View Full Version : Dems declare war is Lost
Warrior-Mentor
04-19-2007, 15:13
Things didn't look too good for the North even up to a year before the end of the Civil War...
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070419184534.ileoeb47&show_article=1
The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.
"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid told journalists.
Reid said he had delivered the same message to US President George W. Bush on Wednesday, when the US president met with senior lawmakers to discuss how to end a standoff over an emergency war funding bill.
"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."
Congress is seeking to tie funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to a timetable to withdraw US troops from Iraq next year, but Bush has vowed to veto any such bill and no breakthrough was reported from the White House talks.
Bush on Thursday was addressing an Ohio town hall meeting and defending the war on terror launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
"It is the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm," Bush told the invited audience in Tipp, Ohio.
"A lesson learned was that -- at least in my opinion -- that in order to protect us, we must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."
But Reid drew a parallel with former US president Lyndon Johnson who decided to deploy more troops in Vietnam some 40 years ago when 24,000 US troops had already been killed.
"Johnson did not want a war loss on his watch, so he surged in Vietnam. After the surge was over, we added 34,000 to the 24,000 who died in Vietnam," Reid said.
The comments came a day after bombers killed more than 200 people in a slew of car bombings in Baghdad, dealing a savage blow to the US security plan which aims to deploy an extra 30,000 troops in the country to quell sectarian unrest.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates fly into Iraq Thursday on an unannounced visit for talks with top US military commanders there.
He met with General David Petraeus, chief of coalition forces in Iraq, his deputy Lieutenant Colonel Ray Odierno and Admiral William Fallon, chief of US forces in the Middle East.
Just how stupid are these folks? I guess they'll wait until the Islamic Fundamentalists have taken control of Iraq and all of the Middle East, then worry about why gas prices are soaring to $10 a gallon because they control the oil flow out of the area. You know, sometimes I think the light are burning but nobody's home between the 'dimocrats' ears.
The Reaper
04-19-2007, 18:14
So all of the lives lost and treasure spent has been in vain?
Who wants to be the the last to die?
Let's just pack up and come home now.
Thanks Harry!:rolleyes:
What a bunch of cowardly surrender monkeys. I am ashamed that they are Americans.
If I was on a hijacked plane and the terrorists told me they were on their way to take out the Capitol, I would be sorely tempted to help them with this crew.
Self-serving bastidges.
TR
Thanks for looking out for us, Harry; what would we do without you. :rolleyes:
Jack Moroney (RIP)
04-19-2007, 19:32
Don't you just know that this sound bite is playing all over Arab media tonight. Shades of TET 68 all over again. Got to be a traitorous/treasonous act here in aiding and abetting the enemy and I do not want to hear anyone talking to me about freedom of speech as this is akin to yelling fire in a crowed movie theater.
Monsoon65
04-19-2007, 19:36
I just read this crap a few minutes ago. I love how he practically ends all his announcements with, "The American people have spoken".
Guess what, Harry? YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING FOR ME!
CoLawman
04-19-2007, 20:39
Harry Reid and the Democratic Party will be the ruin of this country. I used to believe that the citizens of this nation would defend America against any enemy. The attack is from within and our citizens sit idly by drinking their Starbuck latte worrying about American Idol and Nicole Smith.
Et tu Harry?
Kyo called for action on a separate thread. Are we going to start taking our forum speak to a different level? We joke about nominating TR, TS and the Colonel to public office. We can no longer afford to joke. We need to direct our anger and our concern for this nation in a concerted and effective means.
Reid and his Dems are the feared "Red Horde" and they are not coming over the hill.......they have come over the hill.
I have discretionary funds for a fight. I have the energy and the drive for a fight. If I am not a sheep, then why am I not using my assets to defend my family and this nation against traitors to this nation?
We have the same abilities, possibly more, than the Swift Boaties. Let's use our combined resources to counterattack those who betray America. We will never have them tried for treason, but we can get their type defeated at the ballot box.
Get our your pen or your keyboard and let Neville Reid know that you are disgusted with him.
Radar Rider
04-19-2007, 20:51
It is all about history, actually. The democRATs called the effort in Vietnam a losing venture, and only the missteps of President Nixon's team (NOT the President himself) handed them (the cRATs) an opportunity to fuck the people of Vietnam. We left by 1973; the conventional NVA forces invaded in 1975. Because the democRATs refused to send our airpower, the communists triumphed.
My Dad was at Tan Son Nhut Air Base for 13 months; I was 5 years old and miss his presence to this day. We DID NOT LOSE Vietnam. It takes a lot of perspective to stand back and view our effort there; by taking a stand and fighting Communism face to face, the Soviet Union came to learn that it could not rule the world. It took many years and American lives in the conflict, but it has to be viewed in the greater perspective: We won, as the Soviet Union did eventually fall. Had we not fought, the Communists would only have gained strength and might very well be proceeding toward world dominance.
The same applies to today's Global War On Terrorism. We're going to have to continue to fight for a long time and fight hard.
