Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Start U.S. Iraq withdrawal in 4-6 months: Democrats
Reuters ^ | 12 November | staff

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.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: congress; cut; cutandrun; democrats; iraq; levin; moralvictory; rats; retreatanddefeat; run; vietnam; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480481-491 next last
To: My Favorite Headache

You are vulgar and rude. Do not reply to me again. This reminds me of having a battle with a Moonbat.


441 posted on 11/13/2006 5:46:08 AM PST by Paige ("Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." --George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: attiladhun2
If they succeed in this it will be good news for the GOP. Unfortunately it will most likely mean a civil war (in Iraq probably not here), and the terrorists that are currently going to Iraq may end up here. If they succeed and none of our doom and gloom predictions pan out or the media ignores the bloodbath (very likely), then at least the War in Iraq is off the table for the 2008 campaign.

A civil war in Iraq and our simultaneous retreat will mean an Iraq dominated by Iran followed by the Persian Gulf. Say hello to $10.00 gasoline. Thus, the consequences of defeat and retreat in Iraq will definitely be part of the '08 election and the media will blame it all on Bush, hence, Her Thighness wins.

When Shillery gets inaugurated, an armed revolution (or another secession) in America will begin, since the "real" Americans will not tolerate a Marxist federal government. I, for one, plan to move my family as far away from the "Blue" (actually RED) zones as I possibly can.

442 posted on 11/13/2006 6:24:00 AM PST by Conservative_Rob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: meyer
>The most significant image of the Vietnam war:< And there's more to come:


443 posted on 11/13/2006 6:25:03 AM PST by Darnright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Screamname
The muzzie with the hands here, too.


444 posted on 11/13/2006 6:26:51 AM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

I'd get out of the green zone before Israel and Iran go at it. Or have a safe place deep under ground there. It's going to get flattened if the Iranians can get off one strike. Maybe we have building cover to retreat to the Kurdish region north and Shatt Al Arab/Kuwait south. There's going to be a bigger war in the area in the next 6 months you gotta believe.


445 posted on 11/13/2006 6:30:50 AM PST by kinghorse (I calls them like I sees them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

I'd get out of the green zone before Israel and Iran go at it. Or have a safe place deep under ground there. It's going to get flattened if the Iranians can get off one strike. Maybe we have building cover to retreat to the Kurdish region north and Shatt Al Arab/Kuwait south. There's going to be a bigger war in the area in the next 6 months you gotta believe.


446 posted on 11/13/2006 6:31:09 AM PST by kinghorse (I calls them like I sees them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative

"Well, the troops will be home for next Christmas."

And terrorism may again hit home by St. Patricks.
So this is the Dems strategy for winning the Iraq war? Hmmmm. I guess during Normandy, our guys should have started paddling back in rubber dingys to the troop launch ships, and called the invasion off.

This will be called "The Greatest Generation of Self-Absorption and Apathy."


447 posted on 11/13/2006 6:39:10 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
I didn't read the entire thread.

Having said that, I bet the Democrats' plan calls for lots and lots of Iraqi "refugees" who will be settled in all over the USA and given a good start in the heartland.

None will be terrorists or jihadists or former "freedom fighters" either...

And by that time Bush will have his "temporary guest worker" program up and humming like a spinning wheel.
448 posted on 11/13/2006 6:57:13 AM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
brought to you by the CUT AND RUN party
449 posted on 11/13/2006 7:14:51 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking it's heritage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

I don't understand how, if you're opposed to the US being in Iraq, you can be for a "phased" withdrawal.
Immediate withdrawal should be yout goal, no?
How do you let even one more person die if you don't think we should be there in the first place?
These cowards should just say what they are for.


450 posted on 11/13/2006 7:22:26 AM PST by threeleftsmakearight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

What a stupid-A$$ statement!


451 posted on 11/13/2006 7:26:36 AM PST by groovejedi (Bolton/Rumsfled '08! - yes I know I mispelled Rumsfeld)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
"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 needs to re-read his mangled copy of the Constitution. Congress is not responsible for foreign policy. Congress is not the Commander-in-Chief. The first order of business SHOULD BE to get Congress out of the way and let the grown-ups continue to do their jobs.

The fact that the same people who were dancing in the streets and celebrating when the WTC twin towers fell were dancing in the streets and celebrating again last Wednesday should tell you everything you need to know about the democrat agenda.

452 posted on 11/13/2006 7:30:45 AM PST by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
phased redeployment of forces = surrender

Happened in Viet Nam and is happening again in Iraq

All that the Dems stand for

453 posted on 11/13/2006 7:30:53 AM PST by HeartlandOfAmerica (The Democrat Party: Best friends of America's WORST enemies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: groovejedi
Which part? Do you mean the part where I provide a simple statement of readily verified fact ~ to wit: Democrats cannot be trusted.

Or, do you mean the part where I note that the Dems wish for the destruction of Israel ~ and that's fairly easily demonstrated. The Dems have demanded the US discuss things with Iran regarding Iraqi security needs. At the same time the Iranian government is announcing that it will destroy Israel.

You can look at today's Drudge Report for more on that.

Now, recant. Bow down. Give me an abject apology. Crawl through ground glass while you are at it.

454 posted on 11/13/2006 7:35:16 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Sprite518

One good thing about that possiblity is that it'll give us a chance to clean house of the RATs.

When I was in school, I used to say this to the liberal students: "Sometimes, I wish America would be invaded so that when you go over and help the enemy, our soldiers can shoot you as well,"


455 posted on 11/13/2006 7:36:20 AM PST by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 435 | View Replies]

To: Sprite518

That's because it was a democrap who put our troops in those places.


456 posted on 11/13/2006 7:38:33 AM PST by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
"HOW DARE THEY QUESTION OUR PATRIOTISM?"~~Hildabeast's speech after 9-11
This is why Clinton. This is why.
457 posted on 11/13/2006 7:56:01 AM PST by sully777 (You have flies in your eyes--Catch-22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoketree

I don't disagree that our leaving Iraq would make the conflict worse. We know it would be civil war and the Demonrats know it would be civil war. They started making noise about 3 months ago that if they won the House and Senate that they would not do an immediate pull out of our troops. But, if they start pulling our troops anytime soon and there is a resultant mess, they will be blamed and they know it. What I see now is a lot of Democrats losing their seats in 08 irregardless of what they do about Iraq. If they do nothing they lose, if they proceed and the end result is a bloody mess and it will be they lose.


458 posted on 11/13/2006 8:00:55 AM PST by YdontUleaveLibs (Reason is out to lunch. How may I help you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
This should be interesting --I've never seen an Army voted out of a country.
459 posted on 11/13/2006 8:20:52 AM PST by Lurking in Kansas (Nothing witty here? move on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
This should be interesting --I've never seen an Army voted out of a country.
460 posted on 11/13/2006 8:21:14 AM PST by Lurking in Kansas (Nothing witty here? move on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480481-491 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson