Posted on 06/27/2005 9:30:23 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative
TONIGHT President Bush will discuss the situation in Iraq. It's long past time to get it right in Iraq. The Bush administration is courting disaster with its current course - a course with no realistic strategy for reducing the risks to our soldiers and increasing the odds for success.
The reality is that the Bush administration's choices have made Iraq into what it wasn't before the war - a breeding ground for jihadists. Today there are 16,000 to 20,000 jihadists and the number is growing. The administration has put itself - and, tragically, our troops, who pay the price every day - in a box of its own making. Getting out of this box won't be easy, but we owe it to our soldiers to make our best effort.
Our mission in Iraq is harder because the administration ignored the advice of others, went in largely alone, underestimated the likelihood and power of the insurgency, sent in too few troops to secure the country, destroyed the Iraqi army through de-Baathification, failed to secure ammunition dumps, refused to recognize the urgency of training Iraqi security forces and did no postwar planning. A little humility would go a long way - coupled with a strategy to succeed.
So what should the president say tonight? The first thing he should do is tell the truth to the American people. Happy talk about the insurgency being in "the last throes" leads to frustrated expectations at home. It also encourages reluctant, sidelined nations that know better to turn their backs on their common interest in keeping Iraq from becoming a failed state.
The president must also announce immediately that the United States will not have a permanent military presence in Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That picture just sums up JF'ngK in a nutshell - or do I mean "nutcase." Thank God he's not the president.
"I have a plan!"
The Administration and Military estimate the insurgents at about .1% of the Iraqi population. I believe that is about 25,000.
bttt
You lost the election.
Decisively.
You're not in charge.
So shut the hell up.
Why is it that the Democrats are so concerned about having a permanent military presence in Iraq, and never say a word about our permanent military situation in Bosnia?
Could it be that they would relish the idea of Iraq going back to the Baathists after we leave?
As if anyone gives a rat's rear what John Kerry thinks. Not even his own party cares.
Oh yeah! Give me more of the 'Rat pep talk about the quagmire in Iraq.
As Neil Cavuto said yesterday. I wonder how many media people want us to win this war.
"Someone help me out here....who's John Kerry?"
Remember Al Gore? Same guy, same views. Holds the same "will pontificate for food" signs up at Marxist rallies.
Perhaps our mission in Iraq is harder because these "others" refused to help us because they were on the take from the oil for food program.
LT ping!
Spineless US Senate would rather protect Hanoi Kerry
than deal with the anti war crowd.
Anyone who thinks Hanoi Kerry isn't behind the anti war crowd needs to get a clue.
It's time to support our troops and ignore the jelly fish in the US Senate!
There is no need to impeach Hanoi Kerry from the US Senate
He is there illegally!
WAKEUP AMERICA!
For those who "forgot" what Hanoi Kerry
did in the past read on and learn the truth.
Hanoi Kerry was still a USNR officer while he:
gave false hearsay testimony to Congress
negotiated with the enemy
helped the US lose a war
abetted in the deaths of millions
created a hostile environment for all servicemen
Why is Kerry still in the US Senate?
This is in violation of
U.S. Constitution Amendment 14 Sec 3
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html
And the FBI has proof of his treason.
Hanoi Kerry Timeline of a traitor
includes FBI files
May 1970
Kerry and Julia traveled to Paris, France and met with Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, the Foreign Minister of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of Vietnam (PRG), the political wing of the Vietcong, and other Viet Cong and Communist Vietnamese representatives to the Paris peace talks, a trip he now calls a "fact-finding" mission.
(U.S. code 18 U.S.C. 953, declares it illegal for a U.S. citizen to go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power.)
http://www.archive-news.net/Kerry/JK_timeline.html
a) A person charged with absence without leave or missing movement in time of war,
or with any offense punishable by death,
may be tried at any time without limitation.
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#*%20843.%20ART.%2043.%20STATUTE%20OF%20LIMITATIONS
Distribute these url's!
Links to Anti Kerry sites
212 LINKS
News reports,
Viper's Vietnam Veterans Page
http://members.aol.com/ga1449ga/links/links.html
EXPOSE HANOI KERRY!
MUST SEE WEBSITE!!!!
http://www.kerrystreason.com/index.html
Full details on these url's!
http://stophanoikerry.150m.com
There is a backup site
if the 1st url is unavailable.
http://tonkin.spymac.net/hanoikerry1.html
Did you see this...?
(The 'Kerry's Promise Counter')
http://polipundit.com/index.php?p=6628
Polipundit even tells you how to install it on your own page!
Swift Boat Veteran For Truth John O'Neill Comments on Kerry's 180 'Release'
6/7/05
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1418592/posts
John Kerry was dishonorably dismissed from the Navy:
(statement from lawyers there at the time)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1406760/posts
Why does Hanoi Kerry continue to refuse to sign
form SF 180 and release his military records to the public?
Sam Sewell 09 June 2005
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article4388.html
Thanks for the ping!
I recall President Bush saying very clearly this is WHY the USA was going into Iraq. The primary mission is to disarm and dismantle the Iraqi Baathist party. The end of the Baathists is why I support this war and I think the USA has won on that basis.
Iraq becoming a free society is a bonus brought about by the end of the Baathists. Yet Kerry says no more Baathists is the problem in Iraq?
I guess all the liberals miss their old buddys.
Imagine my disappointment...
I'm not knowledgeable enough about the details of a post-war situation like this, so any FReepers with some military background might be able to inform me as to the viability of Kerry's plan. But this has the whiff of something written with the knowledge that none of the advice would be taken. In other words, it's like something written EXCLUSIVELY so the writer can say "Look, they didn't listen to me!" where if they DID take his advice, disaster would follow. The appeasment of the terrorists--saying "Oh, please, we'll get out right away and won't stain your precious soil with our presence!" strikes me as particularly disastrous.
I'm trying to take this piece seriously, but there's not much there there.
It should read, "John F. Kerry is a traitor, enemy sympathizer, and a coward who has no business commenting on military matters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.