Posted on 11/12/2006 7:40:13 AM PST by shrinkermd
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats, who won majorities in the U.S. Congress in last week's elections, said on Sunday they will push for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq to begin in four to six months.
"The first order of business is to change the direction of Iraq policy," said Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), a Michigan Democrat who is expected to be chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee in the new Congress.
Levin, on ABC's "This Week," said he hoped some Republicans would emerge to join Democrats and press the administration of President George W. Bush to tell the Iraqi government that U.S. presence was "not open-ended."
Bush has insisted that U.S. troops would not leave Iraq until the Iraqis were able to take over security for their country.
"We need to begin a phased redeployment of forces from Iraq in four to six months," Levin said.
Speaking on the same program, Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), a Delaware Democrat who is expected to head the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he supported Levin's proposal for a withdrawal.
Cheer up Retired Army. I just was watching Fox News. Now they are doing generic polling on 2008 Presidential election. Thus far 48% RATS, 28% Republicans and the rest "I don't know."
It has already begun. The MSM and the RATS are going to make this a European style welfare state regardless of all else. In a few short years they will have House, Senate and President as well as the major media, academe' and all public employees including teachers.
And don't forget the Kurds. Let down again by the Americans.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saddam/kurds/
It was a sad day tuesday. I predict we will get attacked again while Hillary is in office.
In short if the (D)s make a big fuss and threaten starve our troops out of Iraq they will lose both wings of congress as that is clearly not the will of the people.
Fortunately for our Republic it appears Binden & Co are just squawking for their moonBat base.
Wrong, he can do it and he will do it.
Uh yeah I am going to compare them.
What was guadalcanal, Tarawa, Kwajalein, Eniwetak, Pelileu, Guam, Saipan, Tinian, Iwo Jima, Ojinawa? How many thousands did we lose fighting the enemy in those really small places that were hijacked by the enemy? The residents of those places were not hostile to us yet the battles were far more fierce and bloody because the enemy was there.
Same for Europe. The French were not nazi's but we fought on their soil did we not?
Don't we have ANY Republicans left in the house or senate? No Repub President left in the WH? If so, don't they have a say at all or is it all Pelosi all the way? I was sick enough of the wimpy Republicans before the election but this is too much. I have listened to all their plans like they don't have any opposition at all. If they do get complete say about what goes down next, how in the hell, and us with a 5 seat lead, did they manage to stop everything we tried to do?
Make that Guadalcanal and Okinawa.
While we were not fully vested in Afghanistan after our CIA helped kick out the USSR, we all know were the chips fell there and 9.11 was an indirect result.
The chips also fell when Saigon fell and about a million died. But your good with that, right?
That is true about judicial nominees, but not bills.
More on what you just alluded to:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1735781/posts?page=61#61
I understand your point. I am not arguing that. All I'm saying is that I would not put it past the rats to scheme some way to run things.
Funny you mentioned the ball game. Yesterday I was at a ball game where veterans were honored by thousands of people. Today, all I can think of is that, if the MSM were announcers at a game they want to control for their purpose everybody would just kick their ass and run them out of town on a rail. Why are we all whining about them? Why are we tolerating them? Why aren't we kicking their ass?
Don't include me in that. I was pointing out how wrong that phrase is.
I fully blame clinton for letting aq build up in Afghanistan.
I knew well before 9/11 of the terrroist training there. And if little old me knew clinton sure should have known. But he went after the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Haiti, the Branch Davidians, gun owners, poor little Elian Gonzales, Serbia, etc. None of which would put up any fight.
I'm saying we should not leave Iraq and our bases there that surround Iran and "let the chips fall"
Like Rush said the other day, they have it back and they will never give it up again. They will do whatever, cheat, lie, steal, kill, whatever, but they are not going to lose the congress to republicans again. We can thank the weak spined, weak kneed RINOs and the whiners in the conservative movement, the Christian right who stayed home, etc. for this. They are too blame as much as Bush and the RINOs. They stayed home and let this happen. More dims voted than conservatives. We were defeated by our own side wanting to TEACH THEM A LESSON. The lesson they NEVER SEEM TO HAVE LEARNED IS THAT YOU DO NOT WANT THE F'ING SOCIALISTS IN CHARGE!!! Stupid people have surrendered our Republic to the communist without a fight. Now the cut and run from Iraq will begin "BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WANTED IT." Iraq will become a civil war. GEE-HAD will roam. Another 9-1-1 will happen. Dims will not seek the military to help. IT will become a POLICE or law enforcement matter. We are now going to become a sitting target.
My wife and I had planned a vacation to England, Scotland, Switzerland, Germany, and Austria for the near future. No longer. We are not making ourselves a target and we are not giving those pukes our money. I spent 10 of my 20 years in the Army in Germany. My wife wanted to see Europe. She no longer does now.
President Bush could do well to heed these words...he, Rummy, Cheney and the illogical strategy of sending too few fine men and women into battle with too many hands tied behind their backs are the real reasons that the GWOT isn't gaining ground and the cost was an election that went south.
In 2001 the U.S. invaded Kuwait--a country one eighth the size of Iraq--with 600,000 boots on the ground (and that was just the U.S. contingent). We went into Iraq with just over 1/5th of that total. It doesn't take a military genius to calculate the difference and guess what would happen if the overly optimistic elements (i.e. they'll welcome us as heroes) didn't fall exactly into place...Hello!
Bush was warned repeatedly about bad scenarios if he didn't have the adequate troops by good generals. He ignored them. The reason he didn't use the doctrine of overwhelming force (1.5 million was tossed around by many experts) is IMHO that he could not keep his promise of a tax cut if he did. You see, Chogal, there is an old economic axiom at work here: you can have either guns or butter but you can't have both.
This can also be found in the Congressional Record from 1963...
http://www.semperliber.org/communistgoalsfulfilled.htm
Good one.
That'd be perfect grounds for impeachment if he tried. I doubt it'd ever come to that though.
Why did you ping me? What are you talking about and how does it relate to anything I said?
BTW Great Home page!
The jihadi ba$tard$ must be giddy after this past week's big win for their allies in the congress. How much good news can one group stand?
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.