Dems Still Divided On Plan For Iraq

Republican National Committee ^ | December 6, 2005

[RWR8189]

Dems Debate Themselves Over Right
Strategy In Iraq; President Bush Stands
By His Clear Strategy
                                                       
DNC Chair Howard Dean: Immediate Withdrawal; US Won't Win In Iraq: 

"Democratic Chairman Howard Dean On Monday Likened The War In Iraq To Vietnam And Said, 'The Idea That The United States Is Going To Win The War In Iraq Is Just Plain Wrong,' Comments That Drew Immediate Fire From Republicans."  ("Dean Questions Commitment To Iraq Strategy," The Associated Press, 12/5/05)

• Dean: "I Think We Need A Strategic Redeployment Over A Period Of Two Years ... Bring The 80,000 National Guard And Reserve Troops Home Immediately. They Don't Belong In A Conflict Like This Anyway. ... [W]e Need A Force In The Middle East, Not In Iraq But In A Friendly Neighboring Country ..." (San Antonio's WOAI's Website, www.woai.com, Accessed 12/5/05) 

2004 Dem Presidential Nominee John Kerry: Phased Withdrawal; Stop US Soldiers From "Terrorizing Kids":

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): "The Day After The [Iraqi] Election, The President Of The United States Should Announce To The Iraqis ... I Am Withdrawing The 20,000 Additional Troops ..." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 12/4/05)

• Kerry: "There Is No Reason, Bob, That Young American Soldiers Need To Be Going Into The Homes Of Iraqis In The Dead Of Night , Terrorizing Kids And Children ..." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 12/4/05) 

Ranking Member Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joe Biden (D-DE): Phased Withdrawal:

CNN's Wolf Blitzer: "Nancy Pelosi, The Democratic Leader In The House Of Representatives Now Supports That Murtha Position. You Oppose It. Why?" Sen. Biden: "Well, I Oppose It Because We Have Two Events Coming Up. One This Election On December 15th And Then The Constitution." (CNN's "Late Edition," 12/4/05)

• Biden: "We're Going To Draw Down 50,000 Troops In Iraq Next Year ..." (CNN's "Late Edition," 12/4/05)

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY): Rejected "Rigid" Or "Open" Timetables:

Sen. Clinton: "[I] Reject A Rigid Timetable That The Terrorists Can Exploit, And I Reject An Open Timetable That Has No Ending Attached To It." (Bruce Schreiner, "Clinton Tells Ky. Dems Bush Mismanaged War," The Associated Press, 12/3/05)

Dem House Leadership: Immediate Withdrawal:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): "We Should Follow The Lead Of Congressman John Murtha ... I'm Endorsing What Mr. Murtha Is Saying ... I Believe That A Majority Of Our Caucus Clearly Supports Mr. Murtha ... And Let's Be Clear About What It Is Mr. Murtha Said, 'Yes, Let's Bring The Troops Home.'" (Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, 11/30/05)

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA): "The Deployment Of United States Forces In Iraq, By Direction Of Congress, Is Hereby Terminated And The Forces Involved Are To Be Redeployed At The Earliest Practicable Date." (Rep. John Murtha, Congressional Resolution, Introduced 11/17/05)

Other Dems: Warn Withdrawal "Could Lead To Disaster":

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD): "I Believe That A Precipitous Withdrawal Of American Forces In Iraq Could Lead To Disaster, Spawning A Civil War, Fostering A Haven For Terrorists And Damaging Our Nation's Security And Credibility." ("Democratic Lawmakers Splinter On Iraq," The Washington Post, 12/2/2005)

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT): "I Have Just Returned From My Fourth Trip To Iraq In The Past 17 Months And Can Report Real Progress There. ... Progress Is Visible And Practical." (Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Op-Ed, "Our Troops Must Stay," The Wall Street Journal, 11/29/05)

• Lieberman: "None Of These Remarkable Changes Would Have Happened Without The Coalition Forces Led By The U.S. And, I Am Convinced, Almost All Of The Progress In Iraq And Throughout The Middle East Will Be Lost If Those Forces Are Withdrawn Faster Than The Iraqi Military Is Capable Of Securing The Country." (Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Op-Ed, "Our Troops Must Stay," The Wall Street Journal, 11/29/05) 