We are not under Soviet rule; we'll not be under tango rule if we keep up the fire.
x-factor
04-19-2007, 21:16
Radar - It was either the President of Indonesia or Singapore who said that American involvement in Vietnam ended up being a victory, not because it secured Vietnam, but because it halted the spread of Asian communism long enough for the rest of SE Asia to secure itself (and later to enjoy the economic boom). Take that for what its worth.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
If I drop off the net for a while, it's because after I get through blasting that SOB Reid by letter and email, I'll probably wind up a guest of Sheriff Joe here in the Phoenix area. After what my son's been through this week, the last thing I needed to hear was that he's declaring the war lost. :mad: :mad:
Warrior-Mentor had it right when he called him a traitor - I think he rates up there with Jane Fonda and the rest of those so-called peace-niks.
By the way - my son called again this morning (0900 MST) to let me know he was really OK. He had just gotten back from another patrol - sounded dead tired.:mad:
We won't let you stay long
Good to hear he is good to go
Much agreed on the Traitorous behavior
Ladies and Gentlemen:
If I drop off the net for a while, it's because after I get through blasting that SOB Reid by letter and email, I'll probably wind up a guest of Sheriff Joe here in the Phoenix area. After what my son's been through this week, the last thing I needed to hear was that he's declaring the war lost. :mad: :mad:
Warrior-Mentor had it right when he called him a traitor - I think he rates up there with Jane Fonda and the rest of those so-called peace-niks.
By the way - my son called again this morning (0900 MST) to let me know he was really OK. He had just gotten back from another patrol - sounded dead tired.:mad:
CoLawman
04-19-2007, 21:41
You are not the only one who sent that sawed off traitor correspondence. Good to hear about your son. Hang in there and keep sending those letters. TS and I have some friends in your area to keep you out of the cell with Bubba!
Ladies and Gentlemen:
If I drop off the net for a while, it's because after I get through blasting that SOB Reid by letter and email, I'll probably wind up a guest of Sheriff Joe here in the Phoenix area. After what my son's been through this week, the last thing I needed to hear was that he's declaring the war lost. :mad: :mad:
Warrior-Mentor had it right when he called him a traitor - I think he rates up there with Jane Fonda and the rest of those so-called peace-niks.
By the way - my son called again this morning (0900 MST) to let me know he was really OK. He had just gotten back from another patrol - sounded dead tired.:mad:
Just fired off an email to Reid - I must admit I was much more civil than I thought I would be. Anyway, here's the text of what I wrote:
Sir:
Although I am not one of your constituents, I felt compelled to let you know how disgusted I am with your statement today to the journalists: "I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week".
I happen to have a son (my only son) currently serving with the 82nd Airborne Division and deployed in Sadr City. He's on his second deployment, having served in Sadr City back in 2005 with the 3rd Infantry Division.
It's comments like that that embolden the insurgents and make them do even more terrible acts against their own people. They know that all they have to do is rattle your (Democratic Party) cages enough that you'll cut-and-run.
My son is a third generation warrior proudly serving his country as I did during Vietnam and the first Gulf War, and his grandfather who flew 36 missions over Europe during World War 2. Until today, I was proud to be an American, but statements like that rank right up there with Jane Fonda and her treasonous activities during the Vietnam war. You, Sir, are keeping good company!
I doubt if you'll actually get to read this, but if you do, I hope it causes you to reflect on the impact it has on the morale of our troops. I wish I was articulate enough to express how I really feel.
If you and the other members of your party truly support the troops, then by God show it! Get off the dime, get them the tools they need to accomplish the mission they were assigned, then bring them home in honor. Let's not lose another one because we, as Americans, didn't have the courage to stay the course.
I'm sure Col M, TS or TR could have worded it a lot better, but this is just the warm-up! Wait till I really get going!
Peregrino
04-19-2007, 22:14
We probably need RL or AL (more AL's specialty) to confirm this but - IIRC - congresscritters CANNOT be charged with treason for actions taken in the course of their political activities. Like any number of other laws written by the politicians to protect thenselves as members of a priviledged class. Something about protecting/not stifling debate. Another reason to push for term limits. FWIW - Peregrino
CoLawman
04-19-2007, 23:04
And my letter (email) to the cowardly Reid. Please everyone send this POS at least an email.
Senator Reid,
Your poor choice of words today have infuriated me. Your declaration of our having lost the war has certainly energized the insurgency in Iraq. Your posturing for political gain was far more damaging than the recent deaths in Baghdad you used as evidence of our having lost this war.
You show how little you understand fighting insurgencies. I would recommend you read Mao's treatise on the subject.
"Baghdad Bob", though dismissed as a fool during the fall of Baghdad, understood the power of words. While American Soldiers were Showering in Saddam's Bathroom Nearby Presidential Palace:
"We have killed most of the [coalition] infidels, and I think we will finish off the rest soon."
Baghdad Bob was not the fool you proved to be today.
