Bush and Cheney, Iraq is swell
- Thread starter Spytheweb
- Start date
Heres a few #s you might want add that reported failed to mention--
Democrats Are Still Weak on Security
By KARL ROVE
March 21, 2008
One out of five is not a majority. Democrats should keep that simple fact of political life in mind as they pursue the White House.
For a party whose presidential candidates pledge they'll remove U.S. troops from Iraq immediately upon taking office -- without regard to conditions on the ground or the consequences to America's security -- a late February Gallup Poll was bad news. The Obama/Clinton vow to pull out of Iraq immediately appears to be the position of less than one-fifth of the voters.
Only 18% of those surveyed by Gallup agreed U.S. troops should be withdrawn "on a timetable as soon as possible." And only 20% felt the surge was making things worse in Iraq. Twice as many respondents felt the surge was making conditions better.
It gets worse for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Nearly two out of every three Americans surveyed (65%) believe "the United States has an obligation to establish a reasonable level of stability and security in Iraq before withdrawing all of its troops." The reason is self-interest. Almost the same number of Americans (63%) believe al Qaeda "would be more likely to use Iraq as a base for its terrorist operations" if the U.S. withdraws.
Just a year ago it was almost universally accepted that Iraq would wreck the GOP chances in November. Now the issue may pose a threat to the Democratic efforts to gain power. For while the American people are acknowledging the positive impact of the surge, Democratic leaders are not.
In September, Mrs. Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus "the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief." This week, she said "we'll be right back at square one" in Iraq by this summer.
In December, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refused to admit progress, arguing, "The surge hasn't accomplished its goals." He said a month earlier there was "no progress being made in Iraq" and "it is not getting better, it is getting worse."
Asked by CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Feb. 9 if she was worried that the gains of the last year might be lost, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot back: "There haven't been gains . . . This is a failure." Carl Levin, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee told the Associated Press the same month that the surge "has failed."
This passionate, persistent unwillingness to admit what more and more Americans are coming to believe is true about Iraq's changing situation puts Democrats in dangerous political territory. For one thing, they increasingly appear out of touch with reality, a charge they made with some success at the administration's expense before the surge began changing conditions in Iraq.
For another, Democrats appear to have an ideological investment in things going badly in Iraq. They seem upset and prickly when asked to comment on the progress America is making. It's hard to see how Democrats can build a majority if their position on what they claim is one of the campaign's central issues is shared by less than a fifth of the electorate. They'd be better off arguing success allows America to accelerate the return of our troops rather than appear to deny the progress those troops are making.
There are more problems for Democrats on national security. Led by Ms. Pelosi, House Democrats are digging their party into even deeper difficulty by holding up the bipartisan Senate Protect American Act reauthorization. The reason? House Democrats want personal injury lawyers to be able to sue telecommunications companies for having the audacity to cooperate with the government in monitoring terrorist communications after 9/11.
It appears that in Ms. Pelosi's warped world, the monetary needs of the Democratic Party's most generous financial benefactors take precedence over the nation's security. How else could one rationally explain her opposition? Sens. Clinton and Obama, both of whom opposed the bipartisan Senate reauthorization bill, have joined in her approach.
That is a mistake, both on the merits and politically. For example, a question added to a recently conducted, private national poll introduced the issue by saying "Congress is now debating extending legislation called the Protect America Act, which allows U.S. intelligence agencies to monitor communications of foreign terrorists. Part of the debate is about protecting telephone companies or leaving them open to lawsuits."
It then described two positions, drawing on public statements by those involved in the issue. One position is that of Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who "say it is critical that Congress act as soon as possible to reauthorize the Protect America Act. They said we have already lost intelligence information because Congress let it expire, it has had negative consequences for our national security and degraded our intelligence capability."
The other position is that of "Democrat Congressional leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi," who say "this is a manufactured political crisis, the intelligence community already has the tools that they need, and private companies should not be granted protection from being sued when they cooperate with the government."
