REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEN TAKE IT TO BUSH (Iraq war - RINOs join the Dem coup attempt)

Drudge Report.com ^ | May 09 2007 | staff

[SCHROLL]

that would be nice to have. you can’t do anything about it without knowing who the squimish are first.

[AlphaJuno]

I don’t want to talk to terrorists, I want to hunt and kill terrorists... that isn’t what we’re doing in Iraq. Like others have said on this forum, we ought to be more worried about Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Our priorities are in the wrong place.

[AlphaJuno]

You are saying that all the groups fighting each other in Iraq are secretly hoping to use Iraq as a platform to attack us... that is your premise... If that's the case, what is victory going to look like? Do you really think if we stand up an Iraqi army that when we leave they will be our friend??

You have Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran with powerful weapons and radical groups.... Hezbollah is building a base in South America... and you're worried about Shiites and Sunnis feuding in Iraq? - like they have been doing for thousands of years? - we have much bigger problems.

China is the big sleeping dragon, and is going to make rag-tag terrorists look like ants if we don't wake up.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

“Those with selective memory seem to forget that, but I don’t.’

Hmmmm. establishing a democracy in the middle east....i don’t remember that as being on the high goals for going in, but, then again, what other form of govt would Bush promote after taking out the leadership.

Seems to me, the presidential media machine was WMD, Axis of Evil, rape rooms, and mass graves. Mullah Abdullah’s wife having the right to representative democracy wasn’t high on the totem. But I may be wrong. No doubt the purple finger photos were powerful and our soldiers can always be proud of that. But, come on, we’ve been there going on four years, let the iraqis take more control, and sooner, rather than later. And I’m not wrong on this, why the hell is Cheney over there saying “Game time.” I don’t make this up, the sense of urgency has now become apparent. So 10% of the people can still buy and support the presidential line of “we don’t know how long its going to take” but that rational is getting thin. You are starting to see it in your military with your junior officer corps, and in “re” enlistments, and starting to see the cracks with the moderate to lib repubs.

for what its worth.

[johnthebaptistmoore]

What else does anyone often expect from “big tent Republicanism”? Make the Republican Party just a conservative political party, and get rid of the idea of a “big tent” forever!

[BillyBoy]

>> REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMEN TAKE IT TO BUSH (Iraq war - RINOs join the Dem coup attempt) This delegation was headed by Mark Kirk of Illinois and Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania. It was, in the words of one of the participants, the most unvarnished conversation they've ever had with the president. They told the president, and one said, quote, "My district is prepared for defeat. We need candor, we need honesty, Mr. President." <<

Hmmm... what happened to all the "Republican leaders" in Illinois who told us last year "Look, I don't agree with Mark Kirk's views on domestic issues either [translation: Kirk is a rabid gun grabbing, gay loving, pro-abortion on demand nut] but we HAVE to support Kirk because he will stand with the President on the WOT, and a Democrat won't"

The Mark Kirk apologists have been awfully quiet lately.

[Rutles4Ever]

Say it with me: The Consitution is not a suicide pact.

But if you declare the Constitution void by nullifying an election, the nation is already lost.

[Rutles4Ever]

First of all, no actions taken to defend this country from total destruction are "illegal" by definition.

How far out should we project that? Technically, any nation that is not the United States could potentially destroy us somewhere down the road. Should we just pre-emptively take over the world? Are you ready to pre-emptively strike China? I mean, they've GOT the ICBM's that can hit L.A., Chicago, NY...

[Rutles4Ever]

My whole point in giving this example, btw, was to show that absoutely no amount of public disapproval (in the polls or even at the ballot box) should keep our leaders from defending this country. To do or think otherwise is pure suicide.

It's a bad example. The Soviets were wonderful purveyors of pre-emptive war. Their history of being trampled on by the French and the Germans and the Chinese was the rationale behind invading the satellite states. Those were survival tactics without any lines drawn. Where do we draw ours? If you want to be perfectly protected from our enemies, you're going to have to find another solar system. But taking the war in Iraq and calling it a war for the survival of our nation is a fact not in evidence by any stretch - especially since the greater, more obvious threats are being ignored for political purposes.

