« US Embassy Attacked During Cheney Visit | Main | Tony Blair To Announce Resignation »

Republican Congressmen Confront President Bush on Iraq

Eleven moderate House Republicans had a face to face yesterday with President Bush, Secretary Rice, Secretary Gates, among others:

Participants in the Tuesday meeting between Mr. Bush, senior administration officials and 11 members of a moderate bloc of House Republicans said the lawmakers were unusually candid with the president, telling him that public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts.

One told Mr. Bush that voters back home favored a withdrawal even if it meant the war was judged a loss. Representative Tom Davis told Mr. Bush that the president's approval rating was at 5 percent in one section of his northern Virginia district.

"It was a tough meeting in terms of people being as frank as they possibly could about their districts and their feelings about where the American people are on the war," said Representative Ray LaHood of Illinois, who took part in the session, which lasted more than an hour in the residential section of the White House. "It was a no-holds-barred meeting."

Several of the Republican moderates who visited the White House have already come under political attack at home for their support of Mr. Bush and survived serious Democratic challenges in November.

Representative Charles W. Dent of Pennsylvania, a co-chairman of the Tuesday Group, an alliance of about 30 moderate Republican lawmakers, helped arrange the meeting. He said lawmakers wanted to convey the frustration and impatience with the war they are hearing from voters. "We had a very frank conversation about the situation in Iraq," he said. Even so, the Republicans who attended the White House session indicated that they would maintain solidarity with Mr. Bush for now by opposing the latest Democratic proposal for two-stage financing of war, which is scheduled for a vote on Thursday in the House.

What alarms me more than anything is that, according to this article, American voters, the same people who experienced the terror of 9/11 at the hands of al Qaeda just a mere 5 1/2 years ago, want to withdraw from Iraq even if it means the rest of the world sees it as our defeat by al Qaeda. They don't seem to understand or possibly don't care that the repercussions of our perceived defeat could be catastrophic. Bin Laden was emboldened to hatch and carry out 9/11 because of our withdrawal from Somalia, which was a nothing compared to the Iraq war. Just imagine what the media all over the Middle East will report with immense glee at our withdrawal from Iraq: "The Great Satan was defeated. America can be turned back. Strike at America now when she's at her weakest." Bin Laden, Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Hezbollah and all the other extremist Islamic militant groups will gloat and sneer and dance the jig as they tell it to the world that the armies of Allah defeated the most powerful military force this world has ever known.

Allahpundit at Hot Air has a lot more including video of Tim Russert reporting on yesterday's meeting.

Comments (52)

I couldn't agree with you m... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I couldn't agree with you more, Kim.

Bin Laden was emboldened... (Below threshold)

Bin Laden was emboldened to hatch and carry out 9/11 because of our withdrawal from Somalia, which was a nothing compared to the Iraq war.

So does this logic imply that if we had stayed in Somalia we wouldn't have been attacked on 9/11? If we stay in Iraq does that mean Al Qaeda won't attack us again?

The fact is, whether we remain in Iraq or we leave, bin Laden and his kind are going to attack America and American interests wherever they can. Bin Laden's goal is to take down all of the regimes of the Middle East that we are currently propping up. To do that, he has to cripple us economically which he believes he can do by draining our resources in wars like Iraq and Afghanistan. By getting out of Iraq we actually make it harder for him to achieve that goal.

Can we just call them job s... (Below threshold)

Can we just call them job scared without the brains to look at what happened to the turncoats in the last election. They are home playing 'oh pity me'.

It's not patriotic to leave... (Below threshold)

It's not patriotic to leave our soldiers in the mud and sand of Iraq to fight and die for a Shiite theocracy. Whether this president or the next withdraws from Iraq there will be dancing in the streets of Baghdad. Shiites and Sunnis alike will celebrate their "victory" over the occupiers. As soon as the aid money buyoffs run out the stooges who run the country, whether it's Maliki or another set of Iranian backed goons will start making public anti-American statements in order to hang onto their phony baloney jobs or more likely to keep from being strung up from lamp posts. They'll tear up that godawful onesided hydrocarbon law forced down their throats by Cheney in a New York minute.

