Posted on 09/01/2006 10:41:50 AM PDT by meandog
By JOSEPH L. GALLOWAY
The president's news conference this week was as close to a declaration of policy bankruptcy as anything seen so far in his stewardship of the 3 1/2-year war in Iraq.
With his poll numbers still down around his ankles and even some key Republicans questioning the wisdom of staying the course in Iraq, President Bush flatly declared there will be no withdrawal of American troops before noon Jan. 20, 2009.
I believe it was Will Rogers who said when you find yourself in a hole the first thing to do is quit digging. The president knows he's in a hole and he's still digging furiously and promising he won't quit digging. Ever.
What kind of sense does this make?
(Excerpt) Read more at realcities.com ...
General H. Norman Schwarzkopf has called Joseph L. Galloway, a military columnist for McClatchy Newspapers, "The finest combat correspondent of our generation — a soldier's reporter and a soldier's friend."
"President Bush flatly declared there will be no withdrawal of American troops before noon Jan. 20, 2009."
What?
Capitulating to the enemy and cutting-and-running are NOT appropriate measures to take. I don't care whether this man is considered "The finest combat correspondent" by anyone. Unless he (or those he is representing) articulates a real plan for how to enact a change in Iraq, then he should just STFU.
Yep, nobody in the White House knows anything or can see anything or will listen to anything. Riiiight.
How effective are police forces against militias armed with car bombs, rockets and mortars?
What is it with people named Galloway?
Joseph Galloway has his head up his arse. Sounds just like George Galloway to me.
Indeed...there better not be any withdrawals after Jan. 20, 2009!
Man, this guy is brilliant . Just put the terrorists under arrest!--Why couldn't I think of that!?
He's not saying to cut and run...he's saying that there needs to be a change in strategy in Iraq by building a professional police force to control the insurgency.
Wasn't that the basis for the Mel Gibson film 'We Were Soldiers'? Does Mr. Galloway think that the Islamist terrorists will be any more reasonable than the Viet Cong? Should we have just put Ho Chi Minh under arrest?
Sigh...here we actually have an applicable lesson from one war to another and the one guy who wrote something useful about the first goes all clueless about the second.
There's got to be a reason for this.
LOL
And they should also pass a law making it illegal to set off car bombs in public.
He is for withdrawing the troops. Some would say that's 'cut and run', and his call for a better police force is just cover language--like suggesting "re-deploymnet" of our forces.
I just emailed this self-absorbed hack. One of the problems with somebody like this is that they have come to believe their own press clips and believe they have attained an all-knowing GOD status in their specific area of knowledge.
It helps to read the entire article. The author does put forward a plan. I know it's really close to the end of the article, but it is there.
Nowhere does he suggest cut and run or capitulation. Again, reading the article would have provided that insight.
I gather that it is now unacceptable on this forum to even suggest that we have conducted this war in Iraq less perfectly than we should have? My goodness, governments can screw up a free lunch, but because we like GW, we refuse to believe that anything he does could be anything other than the best of the best?
I don't get it.
I've read a number of his columns.
His reputation has gone to his head. Logic has not. He's stuck on Vietnam.
"he's saying that there needs to be a change in strategy in Iraq by building a professional police force to control the insurgency."
Actually, that IS the strategy of GWB. It usually takes 10-15 years, with US involvement slowly decreasing.
Galloway either isn't smart enough to understand (unlikely), or he blabbing to show his liberal friends in the media that he is really 'one of them'.
People are addressing his plan. Which seems to be to build the police force. Isn't that what it is? Well, when was a police force effective against a militia armed with car bombs, rockets and mortars? Maybe there was a time? I am honestly asking the question. Do you know of an instance? Does he?
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.