[Stars&StripesNE]

You're putting words in my mouth that I never said.

If I didn't know better, you sound like an a angry liberal.

Nobody wants to win this more than the soldiers do. I have had two of my kids there. And if called to return, they would do so with honor and determination with my full support.

It is true the liberal press are trying to achieve defeat in Iraq.

I will say what I said before, I hope the meeting was positive for all who attended.

[PhilCollins]

I agree, Bill. Since I live in Kirk’s district, I know several conservatives who only voted for Kirk because they agreed with him about the war in Iraq. I haven’t voted for him because he’s at least as liberal as all of the Democrats he defeated. In Feb., I e-mailed a few conservative Kirk voters and asked whether they regret voting for him. One of them responded and said yes.

[fieldmarshaldj]

“The Mark Kirk apologists have been awfully quiet lately.”

We know Kirk’s an almost completely useless RINO, but have you seen the latest on this guy ?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1831092/posts

This fella’s apologists have been deafeningly quiet on this thread. ;-)

[Agent Smith]

There is no doubt that Dubya was a slightly preferable choice to Gore/Kerry, but not by much. He is our Jimmy Carter.

The Saudis are NOT our friends. We are their hired body guards. It is a temporary marriage of convenience ONLY. The Saudi Royals control of Mecca and Medina is made possible by the Wahabbi sect of Sunni Islam. In return the Saudis have been financing Radical Islamic schools all over the world. Only Dubya is smart enough to think they are our friends.

[LightBeam]

But if you declare the Constitution void by nullifying an election, the nation is already lost.

And if our government collapses due to Islamic infiltration, the nation is lost too. I'd rather have a strong pro-American leader temporarily suspend some liberties in order to preserve them in the long run.

[Blue State Insurgent]

Sadly my rear. W stands his ground while Jeb couldn’t even stand up for a handicapped woman.

[LightBeam]

How far out should we project that? Technically, any nation that is not the United States could potentially destroy us somewhere down the road. Should we just pre-emptively take over the world? Are you ready to pre-emptively strike China? I mean, they've GOT the ICBM's that can hit L.A., Chicago, NY...

I'm willing to "project that" as far out as the CIC discerns we need to take it.

If we had pre-emptively attacked China before they had the capability to arm themselves with ICBMs we wouldn't be in the position we are in today.

But since we can't change the past, yes, I would support a strategic strike against China post haste....especially if it means our long term survival or not.

And THAT is why we're in Iraq, in case you haven't noticed.

[A.Hun]

Saudi Arabia has been as close to a friend as we will ever get from a Muslim nation, and the rulers of SA cannot stop radicals by themselves.

If you want to deny that, fine. The President, I’m sure, takes their friendship with a grain of salt, but I stand by them being an ally in the WOT.

GWB might be your Jimmy Carter, but no thinking conservative could ever agree. I believe you are just blaming him for our nation’s shortcomings.

[LightBeam]

It's a bad example. The Soviets were wonderful purveyors of pre-emptive war. Their history of being trampled on by the French and the Germans and the Chinese was the rationale behind invading the satellite states. Those were survival tactics without any lines drawn. Where do we draw ours? If you want to be perfectly protected from our enemies, you're going to have to find another solar system. But taking the war in Iraq and calling it a war for the survival of our nation is a fact not in evidence by any stretch - especially since the greater, more obvious threats are being ignored for political purposes.

Okay, for for 9000th time in this thread: I agree that other targets in the WOT are being ignored to our detriment. I don't understand why our CIC is not responding effectively, and I can only hope he has some secret plan up his sleeve to deal with them.

As to the rest of your question, there should be no "lines" drawn around our nation's ability to defend itself from aggression.

Freedom and peace are great, but if you strive for nothing but freedom and peace you'll get neither. I'm an advocate of TOTAL WAR against all enemies of America, foreign and domestic.

The "lines" you speak of are drawn around us by our enemies to emasculate and eventually destroy us.

[Blue State Insurgent]

You are just like the democrats for putting party election chances ahead of defeating the enemy.

We are in a war for the soul of mankind while you think it’s only a political football.

[pleikumud]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1831488/posts