When asked whom they agree with, Americans side with Messrs. McConnell and Mukasey over Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi by a 54%-37% margin. And this is without describing why House Democrats are fighting this battle: campaign donations from wealthy trial lawyers. The more this issue is discussed, the more Americans will come to see Democrats have put their campaign donors -- an unsavory group of lawyers, some of whom have been in the headlines recently with guilty pleas in fraud and bribery attempts -- above the country's security.
Elections are rarely decided over just one issue; to win, candidates don't need to have a majority of Americans agreeing with them on every big issue. But when it comes to choosing a president, Americans take seriously the candidates' views and experience on national security. Voters instinctively understand a president's principal constitutional responsibility is protecting the country.
The Democrats have two candidates with less national security experience and fewer credentials than the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain. And they are compounding these difficulties with positions on Iraq and terrorist surveillance that are shared by a shrinking minority of Americans.
Mr. Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.
See all of today's editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal.
It was the survey and #'s Edward--like these from Pew poll Wed
http://news.yahoo.com/s/pew/20080319/ts_pew/38iraqwarrightorwrong;_ylt=AiaCQKqq6SZM.l1_uOLa6hm84tIF
--Appears tad over half think war was wrong decision--and on 63% wanting end to war--it appears that depends on the circumstances-am sure that # would be 100% --following a win-for everyone but liberals.
P.S. Found newavatar for you--
http://img124.exs.cx/img124/6550/dancingmoore.gif
http://news.yahoo.com/s/pew/20080319/ts_pew/38iraqwarrightorwrong;_ylt=AiaCQKqq6SZM.l1_uOLa6hm84tIF
--Appears tad over half think war was wrong decision--and on 63% wanting end to war--it appears that depends on the circumstances-am sure that # would be 100% --following a win-for everyone but liberals.
P.S. Found newavatar for you--
http://img124.exs.cx/img124/6550/dancingmoore.gif
The terrorists are already here, in office. Look if any terrorists want to come to the US, they would have no trouble. Thousands of people are crossing our border everyday. The border the President is suppose to be protecting. This is a dumb republican talking point. What's it's going to be when the US attacks Iran? It does not matter, you repub sheep will follow, i mean not you yourselves, you egg other Americans to go to war.
You ever hear fact is at times stranger than fiction.
If you were wanting to prove a point why not use real photo and name to match instead of doctored implications:shrug:
Any thing with Rowe's name on it I don't consider.
Anyone that has his buddy Libby take fall for him. Don't trust. As for numbers mind is correct as said. And question was answer by Chenney as stated.
Anyone that has his buddy Libby take fall for him. Don't trust. As for numbers mind is correct as said. And question was answer by Chenney as stated.
Don't worry, warmongers...the U.S. isn't going to leave Iraq any time soon - er - ever. Considering that Bush and Co. hired contractors to build the largest embassy in the world for us, and the contractors and military established/built the 2nd largest (measured by landings) airport in the world for military and "humanitarian" reasons, we certainly have to protect them.
Let it never be said that this administration didn't have a grand plan in place when they hit the ground running... :walk:
Let it never be said that this administration didn't have a grand plan in place when they hit the ground running... :walk:
Chad,
I hadn't seen anything about that airport being the second biggest in the world, or really much about it at all. Do you have a link or an article or whatever? That would surprise me, even though nothing should at this point.
Sure...I just heard about this on the radio this AM, and followed up on it with "The Google."
Sure - here are just a couple links:
4) Camp Anaconda/Balad Airbase
Balad airbase is the second busiest airport in the world, trailing only London?s Heathrow Airport.* Camp Anaconda is the largest U.S. logistical base in Iraq.* The camp is spread over 15 square miles and is being constructed to accommodate 20,000 soldiers.
There is a 24 hour gym, lighted outdoor basketball courts, Olympic-sized swimming pool, as well as a chandeliered cinema for the troops. ?The closest some troops here come to experiencing the Iraq seen on the evening news is the miniature golf course, which mimics a battlefield with its baby sandbags, little Jersey barriers, strands of concertina wire and, down at the end of the course, what appears to be a tiny detainee cage,? wrote Tom Ricks from the Washington Post.
http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases_text.htm
and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302994_pf.html
Good thing we don't plan on being an ock-yew-py-er, eh?