Today Al Queda and the Insurgents are rejoicing in your words. They will be shouting from the minarets, proclaiming victory due to your cowardly and self serving pronouncement of defeat.
My son is currently serving in Iraq in a highly dangerous area of the country. You sir, did not give comfort to my son this day, you gave comfort to and further emboldened the enemy.
You have energized the enemy with your words, yet, unwittingly, you have energized the families of our military and the veterans who still remember your kind during Viet Nam.
Keith Olson
Greeley, Colorado
Roycroft201
04-19-2007, 23:18
Hipshot,
An EXCELLENT letter to Reid!
Your son is in my thoughts and prayers.
RC201
Roycroft201
04-19-2007, 23:23
And just after I posted my thoughts to Hipshot, I see that COLawman also sent Reid a blazing letter. Bravo !
Your son is in my thoughts and prayers, as well, CoLawman.
You have energized the enemy with your words, yet, unwittingly, you have energized the families of our military and the veterans who still remember your kind during Viet Nam.
You can't say it any clear then that. Good job Keith.
My biggest problem with all this is that on a regular basis (it seems anyway) congress, and in particular the "dim"ocratic party, speaks out about military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan as if they are SMEs on whats taking place there.
I don't know all of their backgrounds, but to me, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their friends have NO BUSINESS standing up in front of everyone and telling them "how the war is lost" or "how terrible things are going..."
They have just as much business doing that as I do telling everyone about being a QP. Its not my lane to tell everyone about the Q and being on a team when I don't even leave for selection until next week... by the same token, I think congress has NO RIGHT to tell the American people how "bad" things are and that we've "lost the war" when they don't wear stars on their collars.
Leave that stuff to the Theater Commander or the CiNC.
Just my opinion.
x SF med
04-20-2007, 08:19
Hello, Mustafa?
This is Harry Reid, I just wanted to let you know our plan to demoralize and ridicule the American troops is underway, one problem though...
Y'know that speech you asked me to give, "We have already lost..." yeah, that one.
It seems to have backfired and done nothing but piss off some very well trained, well armed guys over in your area. I'd lay low for a while, I didn't realize the US Military would axctually get more motivated to make sure their job is done right.
Oh, yeah, we'll not be in contact for a while, I think my e-mail server is going to explode from all the angry communications, and I need to go into hiding - the friggin Military is after me now too.
The Reaper
04-20-2007, 08:24
Note out to Senator Reid.
http://reid.senate.gov/
Letter from Nevada residents will have much more impact with him.
Since this was directed specifically from us to him, please do not copy it verbatim, but feel free to use it as the basis or format for your own correspondence. If you copy it, they will think that these are all form letters and will toss them out. As they will probably do, regardless.
"Sir:
I am not one of your constituents, but as you are the Senate Majority leader, you do, in a sense, represent me.
I cannot believe your recent comments that we have lost the war in Iraq. Your vision appears to be myopic and pessimistic, to say the least.
This has given tremendous aid and comfort to our enemies. After all, you have declared our defeat publicly, and our intent to retreat. This is incredible. When the terrorists reach our shores, as they most certainly will, after we surrender and leave them full liberty in Iraq, the blood of innocent US civilians will be on your hands.
Unilaterally announcing our defeat means that thousands of my brothers and hundreds of billions of our tax dollars spent since the defeat of Sadaam have been spent in vain.
Clearly, no one wants to die for a lost cause, or be the last one killed, so I am sure that our brave Soldiers and Marines are demoralized by your comments, and recruiting will suffer for it as well.
What are our allies in this venture to think of us and our alliances? Can we be counted on in the future if the going gets rough?
Are Osama and al Queda correct, that we, as Americans no longer have the stomach for casualties or a protracted conflict?
Has the Democratic Party and our leadership abandoned the brave and bold words of President Kennedy?
"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
This much we pledge—and more.
To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.
To those new States whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom—and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.
To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich."
Sir, today, I am sorry to be a member of a defeated military, as you seem to think it is.
In closing. I would remind you of the words of Cicero:
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." - Marcus Tullius Cicero (42 B.C.)
Very Respectfully-
TR"
Well here's the letter I just wrote.
Dear Senator Reid,
Although not one of your direct constituents I am compelled to write you with regard to your stance on Iraq, specifically regarding your comments of defeat. I have heard you state that “the American public” has spoken…that may be true in your mind but you are not speaking for this American. Or many other Americans that I know, and it’s time WE are heard.
It is literally beyond comprehension how you and others can unequivocally state “the war in Iraq is lost militarily and "can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically" after more than four years of fighting.” The aid and comfort you are providing to the enemy with those comments alone amaze me. Do you not think those that wish to destroy America will “wait it out” until we prematurely withdraw? Not to mention that these types of statements are used as propaganda tools and recruitment for “their cause”. Do you not hear/read/listen to many of the Military members who DO see progress? Do you remember your history, and the time it took our very own Country to “stand up” after the War of Independence for example?
