's a troll. Put antiwar on ignore and save Fred's bandwidth.
Posted by 11A5S 2004-04-13 2:55:52 PM||   2004-04-13 2:55:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 11A5S...best and fastest way to get rid of a troll is to ignore them....they reason they ARE trolls is because being annoying is the only way that anyone ever pays attention to them. I guess it's better than being invisible.

Kinda sad if you think about how desperate that is from their life's standpoint - but best to ignore them and let them pathetically seek attention elsewhere.
Posted by B 2004-04-13 3:09:25 PM||   2004-04-13 3:09:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 11A5S, not to defend Antiwar, but posting in the middle of the night is not conclusive. I also often post in the middle of the night Greece-time and end up waking up around noon -- being a CS grad student I can choose to work (or surf) on my hours of choice.
Posted by Aris Katsaris  2004-04-13 6:23:19 PM||   2004-04-13 6:23:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 " but posting in the middle of the night"

ah..but it does explain the lack of your coherent thought process.
Posted by anon4u 2004-04-13 6:35:09 PM||   2004-04-13 6:35:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 Agreed, Aris. But she _always_ posts at godawful hours for an Australian. With the exception of "dog's breakfast," (which has become standard RB slang and could have been learned here) I have never witnessed her use a Briticism, Aussie-ism, or British spelling.

At any rate, as much as I sometimes disagree with you and others here, I do respect your opinions. Antiwar doesn't seem to have any opinions. She just writes provocative one liners and wastes bandwidth.
Posted by 11A5S 2004-04-13 6:39:08 PM||   2004-04-13 6:39:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 11:59:11 AM||   2004-04-13 11:59:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#35 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 12:09:25 PM||   2004-04-13 12:09:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 12:15:57 PM||   2004-04-13 12:15:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#37 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 12:24:14 PM||   2004-04-13 12:24:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 12:36:30 PM||   2004-04-13 12:36:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#39 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by Antiwar 2004-04-13 1:41:49 PM||   2004-04-13 1:41:49 PM|| Front Page Top

10:03 B
10:02 B
09:23 muck4doo
01:44 B
01:42 B
01:35 BigEdLB
01:35 OldSpook
00:31 Super Hose
00:24 Super Hose
00:20 Super Hose
00:15 RWV
00:06 Long Hair Republican
23:58 OldeForce
23:55 Frank Martin
23:38 Anonymous4156
23:35 ruprecht
23:27 Gromky
23:23 tu3031
23:18 Barbara Skolaut
23:18 Raj
23:16 Gromky
23:10 JAB
23:07 Barbara Skolaut
23:05 whitecollar redneck









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com