Still Other Dem Leaders: No Position At All On Iraq:

DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel (D-IL):  "At The Right Time, We Will Have A Position [On Iraq]." (Charles Babington, "Hawkish Democrat Joins Call For Pullout," The Washington Post, 11/18/05)

"Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL] Said [Yesterday] That The Democratic Party Was Unlikely To Reconcile Its Differences And Reach A Unified Strategy For Iraq ..." (Jeff Zeleny and Rick Pearson, "Obama: Iraq War Splits Democrats," Chicago Tribune, 12/6/05)

• Obama: "The Politics And The Policy Of This May Not Match Perfectly." (Jeff Zeleny and Rick Pearson, "Obama: Iraq War Splits Democrats," Chicago Tribune, 12/6/05)

[Zacs Mom]

[Milhous]

Nice work guys! :)

[vigilante2]

HEY HOWARD DEAN YOUR COMMENTS PROVED TO THE WORLD WHAT A GUTLESS LEADER YOU ARE

[highimpact]

Dems Still Divided On Plan For Iraq

Where's the division? One side wants to cut, and the other side wants to run?

[manwiththehands]

If Dean were a sane and smarter-than-a-room-temperature-IQ fellow he would have added:

"The Iraqis are ultimately going to be the ones who win this war."

I might have even agreed with him had he said that.

These people are so stupid with hatred they don't know an opportunity when it hits them in the face.

[Wolfstar]

Where's the division? One side wants to cut, and the other side wants to run?

In addition, Ramsey Clark (D-Pluto) wants to get Saddam Hussein acquitted, whereupon Leftists everywhere will agitate to have him put back in power. Then Kofi and his UN crowd will reinstate the oil-for-food scam and pay everyone off.

[adorno]

I know who the first seven people in your post are, but did you have to include a creature from another planet as your eight?

Regarding the subject at hand, I think the entire country should be aware by now that the only tactic left for the democrats is to attack the Bush policy in Iraq. If that policy is allwed to continue, chances are that we will win in Iraq and a democracy will be born. And, that would be disastrous for the democrats chances during elections in '06 and '08.

[layman]

Dems Still Divided On Plan For Iraq

Translation ...... Once the likelihood of success or failure in Iraq becomes more clear I will take a courageous position. In the meantime I will do what I can to undermine the administration.

[msnimje]

George Soros is killing the Democratic party.

I can't think of a better use for his billions of dollars of ill-gotten gain.

[Right Cal Gal]

"Where's the division? One side wants to cut, and the other side wants to run?"

Nah - I think the real divide is which order they want to do it in.

(Except Lieberman. As far as I'm concerned, he's one of us.)

[Desron13]

"Democratic Chairman Howard Dean On Monday Likened The War In Iraq To Vietnam And Said, 'The Idea That The United States Is Going To Win The War In Iraq Is Just Plain Wrong,' Comments That Drew Immediate Fire From Republicans."

There was a time in this country that remarks like this during a time of war would have drawn immediate fire form a firing squad. Ahh! The good old days!

[chiefqc]

The dumb-o-crats have no plan, never did have a plan and never will have a plan. It's all smoke and mirrors. They are clueless, worthless and gutless. Their leadership is arrogant pack of morally bankrupt liers with no redeeming qualities who would sell their own children if they thought it would benifit them to any extent. They are selling out their own country and selling their own souls for the lure of power. The shame of it all is that they sleep well at night because they have been doing it so long there is now shame left.

[SandRat]

[LibertarianInExile]

"Dems Still Divided On Plan For Iraq"

Some Rats say we should cut.

Some of them say we should run.

Others say we should cut and run.

Still others say we should cut, run, and burn the American flag on the way out.

And of course, there are those few who think that maybe America could stay there in Iraq...so long as we ask the UN for permission.

[Zacs Mom]

The Rockefeller "Treason" memo
November 6, 2003

Here is the full text of the memo from the office of Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.) on setting a strategy for pursuing an independent investigation of pre-war White House intelligence dealings on Iraq.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.

For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.

The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.

In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.

The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.

The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:

B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.

The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.

[SandRat]

Reading AC's Book Treason and it's worse than imagined with the Rats.

[Wiz]

Plan? Democrats had no plan in the first place. If there was one, it would be "surrender and withdraw". That sounds similar to France doesn't it?