Why would they be so ungrateful? First of all because they're Arabs and live in the ME. The US has been getting bad press in those parts for decades. Secondly because Bush 1 told them to overthrow Saddam in 1991 and then had coalition soldiers stand idly by, sometimes as Republican Guard troops moved right through their ranks to massacre them. Then we sanctioned the whole country into the poorhouse for over a decade for Saddam's sins. Now we've invaded, occupied and destroyed their country. We locked them up without trial and tortured them. 4 million are displaced. Two million outside the country. Probably a million have died. 53% in the last poll said they have a close friend or family member who has been killed or wounded by the violence.

Bush knows all that and it's the reason he won't withdraw. If he can just hang on til January '09 he can get someone else to take the fall, someone else to bail him out and be left holding the bag as has been the case his whole life.

The only bright spot is if we leave now the Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites will exterminate AQ in Iraq. Iraq was a secular Stalinist gulag before we invaded. They have no more use for whackjob Wahhabis who want take over their rackets and tell them how to live anymore than they do for Americans. If the whole purpose is to get people of the ME to reject fundy jihadis then let's get the hell out and let them get on with that rejection.

Tuesday the Iraqi parliment passed a resolution calling for a timetable for coalition troops to leave. They'd have passed it sooner but because so many legislators have fled the country they couldn't get a quorum.

The pity is that most of th... (Below threshold)

The pity is that most of the left wing liberals (aka Larkin & welfare riders) live in the large cities and will die a thousand to one compared to conservatives that work the heartland of America and keep the old clock ticking.

The enemy outside and the e... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

The enemy outside and the enemy within. Larkin you are one who is within. And as surely as the sun rises you are the enemy of this nation. The nazi propagada ploy of telling the same lie over and over again has worked its evil once again thanks to the liberal who hate America. People like Larkin should be hung by the neck. Maybe the radical muslims will do that for us. Oops they behead people like Larkin don't they. Soon enough.

Nobody in the world would s... (Below threshold)

Nobody in the world would see it as a "defeat" at the hands of al-Qaeda.

It is only the American right wing that will push that interpretation.

I don't think you people are unpatriotic, just incredibly blind and stupid. Relentlessly.

Bin Laden is a coward. He ... (Below threshold)
Paul Hamilton:

Bin Laden is a coward. He conducts sneak attacks against civilian targets or against military targets which he believes cannot mount an effective defense. He has never -- nor could he ever -- go head to head against the US military, and so I doubt he would take what's happening with our our forces into account beyond the fact that so long as we're tied up in Iraq, we have fewer resources to go after him and we play right into the hands of his propaganda.

And nobody has forgotten 9-11. I'm offended by the implication. But Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and to add insult to injury, this war has been conducted incompetently from beginning to end. If you want to encourage al Qaeda, our continuing disaster in Iraq and our failure to acknowledge the political, religious and military realities over there are just the ticket. Getting out and refocusing our priorities will not only make his job tougher, it will also remove one of the strongest recruiting tools he has.

Iraq is going to achieve a political and religious balance with or without our presence. If we could have significantly influenced the outcome, it would have become apparent long before this. If America is weak, it's because we've bled ourselves white in a war which has been incompetently run from the beginning. We've "turned the corner" so many times, we're just going in circles and the American people have limited tolerance for throwing lives away.

Fighting communism was a cause we believed in a couple generations ago, but Vietnam didn't work. And today, we strongly support fighting terrorists, but it's become clear that Iraq is accomplishing nothing toward that objective.

And that is why even the members of Bush's party have had enough of this war. The American people want to fight terrorists, not try to come between two warring factions in a civil war of our own making.

