Hooray for Dems
OK, let me see if I get this straight.
After screaming at W for YEARS, since 2003, that he needs to have sent more troops to Iraq from the beginning, Congressional Democrats are now threatening to block the funds to send more troops to Iraq. . .
If I ever needed more proof that the Democrats want us to fail in Iraq purely for political gain, this would be it.
Whether you agree with the surge or not, the fact that Democratic Congresscritters have, in significant numbers, changed position from "send more troops" to "don't send more troops" and that the only thing that happened to alter their position was the President suddenly agreed with them. . .
Disgusting animals.
After screaming at W for YEARS, since 2003, that he needs to have sent more troops to Iraq from the beginning, Congressional Democrats are now threatening to block the funds to send more troops to Iraq. . .
If I ever needed more proof that the Democrats want us to fail in Iraq purely for political gain, this would be it.
Whether you agree with the surge or not, the fact that Democratic Congresscritters have, in significant numbers, changed position from "send more troops" to "don't send more troops" and that the only thing that happened to alter their position was the President suddenly agreed with them. . .
Disgusting animals.
posted by Just A Decurion at 1/19/2007 09:01:00 PM
3 Comments:
Reminds me of Machiavelli's remark that, if you need to be cruel, you should do it right away, decisively, and then be done with it.
At this time, how many more troops do you think it would take to prevent failure?
On a loosely related subject, does W follow the advice of the [bipartisan] Iraq Study Group?
Reminds me of Machiavelli's remark that, if you need to be cruel, you should do it right away, decisively, and then be done with it.
At this time, how many more troops do you think it would take to prevent failure?
On a loosely related subject, does W follow the advice of the [bipartisan] Iraq Study Group?
I think the Dem's point here is that it's over, we failed. More troops aren't politically feasible and can't retrieve the situation anyway. Too many mistakes have been made and it's time to cut our losses. Overwhelming force for the occupation at the beginning, it is now said, would likely/may well have have kept us from getting into this fix from the beginning.
Cutting our losses and getting out in 2007 may well be the lesser of possible evils. There may well be those who cry that were were beaten and the time to attack us has come. Most of those people can be dealt with by an AC-130 strike, the rest can be voted out of office (rimshot).
Post a Comment
<< Home