Sure - here are just a couple links:
4) Camp Anaconda/Balad Airbase
Balad airbase is the second busiest airport in the world, trailing only London?s Heathrow Airport.* Camp Anaconda is the largest U.S. logistical base in Iraq.* The camp is spread over 15 square miles and is being constructed to accommodate 20,000 soldiers.
There is a 24 hour gym, lighted outdoor basketball courts, Olympic-sized swimming pool, as well as a chandeliered cinema for the troops. ?The closest some troops here come to experiencing the Iraq seen on the evening news is the miniature golf course, which mimics a battlefield with its baby sandbags, little Jersey barriers, strands of concertina wire and, down at the end of the course, what appears to be a tiny detainee cage,? wrote Tom Ricks from the Washington Post.
http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases_text.htm
and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020302994_pf.html
Good thing we don't plan on being an ock-yew-py-er, eh?
Thanks Chad, I appreciate it.
A couple thoughts on the articles.
On a broader level, i'm not sure I appreciate the repeated mention of air-conditioning, basketball courts, lack of danger, where our troops hide porn, etc, etc. Not sure what the point of that is. Those things are not indications of permanent occupation, as opposed as the worlds largest Embassy project.
As if life is good and easy at Camp Anaconda/Balad Airbase. Those were throwaway comments that are irrelevant to the purported thesis of the article or Q&A thing.
Thomas Ricks is sometimes ok, but there is almost always an undercurrent to his stuff.
More specifically, and more to the point of my inquiry/interest, I think that their references to the ' 2nd busiest airport in the world' is extremely misleading. Before I read the links, I thought that the reference was to the former 'Saddam' airport, or whatever, and renamed 'Baghdad' airport. The one where tourists :mj07: might come in on.
This Balad Airbase, the '2nd busiest airport', is apparently the main logistics hub for us in Iraq, and supplying 150,000 personnel with everything from bullets to food to whatever on a daily basis is certainly going to create a lot of traffic, but again, not any real sign of permanent occupation.
Again, the Embassy, yes, this other stuff, no.
Thanks again for the links, my man.
Before this turns into a blast-fest...I didn't post the stuff about the camp lifestyle, etc., for any reason...I hope the soldiers have a little good stuff in their lives over there. In fact, I wish I hadn't had that as a part of the post. I just think it shows that we didn't enter into this war with any other plan other than establishing our place there, and probably long term.
So much for the inexpensive, couple year effort that would be paid for totally by Iraqi oil funds, eh?
So much for the inexpensive, couple year effort that would be paid for totally by Iraqi oil funds, eh?
No, no. Please don't take my post the wrong way. It wasn't towards you at all about that stuff. It just happened to be in there with the links.
I didn't, not you. I figured it was coming, though, from a coupla others. Since I hate America, Freedom, Whites, et al.
Wayne:
I am shocked that you are making fun of the greatest film maker of our time. Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine, Sicko, and the other one that I can't rememeber are proud films that one day will rank with Gone with the Wind, the Ten Commandments and When Harry Met Sally as all American classics. He is the modern day Cecille B. DeMille.
Eddie
I am shocked that you are making fun of the greatest film maker of our time. Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine, Sicko, and the other one that I can't rememeber are proud films that one day will rank with Gone with the Wind, the Ten Commandments and When Harry Met Sally as all American classics. He is the modern day Cecille B. DeMille.
Eddie
- Sep 27, 2005
- 1,171
- 14
- 0
Although the fighting continues in Basra, followers of Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in Baghdad instead took to the streets in mostly peaceful protests. At least 123 Iraqis were killed or found dead and 191 more were wounded in various incidents across Iraq. The numbers include a mass grave that was found in Muqdadiyah. Also, the FBI is in possession of three new bodies belonging to kidnapped American contractors.
Ten of thousands of al-Sadr followers protested peacefully in Baghdad. They are demanding an end to the U.S.-backed Iraqi government headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who was once championed by al-Sadr, and to his crackdown against the Mahdi Army. The demonstrations were held in predominantly Shi'ite neighborhoods, in particular the Sadr City suburb, which was named for al-Sadr's father. Some analysts believe crackdown is actually meant to politically cripple the cleric. The Mahdi Army was observing a unilateral cease-fire at the time of the crackdown.