Just imagine what the me... (Below threshold)

Just imagine what the media all over the Middle East will report

Wow, Kim. You could sure be AQ's spokeswoman with that perspective.

Paul -The fact tha... (Below threshold)

Paul -

The fact that the majority of Americans are not Muslim is the only recruiting tool "Uncle Benny" needs. Jihad as been ever thus since before Big Mo died.

2nd: Uncle Benny is not an Iraqi, true. Why, therefore, should his opinion about US involvement in Iraq mean more than the opinion of the elected Iraqi government?

That government has asked us to stay. The soldiers and administrators of that government are in the firing line and are dying in greater number than the US troops. They are dying for something that as an American should be important to you, the right to live based on agreement rather than force.

The fact that you may not agree with them on what those agreements might be is just about as relevant as me shooting you for paying $100 too much for your new car. The agreement for the new car was between you and the seller. I have no reason to interfere.

3rd: Given that life is stable (not free of danger, but stabilizing) and progressing in 15 out of 18 provinces, by what right do you call Iraq lost to civil war? Death? The narco-wars of Colombia have killed more people. The genocide of Kurds and Shia under Saddam Hussein killed more people. The famine in Ukraine courtesy of Uncle Joe killed more people.

4th: As many people as died under Saddam Hussein, why wasn't that a reason to make it stop; if the death of innocents motivates you to stop the counter-insurgency?

5th: Please don't have children, if you give up on troubled situations this quickly. 10-15 years is not unheard of, for an insurgency. How long did it take Greece to bust open November 17th? And they weren't climbing out of the ruins like Iraq is doing now.

6th: What is the high road of 'letting Iraqis settle this thing' by themselves, when only one team is playing by the rules? How does a killing field of moderate Iraqis enhance the security of the US in any way? They were the ones that cooperated with us. They were the ones that believed in ballots over bullets. When they are gone, how does Iraq become a better place?

We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Part Two.


Unfortunately, my two senat... (Below threshold)

Unfortunately, my two senators (kerry/kennedy) will be celebrating with AQ, just as they celebrated their great victory called vietnam. The slaughter that followed was not even considered, just as the slaughter that will follow in iraq is not their consideration. Actually, the welfare of the USA is not their consideration, only their power is their focus. God help us.

Aren't these fellas what so... (Below threshold)

Aren't these fellas what so many of you so easily brand others - traitors, military haters and un-American?

So eleven congress critters... (Below threshold)

So eleven congress critters went crying to their master about the war is dragging down their re-election chances. Oh my, when are you going to call those 11 critters "Traitors"?

It doesn't matter what a few people think, the majority of Americans want the troops out of Iraq. Notice not one American is for removing troops from Afgan? Wonder why that is. Guess most people have woken up and realized that invading Iraq was wrong.

Maybe if this war wasn't mishandled from the start, the people wouldn't feel this way. And why is this Admin looking for a "War Czar"?

Hey, the Sunni and the Shia... (Below threshold)

Hey, the Sunni and the Shia deserve a nonpartisan referee. The world needs for them to be refereed. It's a dirty, thankless, job, and the UN surely won't do it.

GW did not invade Iraq, the... (Below threshold)

GW did not invade Iraq, the congress authorized the invasion then the US went in.

A majority of americans want to not pay income tax.

A majority of americans want to close the border.

A majority of americans want to end entitlments.

Just what is it with the lefties wanting to run our government by polls. Well, really, only the polls they agree with. Like a majority of americans do not want same sex marriage but the lefties would then say we are ignorant or bigoted, so they disregard the poll. Pathetic how the lefties are. Your protest to this war has nothing to do with lives or foreign soil. It is all about hating GW from the year 2000 on. ww

wwDo you have fact... (Below threshold)


Do you have facts to back up those assertions or did you just pill them out of your a** as usual?

Some of those polls you love to despise perhaps? or did you just divine those assertions?