General Petraeus stated that “Hard is not hopeless”. Do you not believe him, the man “on the ground”, when he offers his intelligent observations as to what is going on? How can you even think of attaching a deadline and other mundane “pork” to a funding bill for the war and the Military? Is your dislike for the present administration so strong that no matter what the POTUS does, it’s not right…not good enough?
I’m beyond disgusted and appalled at the Democratic “leadership” regarding our Military efforts and our Armed Forces. America’s Military and our efforts to retard the growth of terrorism can only be lost one way. That, Senator Reid, would be the result of the consistent lack of support from the leaders, and the overwhelming negative media “reports” on what is truly happening in Iraq and in other hot spots around the world. Most of these “reporters” get their information second hand, from their hotel rooms in the GZ.
Saying you support the Troops but not the war is akin to a slap on the face of every man and woman serving. They are not mutually exclusive, that statement is truly laughable.
"I'm Tired"
Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of
duty in Iraq, I was
forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury
I sustained prior to
my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq to
finish my tour.
I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication
that we are winning, to
return to a demoralized country much like the one I
returned to in 1971
after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn
60 years old in just
four months, but I'm tired:
I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and
Republican who lack
the courage, fortitude, and character to see these
difficult tasks through.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to
rewrite history when
the going gets tough.
I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that
claim they 'Support the
Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before
victory is achieved.
I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on
car bombs and
casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave
the safety of their
hotels to report on the courage and success our brave
men and women are
having on the battlefield.
I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild
a dictatorship into a
democracy over night.
I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi
people to go to the
voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon
a permanent
Parliament.
I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs
this war by giving aid
and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the
Vietnam War.
I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the
funerals of our fallen
soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in
a just and noble
cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day
by cowardly
protesters is beyond shameful.
I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam
generation, who have
such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing
the difficult tasks
through to victory.
I'm tired that some are more concerned about the
treatment of captives than
they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens
and allies.
I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom
reported by the press,
but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.
Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation
didn't learn from
history that there is no substitute for Victory.
Sincerely,
Joe Repya,
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division
Team Sergeant
04-20-2007, 10:06
Radar - It was either the President of Indonesia or Singapore who said that American involvement in Vietnam ended up being a victory, not because it secured Vietnam, but because it halted the spread of Asian communism long enough for the rest of SE Asia to secure itself (and later to enjoy the economic boom). Take that for what its worth.
Probably the Indo President.
And how did the Indonesians deal with the threat of communism. :munchin
one-zero
04-20-2007, 10:29
Weasly Reid was just on news earlier saying he meant to say "we lost war if the current policy was continued"...
must be taking some incomming...hehehe
Oscar Foxtrot Sierra!:lifter Way to go folks!
Hello, Mustafa?
This is Harry Reid, I just wanted to let you know our plan to demoralize and ridicule the American troops is underway, one problem though...
Y'know that speech you asked me to give, "We have already lost..." yeah, that one.
It seems to have backfired and done nothing but piss off some very well trained, well armed guys over in your area. I'd lay low for a while, I didn't realize the US Military would axctually get more motivated to make sure their job is done right.
Oh, yeah, we'll not be in contact for a while, I think my e-mail server is going to explode from all the angry communications, and I need to go into hiding - the friggin Military is after me now too.
Bravo Sir!
Very well written IMHO. :)
Holly
incommin
04-20-2007, 11:50
Sent my letter to Mr. Reid..... among other things I wrote that I hope he has awakened a large majority of old military people who will make the commotion raised by the "swift boat crew" look like a speck in the eye of a flea and it was all coming his way.
Don't think it was a eloquent as the other letters, but it will help sharpen the stake!
Jim
Mine is by far as eloquent, yet I hope it slips through, and gets read.
(TR--I quoted You Sir.)
"I am not one of your constituents, but as you are the Senate Majority leader, you do, in a sense, represent me." TR
Senator, since you feel this war is lost, why not go ahead and join this site!
http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/aboutwbc.html
The Westboro Babtist Church folks have plenty in common with you...Most important, they spit on the graves of those who have paid the ultimate price for OUR Freedom.
And in case you forgot, let me, as a simple American, remind you.
FREEDOM IS NOT FREE!!!
You should be ashamed of yourself, and instead of throwing out lame excuses for your words, you should stand up and be a real MAN, and appologize to Our Brave Troops!
Holly
Weasly Reid was just on news earlier saying he meant to say "we lost war if the current policy was continued"...
must be taking some incomming...hehehe
Yeah right. He said EXACTLY what he meant to say....
Crotchety Old Bastard (http://crotchetyoldbastard.com/blog/2007/04/thank_you_senator_reid.html) had an interesting response:
Dear Senator Reid,
Thank you for finally putting this whole Iraq War mess to bed. The timing couldn’t be better for my family.
You see, my son is serving in this “lost war” with the 82nd Airborne Division; actually on his third tour. My family will be very happy to have him home within 30 days because then he can attend my daughter’s graduation from college and Commissioning Ceremony.
