Article

2007-01-18 Home Front: Politix

US Democrats ready resolution opposing Iraq war

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 Fred 2007-01-18 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Olympia Snow should change her party affiliation...the party name I won't write here in deference to the pleasant folk who are here.

It sickens me that these "Americans" are so eager to see us fail and that they have so little understanding of the consequences should we do so.

Posted by remoteman 2007-01-18 01:57|| 2007-01-18 01:57|| Front Page Top

#2 US Democrats ready resolution ~~losing~~ opposing Iraq war

Posted by Spomort Greling4204 2007-01-18 02:38|| 2007-01-18 02:38|| Front Page Top

#3 They proclaim to seemingly "oppose" the war but have yet to prove they are le seriuese about Congressionally stopping Dubya. THE WAR IS SO BAD FOR AMERICA THEY GOTTA LET DUBYA CONTINUE TO DO HIS THINGY???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-01-18 03:52|| 2007-01-18 03:52|| Front Page Top

#4 REGAN > the Dems biggest challenger for 2008 may be from FAR/RADICAL LEFTY ELEMENTS within their own Party. WOT > Limited Socialism, Communism, Govt-ism, Totalitarianism, etal.; versus FULL.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-01-18 03:57|| 2007-01-18 03:57|| Front Page Top

#5 I e-mailed Hagel and Snowe this morning:

I read two interesting articles on the Internet this morning, Senator. One was about how the troop surge in Iraq is already having an effect. Al-Qadea has directed their fighters to leave Baghdad, and the neighboring areas are afraid of the violence, so are cooperating with the Iraqi police and army.

The second article, Senator, dealt with your support for a resolution condemning the troop surge. Some of the most vocal opponents of the war have presidential ambitions, and I detest them putting their personal ambition above the safety of our troops.

My son served in Iraq, Senator, and I believe those who encourage a reduction in the war effort also encourage our enemies, prolonging the war. I saw it in Vietnam. I urge you to reconsider your support of the Commander in Chief.

Posted by Bobby 2007-01-18 06:55|| 2007-01-18 06:55|| Front Page Top

#6 You are assuming that these senators give a damn about that happens in Iraq, to the Iraqi people, or our troops.

I don't see it. In fact, with some congressmen I see the exact opposite - the strategy of the Democratic party over the past few years is that we have to lose, and lose big, in order for them to advance their agenda.

Posted by CrazyFool 2007-01-18 08:21|| 2007-01-18 08:21|| Front Page Top

#7 I remember a Senate who sent a directive to one of their commanders to not cross the Rubicon with his troops. That opposition to a troop surge didn't work well for the Senators in the end. Keep playing politics boys and girls and ignore the pattern of human behavior known as history.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-01-18 09:42|| 2007-01-18 09:42|| Front Page Top

#8 Here's the first test for McConnell. It shouldn't be too hard to make this stunt backfire on its proponents, but Frist would have botched that entirely.

Posted by JSU 2007-01-18 10:20|| 2007-01-18 10:20|| Front Page Top

#9 Procopius2k, I love the reference and the implications. History teaches us much.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2007-01-18 11:19|| 2007-01-18 11:19|| Front Page Top

#10 The Chicken Dance continues.......

Posted by OyVey1 2007-01-18 12:46|| 2007-01-18 12:46|| Front Page Top

#11 Sulla?

Posted by Dar">Dar 2007-01-18 12:49|| 2007-01-18 12:49|| Front Page Top

#12 #6 CrazyFool, I do not assume they care, I figger at best I get lumped into the "31% of the e-mailes are from wackos who do not support you, Senator" crowd.

But I do feel, from time to time, that it is my responsibility to make the difference between 30% opposed and 31% opposed. It makes me feel ...well...like I'm part of the democracy.

Posted by Bobby 2007-01-18 13:04|| 2007-01-18 13:04|| Front Page Top

#13 We must do the very best we can to counteract the distorted picture that the MSM foists on Americans citizens everyday. [world for that matter]

We must also recognize that our enemies here at home are possesed by an evil that is tireless, and we must never forget that the job to defend liberty and freedom is a battle never done.

Plz contact as many people as you can [serving or civilians] and urge them to relate the vital importance of the WOT in Iraq; to Congress Criters, on major media blogs, put your 2 cents in everywhere you can. We must join the battle and defeat the bastards once again, for the sake of our children and grand children.

Posted by RD 2007-01-18 14:10|| 2007-01-18 14:10|| Front Page Top

#14 I thought Fred Thompson's comments on the radio this morning were interesting. This is my quick & dirty transcription:

You know, you couldn't turn on the TV yesterday without seeing a senator or a congressman announcing a plan to pull American troops out of Iraq, or stop the troop buildup in Iraq, or at least warn President Bush that there's opposition to his plans in Iraq. Its worthy of a comment or two.

Well first of all, preparation continues in the house and the senate for the introduction of a resolution disapproving of the president's plan to to send additional troops to Iraq in order to quell the violence there. The resolution will have no legal affect. A congressional vote to cut off funding could stop the troops or could stop the war all together for that matter, but the critics of the plan don't have the stomach for that. It might be politically dangerous.

One sponsor of the senate resolution said that the goal is really to demonstrate that the president is on his own.

Well last week I said it seemed to me that we ought to support the plan for the additional troops which incidentally would still bring the troops up to a number that's less than the number that we've had there in the past but support it because the consequences of an American defeat in Iraq are so great.

Understandably, people have strong feelings on both sides of this debate. I read yesterday in the Economist magazine, which openly dislikes President Bush, that they agree with the President's plan as our last, best chance to prevail there.

But I can see the arguments for the other side, in fact, I can even understand the vote to cut off funds for the war effort if one believes that we've clearly already lost the war, and is prepared to accept the consequences of that loss.

But what I can't see is this non-binding resolution of opposition. Is it really in our country's best interest to signal to the enemy that they probably only have to wait us out a little longer because congressional determination to defeat them is crumbling? Doesn't such a resolution further diminish our chances for success at the very time our soldiers are preparing to go into battle?

And finally, regardless of our politics, is this the time to announce to the world that our president is on his own?

Posted by Elmert Crosh5077 2007-01-18 22:21|| 2007-01-18 22:21|| Front Page Top

23:56 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:55 USN, ret.
23:47 USN, ret.
23:34 USN, ret.
23:19 C-Low
23:06 Barbara Skolaut
22:55 Elmert Crosh5077
22:46 Glenmore
22:45 Glenmore
22:42 Shieldwolf
22:39 Swamp Blondie
22:32 Shieldwolf
22:21 Elmert Crosh5077
22:15 Shieldwolf
22:14 Jan
22:13 BA
22:12 JosephMendiola
22:08 CrazyFool
22:07 JosephMendiola
22:04 Frank G
22:02 KBK
22:01 JAB
22:01 JosephMendiola
21:56 Frank G