WW,But But #43 asked... (Below threshold)

But But #43 asked congress for the authority to invade Iraq. And after being spoonfed a bunch of lies, the critters in congress gave him the authority. And the Dowing Street memo's also prove that Bush intended to invade Iraq before 9-11.

But I do agree with some of your other statements, such as taxes, close the border, gays, etc.

The Dems have the best of b... (Below threshold)

The Dems have the best of both worlds. If al-Qaeda's back is broken they can claim that Bush was a war-mongering oil bully and if it is not they can claim that Bush had the wrong strategy in the War on Terra.

The Repubs have the best of both worlds. If al-Qaeda'a back is broken they can claim that Bush did it and if it is not they can blame it on the Democrats.

Allen, you've been spoonfed... (Below threshold)

Allen, you've been spoonfed a bunch of lies to believe Congress was spoonfed a bunch of lies during the run-up to the war.

That's what someone wants you to believe. I challenge you to prove that your belief is 'reality based'.

I sincerely hope the Iraqi ... (Below threshold)

I sincerely hope the Iraqi Parliament enjoys its impending two month vacation. Most Americans don't mind our young people dying every day for them while they're gone. Everybody needs a vacation. These people aren't even serious about saving their own country.

Where the hell do you go for a vacation in Iraq anyway?

I see it coming. This Abdu... (Below threshold)

I see it coming. This Abdullah guy in SA has Ahmad's number and will get with the mullahs to chill things. They may even be able to reason with Palestinians.

To parlay with the purple-f... (Below threshold)

To parlay with the purple-fingered majesty, Milord Pug.

They're just taking a deep ... (Below threshold)

They're just taking a deep breath before triparting.

Hey sad pathetic deluded so... (Below threshold)
marty arrowsmith:

Hey sad pathetic deluded souls: Wake UP!
Your RepubliCANT party has provided aid and comfort to the enemy since the days of your sad hero Ronnie "the gipper" Reagan. You and your pathetic yours have cut and run from the face of the "Islamofacists" for decades.

You may wish to hide the truth, but has a habit of ultimatley rearing its ugly head:

"During last week's Republican presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Library, Rudy Giuliani cited the 40th president as a model of fortitude in dealing with enemies. Among "the things that Ronald Reagan taught us," he declared, is that "we should never retreat in the face of terrorism."

No one present was impolite enough to mention that far from spurning retreat in the face of terrorism, the Gipper embraced it. After the 1983 terrorist bombing in Beirut, which killed 241 American military personnel, he recognized the futility of our presence in Lebanon and pulled out.

Boehner portrays himself and his colleagues as brave patriots who would never accept anything less than victory in war. But in 1993, when things got tough in Somalia, he voted for withdrawal. John McCain likewise favored "defeat" in that conflict. He opposed a timetable for withdrawal not because he wanted U.S. forces to stay but because it would take too long. Our soldiers, he insisted, should leave "as rapidly and safely as possible." Or, you could say, cut and run."

And now Bushy, Cheney, Condi, Rovey, Feithy, Wolfy, and Rummy have fallen into a trap that was so obvious that it is hard to believe. They reacted with a hubris and ignorance that only a Bushie could love. And somewhere under a rock, in a dark cave our enmy laughs. Ya know why? 'Cuz we didn't get him. "Cuz Bush didn't want to get him.

So Sad Pathetic Deluded souls either wake up or shut up.

Let's live outside the Orwellian world of:
War is Peace &
Ignorance is Strength


" Just imagine what the ... (Below threshold)

" Just imagine what the media all over the Middle East will report with immense glee at our withdrawal from Iraq: "The Great Satan was defeated. America can be turned back."

That, kim, is precisely what you get when you have the dumbest and most incompetent fool as president in the history of this country.

So America should continue to feed its youth into the maws of the Chimp-in-chief's meat grinder to save the face of this country after it stupidly elected the greatest incompetent in modern history?