My bride is skeptical of all of this but I reassured her that I know for a fact that he will be home soon because based on your statement and being the Senate Majority Leader, you will kill all funding for this “lost war” immediately.
My bride was still unconvinced and I explained it to her this way.
If Senator Reid, based on the information that the Senate Majority Leader has, has determined that this war is lost; there is nothing left to do but come home. The way I see it, if you were to vote for anything less; you would be personally liable for any future wounded or God-Forbid dead soldiers.
Although, I have the utmost confidence that you will do the right thing and de-fund this war immediately; I have retained legal council just in case.
So, know this Senator; if you don’t de-fund this war within seven days, I will hold you personably liable for any harm to American servicemen. If the war is lost and you have the power to end it then just do it. Stop whining like a bitch and just do it.
Tort law: an overview
Torts are civil wrongs recognized by law as grounds for a lawsuit. These wrongs result in an injury or harm constituting the basis for a claim by the injured party. While some torts are also crimes punishable with imprisonment, the primary aim of tort law is to provide relief for the damages incurred and deter others from committing the same harms. The injured person may sue for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the tortious conduct or for monetary damages.
Negligence
From Wex, everyone's resource for law learning
Failure to exercise due care. When a person fails to exercise the care that a reasonable, prudent person would exercise under the same circumstances, that person is said to be negligent.
Intention
Intentional torts are those wrongs which the defendant knew or should have known would occur through their actions or inactions.
I have listened to your bullshit long enough. You, a person in high authority in the US government, have made a definitive statement that an action is occurring with no redeeming value. Said action is causing harm and death to US citizens. You have the unique power to stop said action and thusly stop the harm.
So Harry, I say have the balls to actually do it or find yourself liable.
Governing is not just whining and pandering. At some point you have to actually govern. It is painfully clear that you have neither the intellectual power nor the fuzzy kiwis to actually do it.
Feel free to share this with Neville Nancy as I plan the exact same action for her pathetic ass.
The soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen that you are endangering by either your idiotic statements that empower the enemy or your overt inaction that contributes to their danger; are American citizens. In either case, you have endangered them and you alone have the ability to correct it.
See you in court.
Very sincerely,
Crotchety Old Bastard
PS: I am asking all veterans, friends and families of servicemen and simple good Americans to please add a comment to this post. I will forward it to Senator Reid.
PSS: I know that Senator Reid’s comments likely upset many of you as it clearly did me. I have my flesh and blood that has been endangered by this jack-ass so please forgive the salty nature of this post.
You go, COB. I've read his blog before...this is outstanding.
Kyo called for action on a separate thread. Are we going to start taking our forum speak to a different level? We joke about nominating TR, TS and the Colonel to public office. We can no longer afford to joke. We need to direct our anger and our concern for this nation in a concerted and effective means.
All rhetoric aside I would whole heartedly support any honorable man who would be willing to accept both the challenge and responsibility of running for public office. If such a person were not either willing or ready for POTUS then lets take a state set an example, and go from their.
JPH
x-factor
04-20-2007, 15:45
Probably the Indo President.
And how did the Indonesians deal with the threat of communism. :munchin
Harshly, to say the least.
TR - Excellent letter. I'd like to commend you for being ardent and well-reasoned, without descending to shallow, partisan cheap shots. Your letter was in the best traditions of American politics. The Democratic Congress' behavoir of late has been in the worst (and I say that as a Democrat...though perhaps soon to be an Independent).
steeve20
04-20-2007, 16:09
Senator Reid
I am very distressed buy your recent statement on the war. The war is not lost. As a member of the Armed Forces you put me and my fellow soldier in jeopardy. It’s obvious that you do not care for the U.S. citizens including your constituents who are fighting this war. I can only hope that you are removed from office by your state citizens the next election. I don’t belief the current congress has the integrity to remove you from office.
With no respect to you
MSG Steven Holliday
ALARNG
I encourage everyone to write to him. I am providing the link below.
http://reid.senate.gov/contact/[/
I'm not writing a letter. I'm going to have alec baldwin call him.
Matta mile
04-20-2007, 19:40
"I'm not writing a letter. I'm going to have alec baldwin call him."~Kgoerz
Excellent approach (funny too)!
MM
He is at it again. I wonder how many emails he got, and didn't read?:confused:
Reid: Bush in Denial Over War in Iraq
Updated 9:23 AM ET April 23, 2007
By DAVID ESPO
WASHINGTON (AP) - With a veto fight looming, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Monday that President Bush is in a state of denial over Iraq, "and the new Congress will show him the way" to a change in war policy.
Full Story:
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=070423&cat=news&st=newsd8omb74o0&src=ap
I twisted my head as if I were a dog hearing an unfamiliar tone when I came across this. This was posted by the New York Times.
Author unknown - April 24, 2007 -- Fresh from his declaration that "this war is lost," Senate Demo cratic leader Harry Reid is moving quickly to hasten America's unilateral surrender.