Meanwhile, the casualty totals from the Mahdi Army clashes in Baghdad has risen to 30 people dead and 200 more wounded, upping yesterday's figures by 16 dead and 60 wounded. Many of the wounded are women and children caught in the crossfire. In other violence, three people were killed and 15 more were wounded during a mortar attack on a bus terminal in Karaj Alawy. Four soldiers were wounded during an armed attack in Sadr City. Also, a spokesperson for the Baghdad Security Plan was kidnapped from his home in the al-Amin neighborhood.
As many as 29 people were killed and another 39 more were wounded during an air attack by U.S. forces in Hilla. Some unconfirmed reports have placed the number of dead at sixty.
In Basra, the casualty figures were upped by 11 dead and 25 injured to a total of 51 people killed and 225 others wounded over the last three days. Reports out the city today mention heavy mortar fire and more armed attacks. Last night, a roadside bomb killed three bodyguards working for the city's police chief. Also, some of the police casualties are being treated in Baghdad.
The totals so far in Kut have been 44 people killed and 75 more injured, adding 26 dead and 63 wounded since yesterday's preliminary reports.
Four Iraqi soldiers were killed in Daquq when gunmen attacked their checkpoint.
Gunmen attacked an army patrol in near Nasariya in al-Rifai, killing two Iraqi soldiers.
In Kirkuk, a car bomb killed two Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers and wounded six others, including two civilians.
A roadside bomb killed four policemen and wounded four more in Mahaweel.
Four bodies were found near Baquba.
Outside Muqdadiyah, police have found a mass grave containing 37 bodies. The age of the grave was not given, but it could date from the Saddam era. Mass graves from that period and quite a few recent ones dot the Diyala province.
Also, a main oil pipeline outside Basra was bombed.
BTW, oil is $107.00 a barrel.
Ten of thousands of al-Sadr followers protested peacefully in Baghdad. They are demanding an end to the U.S.-backed Iraqi government headed by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who was once championed by al-Sadr, and to his crackdown against the Mahdi Army. The demonstrations were held in predominantly Shi'ite neighborhoods, in particular the Sadr City suburb, which was named for al-Sadr's father. Some analysts believe crackdown is actually meant to politically cripple the cleric. The Mahdi Army was observing a unilateral cease-fire at the time of the crackdown.
Meanwhile, the casualty totals from the Mahdi Army clashes in Baghdad has risen to 30 people dead and 200 more wounded, upping yesterday's figures by 16 dead and 60 wounded. Many of the wounded are women and children caught in the crossfire. In other violence, three people were killed and 15 more were wounded during a mortar attack on a bus terminal in Karaj Alawy. Four soldiers were wounded during an armed attack in Sadr City. Also, a spokesperson for the Baghdad Security Plan was kidnapped from his home in the al-Amin neighborhood.
As many as 29 people were killed and another 39 more were wounded during an air attack by U.S. forces in Hilla. Some unconfirmed reports have placed the number of dead at sixty.
In Basra, the casualty figures were upped by 11 dead and 25 injured to a total of 51 people killed and 225 others wounded over the last three days. Reports out the city today mention heavy mortar fire and more armed attacks. Last night, a roadside bomb killed three bodyguards working for the city's police chief. Also, some of the police casualties are being treated in Baghdad.
The totals so far in Kut have been 44 people killed and 75 more injured, adding 26 dead and 63 wounded since yesterday's preliminary reports.
Four Iraqi soldiers were killed in Daquq when gunmen attacked their checkpoint.
Gunmen attacked an army patrol in near Nasariya in al-Rifai, killing two Iraqi soldiers.
In Kirkuk, a car bomb killed two Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers and wounded six others, including two civilians.
A roadside bomb killed four policemen and wounded four more in Mahaweel.
Four bodies were found near Baquba.
Outside Muqdadiyah, police have found a mass grave containing 37 bodies. The age of the grave was not given, but it could date from the Saddam era. Mass graves from that period and quite a few recent ones dot the Diyala province.
Also, a main oil pipeline outside Basra was bombed.
BTW, oil is $107.00 a barrel.