This unfortunate price is the price we pay for electing an idiot Republican president. You Wizfools just don't ever want to admit the insanity of what you foolishly did.

"Allen, you've been spoo... (Below threshold)

"Allen, you've been spoonfed a bunch of lies to believe Congress was spoonfed a bunch of lies during the run-up to the war."

Rather than babbling crap, try The Downing Street Memos, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, George Tenet or Carne Ross, for starters. Then take a look at PNAC where it was all laid out and the members of that gang of swine with whom The Chimp filled his highest levels of council.

How many smoking guns do you need to wake up, you silly thang?

Just imagine what the me... (Below threshold)

Just imagine what the media all over the Middle East will report with immense glee at our withdrawal from Iraq: "The Great Satan was defeated. America can be turned back.

And what does the media in the Middle East say about us now? It's amusing to me that the same people who so often decry our media as biased and untrustworthy are more than willing to base our foreign policy on the propaganda of Middle Eastern media.

Sorry, they hear constantly about how we're the Great Satan and we will be destroyed, and no event will change that. It's a ridiculous argument.

I would bet these 11 "Repub... (Below threshold)
civil behavior:

I would bet these 11 "Repubelican" congressman wer for the aurge before they were against it.

I would bet that these same 11 "Repubelican" congressman are deciding they better cut and run if they want to get relelected in their districts.

I would bet that these 11 "Repubelican" congressman have already been given talking points as to how they will spin the withdrawl of troops not as surrender, or defeat but as some glorious invention of Rove's alley cat rhetoric.

Foolish stupid Americans in that 30% "Bush is our savior" category.

Since we're talking about h... (Below threshold)
mike filancia:

Since we're talking about hanging "traitors"-how about this? Chevron Oil was giving millions of $ in kickbacks to Sadaam Hussain during the 1990s--guess who was on the Board of Directors for Chevron and in charge of the committee that dealt with Iraq? None other than that complete incompetent Condoleeza Rice--so how about beheading her? Or George Bush, who allowed Bin Laden to escape Tora Bora because the Saudis who continue to fund OBL were pissed and about to pull out of a big arms sale? When are right wing morons going to wake up and figure out how duped they have been with all this bs about "patriotism"?????

It blows my mind that the d... (Below threshold)

It blows my mind that the debate over the war these days isn't about how to win it, it's about how badly we've lost it.
That's about as messed up as I can imagine.

Unfortunately nothing good ... (Below threshold)

Unfortunately nothing good can come of a war based on fraud. And that's what this war is.

The chickens are coming home to roost.

OK Veeshir: Define what you... (Below threshold)
mike filancia:

OK Veeshir: Define what you mean by "winning" and give us your ideas on how accomplishing that would/could take place. Please.

I knew damn well that WizBl... (Below threshold)

I knew damn well that WizBlue would bring in a whole new crop of moonbats, there are more and more new frothing BDS sufferers every day. Thanks a lot Kevin. It's becoming like daily KOS around these comment sections.

Why? Iraq had nothing to d... (Below threshold)

Why? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al quaeda. Why did we veer off after Hussein and seem to forget bin Laden?

Power corrupts, but near-absolute power in the hand of idiots corrupts especially spectacularly and quite lethally for those Americans and innocent Iraquis who've died as a result.

AQ has had a minimal presen... (Below threshold)
Von Cracker:

AQ has had a minimal presence in Iraq, but keep saying what you're saying and it might come true! Our own generals have stated over the past 4 years that AQ is responsible for about 5% of the attacks on our troops.

So if we withdrawl, tell me again how it's a victory for AQ? I know, I know, you know so much more than the military and the would press combined...Impressive, you are!


Naturally the common people... (Below threshold)

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

- Zelsdorf Ragsh......oops, sorry, Hermann Goering

Trolling aside, AQ will dec... (Below threshold)

Trolling aside, AQ will declare victory no matter what we do. Hell, they'd claim they'd made the sun rise in the East if they could get away with it. We shouldn't run foreign policy by enemy propaganda.