And to cast the Middle East into murderous chaos.
Reid yesterday promised that the Democratic-controlled Congress will within days pass legislation requiring U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq over the six months starting Oct. 1.
Never mind that such legislation:
* Likely wouldn't pass either house of Congress . . .
* . . . and, even if it did pass, certainly wouldn't survive a veto.
So the point must be not to make policy, but to send a message: That Harry Reid's Democratic Party is against war in the Middle East, maybe?
Or that war in the Middle East is OK - so long as no Americans are fighting?
Or, maybe it's all about politics?
To be sure, Reid won't risk calling for an immediate pullout. He cautioned his party's bug-out-now wing to be patient, despite "the restlessness" of those who "voted for change in November [and] anticipated dramatic and immediate results in January."
The problem, said Reid, is that "George W. Bush is still the commander-in-chief - and this is his war."
And there's the real problem: From the start, Reid and the Democrats have seen the war in Iraq as a partisan opportunity.
They refuse to present a unified front to the rest of the world - especially to America's enemies - because, in their pinched view, to do so would be to weaken their own prospects for retaking the White House in 2008.
No, Reid didn't repeat his declaration of defeat during yesterday's speech from the Senate floor.
It probably has dawned on him just how big a political blunder he committed - witness Sen. Chuck Schumer's gentle contradiction of the majority leader over the weekend, insisting that "the war is not lost."
Then again, Reid didn't have to repeat his original remarks - because the imposed timetable he announced, if enacted, would bring about precisely the same result.
That is, a precipitous U.S. withdrawal from the region - if Reid thinks the bug-out would stop at Iraq, he's dumber than he sounds - followed by:
* A rapid, al Qaeda/Iranian-driven descent into regional chaos.
* Most likely, a general war.
* And, almost certainly, a Mideast nuclear-arms race as Saudi Arabia, Eygpt and (probably) Turkey rush to arm themselves in anticipation of an Iranian bomb.
At the very least, Reid has to understand that his rhetoric can only encourage short-run insurgent attacks on Americans in Iraq.
Their blood stands to be on his hands.
And that's a terrible price to pay for a political payday that's so tentative that even an instinctive gut-fighter like Chuck Schumer recoils from the risk.
Harry Reid needs to put a cork in it.
Today.
[I]I don't condone the NY Times and their typical antics for politicizing events to the nth degree, but I felt that it was worth posting to show that even liberal media outlets are getting tired of this crap.
I am so outraged about the idiocy of most of the Democrats in congress, that what good is the statue on Treason and Sedition any more. What does it take to make these cowardly appeasers understand they only embolden an enemy that cannot be reasoned with, bargained with that must be destroyred!
I have writen to my congress reps like some of you brothers have, I grieve for the deaths of the warriors from my old unit... What is there to do, short of outright revolution, to kick the bums out and take back the America I grew up with and love? And how about those same Democrats and our President that want open borders? I only share these thoughts here, since you all can understand what I mean. Otherwise I am called a Warmonger, Bigot, Hater of immigrants, (though I came to this country as a LEGAL immigrant), Should not the likes of Reid, Pelosi Rosie be arrested and tried for at least Sedition???
Ret10Echo
04-26-2007, 05:54
This is pretty lengthy, but this is part of the text of the recently passed Emergency Spending Bill that will require a pullout. For the full text follow the link:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1591
SEC. 1315. REVISION OF UNITED STATES POLICY ON IRAQ. (a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or have served bravely and honorably in Iraq.
(2) The circumstances referred to in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) have changed substantially.
(3) United States troops should not be policing a civil war, and the current conflict in Iraq requires principally a political solution.
(4) United States policy on Iraq must change to emphasize the need for a political solution by Iraqi leaders in order to maximize the chances of success and to more effectively fight the war on terror.
(b) Prompt Commencement of Phased Redeployment of United States Forces From Iraq-
(1) TRANSITION OF MISSION- The President shall promptly transition the mission of United States forces in Iraq to the limited purposes set forth in paragraph (2).
(2) COMMENCEMENT OF PHASED REDEPLOYMENT FROM IRAQ- The President shall commence the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat forces from Iraq except for a limited number that are essential for the following purposes:
(A) Protecting United States and coalition personnel and infrastructure.
(B) Training and equipping Iraqi forces.
(C) Conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations.
(3) COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY- Paragraph (2) shall be implemented as part of a comprehensive diplomatic, political, and economic strategy that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and the international community for the purpose of working collectively to bring stability to Iraq.
(4) REPORTS REQUIRED- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the President shall submit to Congress a report on the progress made in transitioning the mission of the United States forces in Iraq and implementing the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq as required under this subsection, as well as a classified campaign plan for Iraq, including strategic and operational benchmarks and projected redeployment dates of United States forces from Iraq
The Reaper
04-26-2007, 08:13
I think the "but we support the troops" line by the Dims national leadership is ringing about as true as the old, "but some of my best friends are black" comment.
The fact is, as they have already stated, they see the troops as an underclass of losers who couldn't get real jobs, and are only stating their support because they believe public sentiment and political expediency demand it.
As soon as they think they don't have to say they support the troops to keep popular support, they (for the most part) will drop us like a hot potato.
Just my .02, YMMV.
TR
Ret10Echo
04-26-2007, 08:34
Standard use of the word "BUT" which negates everything previous. They frontload the "Support the troops" and flag wave, immediately followed by a detailed tearing down of what they presented up front.
Additionally if you read through the rest of the bill that it has been booby-trapped with a lot of other spending such as Katrina relief, Veteran support and the list goes on and on. So the veto pen comes out because of the &^%#!&@^%#&! pullout, but a lot of other stuff goes down with it. And don't think that all of those "other" things won't magically pop up in MSM.
Col. North is right on the nail, IMO!
Military Responses to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Comments
By Lt. Col. Oliver North
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268845,00.html
April 26, 2007
Washington, D.C. — If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is right, nearly sixty percent of Americans agree with him that the war in Iraq is already lost. And if he is correct in saying that losing the war will increase Democrat majorities in future elections, then it may be fair to conclude that Americans now love losers.
I’m not buying any of it — and neither are the troops who are fighting this war.
In the days since Mr. Reid announced that “this war is lost,” I have heard from dozens of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardsmen and Marines that I have covered in eight trips to Iraq and two to Afghanistan for FOX News. Some of those who correspond with me are there now, others are home and some are preparing to deploy again. None of them agree with the Majority Leader’s assessment.
• One e-mail from Ramadi, Iraq observed: “Good thing this guy Reid wasn’t around in 1940 when Winston Churchill promised the people of Great Britain nothing but ‘blood, toil, tears and sweat.’”
Another, a National Guardsman, recently returned from Mesopotamia with a Purple Heart, noted that the Senate Majority Leader has become “Al Qaeda’s most powerful ally.”
• At Mississippi State University, a Marine corporal I last saw along the banks of the Tigris River — now a college student — asked me, “Do those people who think we’ve lost this war have any idea what things will be like if we really do lose?”
It’s an important question that none of the potentates on the Potomac who just voted to withdraw U.S. troops appear willing to address.
According to military folklore, Napoleon kept a corporal at his side to ensure that the orders issued in battle were understandable by the troops who had to carry them out. Whether true or not, it’s time for Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi to find such a corporal who will ask them such questions, for if the Democrats continue their current course, we may well lose this war. This way, they will have embraced defeat and all that comes with it.
What would losing the war in Iraq mean? It’s a picture so dark and depressing that it makes the collapse in Vietnam — 32 years ago next week — look like a Sunday school picnic by comparison. The fall of Saigon was horrific for the people of the Republic of Vietnam and their neighbors in Cambodia and Laos. More than five million became refugees and by the most conservative estimates — no one knows for sure — at least a million others perished.
For most Americans, the consequences were minimal. The vast majority of the 2.8 million of us who had fought and bled there mourned the loss of 58,253 of our comrades, swallowed the bitterness of defeat, and got on with our lives. Our nation spent a few hundred million tax dollars on refugee relief and resettlement — and tried to forget what people in Mr. Reid’s party called “the long nightmare of Vietnam.”
But classified U.S. intelligence assessments, military contingency plans and staff studies evaluating the consequences of a precipitous U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, coupled with the lack of funding for political reform measures — as contained in the legislation just passed by Mr. Reid’s party — paint a far more dismal picture than anything that happened after Vietnam.
Within months, an immediate upsurge in vicious sectarian violence fomented by Iranian intervention on behalf of Shiite militias and Wahabbi-supported, al Qaeda-affiliated terror groups. As U.S. forces retreat to a half dozen staging areas for retrograde through Kuwait and Jordan, American casualties will dramatically increase from suicide bombers seeking “martyrdom” in their victory.
Inside of 18 months, the fragile, democratically-elected government in Baghdad will collapse, precipitating a real sectarian civil war and the creation of Taliban-like “regional governments” that will impose brutal, misogynistic rule throughout the country. The ensuing flood of refuges into Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey and Iran will overwhelm relief organizations, creating a humanitarian disaster making what’s happening in Darfur pale by comparison.
The Kurds in Northern Iraq are likely to declare an autonomous region that could well result in Turkish, Iranian and even Syrian military intervention.
In the course of withdrawing U.S. combat brigades and support units, billions of dollars in American military equipment and ordnance will have to be destroyed or left behind. More than $40 billion in reconstruction projects for schools, health care facilities, sanitation, clean water, electrical distribution and agricultural development will be abandoned. Plans to exploit the new West Qurna oil field in southeastern Iraq will be forsaken.
The governments of Kuwait, Jordan, Abu Dhabi and Bahrain, intimidated by Iranian boldness in acquiring nuclear weapons, will likely insist on the withdrawal of American military bases from their territories. Such a move will jeopardize U.S. naval operations in the Persian Gulf and logistics, intelligence collection and command and control facilities supporting operations in Afghanistan.