You guys have such a parano... (Below threshold)

You guys have such a paranoid mind set that you automatically think that every problem can be understood as a fight against a defined enemy. That outlook makes it hard to operate effectively in Iraq where there is no enemy, one enemy, that is, but there are several groups that all dislike us to various degrees. It doesn't help that the opponent you most like to talk about, AQ, isn't the most important, is not quite the same movement as the Bin Laden AQ, and, as a Sunni outfit, has zero chance of prevailing in an overwhelmingly Shia country.

Fighting against chaos requires a different approach than fighting against EVIL (all caps, all the time). I guess realism just isn't as much fun.

Adriane:1. Binny ... (Below threshold)
Paul Hamilton:


1. Binny doesn't really care about the US, he cares about Saudi Arabia. I would remind you that the Saudis asked us to leave their country and we did, thus doing exactly what bin Laden wanted.
2. I'm not the one making a big deal out of bin Laden. AFAIC, al Qaeda is a non-factor in the Iraqi civil war because both sides want power for themselves, not to become the proxy for a Saudi nutcase.
3. All beside the point. By your own argument, you'd think if there were only a few trouble spots, we could surely straighten things up right away. Four years later, things are getting worse, not better.
4. Please cite a source that the death rate of Iraqi civilians was worse before our invasion than since.
5. It's not our war. If the Iraqis choose to fight among themselves for two decades, that's fine with me, but no civil war has ever been resolved by the presence of an outside force.
6. Who are you calling "moderates?" Both sides are employing death squads, ethnic cleansing, suicide bombers, kidnapping and every other atrocity you can imagine. There are no "rules" in a war such as this. If there was ever a time since the invasion when a unity government might have worked, it passed very quickly. When we didn't destroy or guard the vast stockpiles of weapons and munitions in our rush to Baghdad, we armed the forces who are ripping Iraq apart today.

What alarms me is that the ... (Below threshold)

What alarms me is that the Iraqi parliment is planning on taking a two month vacation this summer. Sounds like they're REALLY committed, huh?

What alarms me more than... (Below threshold)

What alarms me more than anything is that, according to this article, American voters, the same people who experienced the terror of 9/11 at the hands of al Qaeda just a mere 5 1/2 years ago, want to withdraw from Iraq even if it means the rest of the world sees it as our defeat by al Qaeda.

What's going on here, is that the American public want the US to go after Al Qaeda. And the American public understands that having our soldiers die in the middle of a civil war, is exactly what Al Qaeda wants.

Also, the American public understands the facts that you are resisting: According to statistics and the reports of nonpartisan experts, our presence in Iraq is creating more terrorists than we're killing.

Facing reality is not losing; it's the only way to win in a larger war against terror.

Darn moonbats and their fac... (Below threshold)

Darn moonbats and their fact-based logic! Can't they see we're trying to whip ourselves up into an emotional frenzy, because cheerleading redefines reality?

i don't understand, didn't ... (Below threshold)

i don't understand, didn't we destroy al Qaeda and render bin Laden useless. isn't that why we quit chasing him? if george and dead end dick say its so, its so...

What alarms me is that Amer... (Below threshold)

What alarms me is that American Government is constrained to follow the will of the people, even though the people may occasionally be wrong! Personally, I think the public is right in this case. I think the public has finally come to its senses after being bamboozled into the the Iraq war. But right or wrong, We've got this annoying system of government that responds to the will of the people. Damn! Who ever thought that was a good idea?

Answer to Wizbang.... (Below threshold)

Answer to Wizbang.

What is alarming to me is that after four years of you watching Sunni kill Shiite and the other way around you are still saying that some how Al- Quaida will be winning if we get out of Iraq. Al Quaida is winning right now with our Army pin down in a civil war, or a mess take your pick. If I was a General that's the way I would want my enemy to be..... Pin down and with no way out..... But in your eyes that's winning!!!! And if we get the hell out of this mess some how Al Quaida will consider this a defeat!!!

You are on the side of the fools that considers perception first and reality second.

Correct me if I am wrong but were you not saying that Al Quaida was in Iraq BEFORE the invasion? You were absolutely wrong then , and still continue with your fixation with Al Quaida in Iraq.

Al Quaida is in Afhganistan and Pakistan . Please wake up and get some geography lessons. The Al-Quaida terrorists in Iraq are a treat against Shiite in Iraq not us.

But even if they were, we are the ones that created their presence there. There was no Al Quaida under Saddam. The real problem in Iraq is not Al Quaida is the hate the Sunni and the Shiite have for each other. Al Quaida is just exploiting this fact to their advantage.

The Republican Congressman that went to talk to Bush is just the beginning. I noticed you don't make any comments of the fact that the Iraqi Government will be on a two month Summer vacation as proof of how commited they are to your "brilliant policies". Do you have any idea how you, and your party look attacking the Democratic Congress for trying to put some dead lines to the Iraqi Government, while at the same time keeping mute about the Iraqi Govenment just having a vacation at the time our soldiers die every day to "buy them time"?...... Buy them time at the beach pal??????? Because that's about the only time I see you "buying" here with the blood of our people.

That's why the Republican Congressman went to talk to Bush. This madness has to stop. I am not a Republican, but if I was I will tell Bush to go to hell and take his ideas with him.

Bush is about the best friend a Democrat can have. That's what the Republicans are saying behind close doors.

Dear Wizbang.At th... (Below threshold)

Dear Wizbang.

At the end of the day the ultimate indictment to the Bush Administration, and the Republican party is that there is no winning solution to Iraq.

The fact is that if we stay in Iraq our Army is pined down in a war of attrition that Al Quaida would love to fight us on. If we live we will almost surely hand over Iraq to Iran and the rest to Al Quaida.

In realistic and pragmatic terms, not the usual partisan rethoric comming from most blogs.... Bush got us in the classical definition of a quagmire .... Just as he (and you partisans)was warned, and forewarned by most of the world before the invasion.

The present policy by Bush of creating a Democracy in Iraq will have to go to the trash as soon as this disgrace of a President lives office. There is no Democracy to be had in Iraq period, just as there were never WMD's, just as there was no conection between Saddam and Al Quaida, just like we were not turnning any corners in 2003, or 2004, or 2005,or 2006, just like no one is cutting and running from terrorism but from stupidity.

In Iraq is either a strong man, or partition take your pick and get to work on it..... That's plan B. Just not for Bush because the man was never able to get past plan A.

To believe that we can continue to destroy our military, and out National Guard, not to mention loose a trillion Dollars in the hopes that some day some how Shiite and Sunni can form a Democracy by the force of our guns is simply idiotic. If anithing it would be clear even to the most stupid among us that the more people that get killed, the least likley it is for them to reconsile.

So when you Republicans talk about "cut and run" I for one say absolutely. I am cutting and running from your policies, if you can call this nonsense a "policy".

To bad so many of our brave soldiers had to die holding the water for an incompetent with no vision, no plan, and no guts to accept reality.

I'm wondering what conserva... (Below threshold)
Jesse Covner:

I'm wondering what conservatives here feel about arrosmith's comments:

"No one present was impolite enough to mention that far from spurning retreat in the face of terrorism, the Gipper embraced it. After the 1983 terrorist bombing in Beirut, which killed 241 American military personnel, he recognized the futility of our presence in Lebanon and pulled out.

Boehner portrays himself and his colleagues as brave patriots who would never accept anything less than victory in war. But in 1993, when things got tough in Somalia, he voted for withdrawal. John McCain likewise favored "defeat" in that conflict. He opposed a timetable for withdrawal not because he wanted U.S. forces to stay but because it would take too long. Our soldiers, he insisted, should leave "as rapidly and safely as possible." Or, you could say, cut and run."