As Iraq becomes a battleground for the centuries-long Sunni-Shiia conflict, radical Islamic terror organizations will use the territories they control to prepare and launch increasingly deadly terror attacks around the globe against U.S. citizens, businesses and interests.
Senator Reid and his cohorts in Congress who believe that “this war is lost” have acted to ensure that it will be. No one asked them: “If we lost, who won?” The answer should be obvious.
x-factor
04-30-2007, 15:59
Best line in that whole piece: “Do those people who think we’ve lost this war have any idea what things will be like if we really do lose?”
So many people have no understanding (or desire to understand) how much worse it could get and how fast it could get there.
IMO...The only Democrats saying anything worth listening to on Iraq right now are Lieberman and Biden. Lieberman because he's giving a sober assessment of the consequences of withdrawal and Biden because he's the only politician in the public discourse thinking through the possibility of breaking Iraq into a looser, federal state (which, right or wrong, is at least worth considering). Everyone else is just battling for headlines without contributing anything of substance to the policy discussion.
..... So the veto pen comes out ....
Sure did !
WashPost (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/02/AR2007050202410.html)
When President Bush vetoed the war spending bill, he used Bob Derga's pen.
"It was just a plain old black rollerball," Derga said. "Just a $2 pen."
Amid the sadness that has looped through his life since the death in Iraq of his only son, Bob Derga has found a spark that drives him to defend President Bush, the war and the troops who are fighting it.
But it was priceless to Derga, an Ohio engineer who used it to write letters to his son in Iraq.
Cpl. Dustin A. Derga, a reservist with Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 25th Marines, was killed in a May 2005 assault just east of the Syrian border. For a grieving father, the pen remained a link to what he considers a young life lost for a good cause, and he wanted Bush to use it for a purpose.
Ret10Echo
05-04-2007, 07:46
That pen, some of the letters, a copy of the bill and the photo would be in the biggest shadow box you have ever seen over the fireplace.
God bless those who put their lives on the line to defend an ideal that most Americans seem to have forgotten
Well, HRHClinton now wants a total do-over. :rolleyes: What is she, five years old?
Who in the hell votes for these people??
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-03-clinton-war-powers_N.htm
Clinton: Revoke president's war powers
Updated 7h 22m ago
By Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton announced Thursday that she's joining forces with one of the Senate's most skilled parliamentary infighters to try to rescind President Bush's authority to wage war.
Clinton, a New York Democrat seeking her party's presidential nomination, and Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat who is the Senate's longest-serving member, said they will seek a vote to rescind the authority Congress granted Bush to use force in Iraq in October 2002. If approved, the measure would require congressional reauthorization for troops to remain in Iraq, Clinton said.
"We're going to force a debate on the whole war," she told reporters outside the Senate chamber. "We want to force the Congress to look at whether the president's authority, which comes from Congress, should be rescinded."
The Bush administration accused Clinton of playing presidential politics.
"Here we go again. The Senate is trying another way to put a surrender date on the calendar," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "Welcome to politics, '08 style."
Clinton's challenge to Bush came as party leaders tried to negotiate a deal with the White House over a funding bill for military operations In Iraq and demonstrated how presidential politics may affect the pace of the congressional debate over the war. Bush vetoed the $124.2 billion bill Tuesday because it contained a timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The House fell 62 votes short of overriding the veto Wednesday.
In joining forces with Byrd, Clinton is allying herself with an 89-year-old hero of her party's anti-war movement. Byrd was one of 23 senators who voted against the resolution giving Bush authority to go to war in Iraq — a resolution Clinton supported.
On Thursday, Clinton made a point of noting that she supported a resolution Byrd offered to the war-authorization resolution that would have required the president to return to Congress every year for renewal of his war powers.
One of her Democratic rivals who has been most critical of Clinton's Iraq vote, former North Carolina senator John Edwards, voted against Byrd's effort to limit Bush' authority.
Clinton's vote on the Iraq war and her refusal to apologize for it — she says she based her decision on information she considered reliable at the time — has become a point of debate on the campaign trail.
As for the emergency-funding bill for the troops in Iraq, Clinton said it "has to move forward in whatever form we get agreement on." She added, "Sen. Byrd and I wanted to send a very clear signal that the supplemental (bill) is not the end of it."
A funding bill must be passed before next month or the Army will begin running out of money for its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.
White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and budget director Rob Portman met with congressional leaders Thursday to discuss a possible compromise.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he intends to enact funding legislation by the end of the month. He called his initial meeting with Bolten "constructive," but would not elaborate on details of a possible compromise.
Asked whether the presidential rivalries will make it harder to maintain party unity on the Iraq issue in the Senate, Reid said: "They've caused me no concern. Presidential politics is one thing. They can kick and scream and bite and scratch out there politically but they haven't done that in the caucus."