Regan pulled out of Beiruit and Lebananon fell into chaos. In my opinion, it was headed into chaos anyway and there was nothing we could do. Same as in Iraq. But no one calls Regan a traitor or coward.

I pointed to Wizbang.... (Below threshold)

I pointed to Wizbang.
I got Daily Kos by mistake.
I have not seen any proof adduced by anyone that the current war is any less than 1300 years old. The war began with revelations which were given in a cave, resulting in the Muslim faith.
The Muslim faith, according to its founding document, is a one size fits all faith, into which all living beings are incorporated. Those who refuse membership are executed.
The United States is a latecomer to this war. Very much a latecomer. Uncle Benny is also a latecomer. Most of the posts on this thread show a mastery of invective, coupled with a total inability to deal with historic fact. By historic fact I mean the subjugation of the Maldives, the subjugation of Pakistan, the repeated invasions of Europe, and so on.
Your posters need to read up on Qutb and Wahab and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Sigh. Ignorance is bliss.

Mathman's knowledge of Isla... (Below threshold)

Mathman's knowledge of Islam is, to be charitable, a bit shaky. For example, when Muslims took over countries they certainly didn't routinely execute people who refused to become Muslim. In fact, as any historian will tell you, they or at least their leaders were happier if people didn't convert since non-Muslims had to pay them a tax. The Koran mandates tolerance for people of the book, such as Jews and Christians, and even in practice Islam was markedly less persecuting than Christianity.

The fundamental problem with Mathman's world view is really metaphysical. He believes, against the historical evidence, that religions have unchanging essences and that they are somehow defined by founding documents as if books interpreted themselves. Unless there really is an Allah, however, what Islam can become is whatever its believers decide to turn it into. Qutb and Wahabi represent a couple of versions (distinctly different versions, for what its worth) but so do conservative, traditional Muslims, mystical Sufis, and a host of other folks. In practice, Islam tends to be strongly influenced by the local culture--in India, for example, Muslims sing devotional songs about the baby Muhammad that are indistinguishable from songs about baby Krishna and evince a sentimentality that seems drastically alien to what we usually think of as Islamic.

Now I guess you could argue that simple-mindedness can be a virtue in politics; but in confronting the Middle East, that's a pretty dubious proposition. Ignoring the profound differences in practice and belief among the many peoples of the Middle East encourages the development of a novel racism. And if all those rag heads really are fanatics possessed of the same deadly faith, what kind of political response makes sense short of annihilation? That policy, however, is not only odious but utterly impractical.

"What alarms me more than a... (Below threshold)

"What alarms me more than anything is that, according to this article, American voters, the same people who experienced the terror of 9/11 at the hands of al Qaeda just a mere 5 1/2 years ago, want to withdraw from Iraq even if it means the rest of the world sees it as our defeat by al Qaeda."

But I thought conservatives didn't care about what 'the rest of the world' thinks? After all, from what I hear they're a bunch of un-American pinko commies who snack on 'bree and cheese'. Also, I don't know where you get that assertion. The rest of the world thinks we're a bunch of idiots for starting this war, and would like to see it end.

You also neglect to mention the recent video where an Al Qaeda cleric lamented that the pullout advocated by Democrats would "deprive us of the chance to destroy the American forces" and asked Allah not to let us withdraw until we have lost "200,000 or 300,000". So who's 'helping the terrorists' now?

Iraq has nothing to do with... (Below threshold)

Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11,and all the evidence has shown that there is no relationship.

The U.S. invasion of Iraq was a war based on a faulty premise and trumped up evidence.

The question is now how does the U.S. exit from Iraq? The bipartisan Iraq study group showed the way. Bush needs to pay attention and implement the exit strategies outlined by the study group.

why doesn't wizbang defend ... (Below threshold)

why doesn't wizbang defend herself. cat got her tongue?






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy