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

Skip to comments.

Defense Secretary Nominee Gates is a Defeatist
December 5th 2006 | jveritas

Posted on 12/05/2006 10:10:32 AM PST by jveritas

Based on what on what Defense Secretary nominee Mr. Gates has said so far in the Senate confirmation hearings, it is easy to conclude that he is a “Defeatist”. No matter how tough the situation is in Iraq he must not say in public that we are not winning the war in Iraq. That is totally demoralizing to our troops and will further embolden our enemies there like Al Qaeda, Iran, and Syria. Moreover the man has shown extreme ambiguity and uncertainty in his answers to many questions.

I doubt very much that he told the President that we are not winning in Iraq or else the President would not have nominated him. It may be too late to withdraw his nomination now, but our country and most importantly our brave troops deserve a better person to be the Secretary of Defense.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; bush; gates; iran; iraq; syria; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-186 next last

1 posted on 12/05/2006 10:10:36 AM PST by jveritas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jveritas

This guy was on the Baker-Hamilton Commission. When the report comes out, and calls for a cut-and-run, how will he be able to oppose it, given that he helped write it??? Bush has painted us into a corner.


2 posted on 12/05/2006 10:11:50 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Defeatist? Why? Because he told the truth? Are you suggesting he lie?


3 posted on 12/05/2006 10:12:46 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

How is that defeatist?

Do you think Churchill claimed Britain was "winning" the war when Germany was bombing London? Of course not. But he sure as heck didn't give up either.


4 posted on 12/05/2006 10:13:58 AM PST by Omega Man II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Yes, I prefer to have a SecDef who is delusional, closed-minded, tells the American public that things are going well in Iraq...

Oh, wait that guy just got canned.


5 posted on 12/05/2006 10:14:09 AM PST by Lunatic Fringe (Say "NO" to the Trans-Texas Corridor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
Either that, or Bush knows that Gates won't be confirmed.

In which case, we may have 2 1/2 mores years of Rumsfeld :-). Maybe gates is a "Harriet Miers" nominee.

6 posted on 12/05/2006 10:14:10 AM PST by pierrem15 (Charles Martel: past and future of France)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Cut and Run is now being supported by the new Defense Secretary, and when Levin endorses him, you KNOW we've lost for sure, as he will give the Democrats all the ammo they need to tout their cut and run agenda.


7 posted on 12/05/2006 10:14:27 AM PST by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Cut and Run is now being supported by the new Defense Secretary, and when Levin endorses him, you KNOW we've lost for sure, as he will give the Democrats all the ammo they need to tout their cut and run agenda.


8 posted on 12/05/2006 10:14:31 AM PST by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pierrem15
we may have 2 1/2 mores years of Rumsfeld :-)

God help us all.

9 posted on 12/05/2006 10:15:12 AM PST by Lunatic Fringe (Say "NO" to the Trans-Texas Corridor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
Bush has painted us into a corner.

The wrong people have been thrown under the bus.

Bush himself should have taken the hit. Then at least we would have Cheney in the White House, Rummy still at DOD, Porter Goss at CIA, Ashcroft at DOJ, and John Bolton at UN. And someone a hell of a lot more conservative at State.

10 posted on 12/05/2006 10:15:18 AM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Gates is saying what he needs to in order to get confirmed.

Less knee jerking, please.


11 posted on 12/05/2006 10:15:43 AM PST by Terpfen ("Conservatives" who sat at home cost us the War on Terror, SCOTUS, and economic success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

Next time I'd like to see you use "cut and run" THREE times in one sentence!


12 posted on 12/05/2006 10:15:58 AM PST by Lunatic Fringe (Say "NO" to the Trans-Texas Corridor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Bush is the president not Gates, and we need to face reality in Iraq. The mission of the US military is not to police Iraq into the far future.

We need to keep Iraq out of the terrorist sphere and we need to move forward to deal with (I mean confront) Syria and Iran. If they will still do that I'm ok with it.

13 posted on 12/05/2006 10:16:13 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pierrem15
Either that, or Bush knows that Gates won't be confirmed.

He'll be confirmed, most likely by the end of the week, most likely unanimously, by voice vote. The new US policy on Iraq is cut and run.

14 posted on 12/05/2006 10:16:17 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

What is it with the Class of 98?


15 posted on 12/05/2006 10:17:13 AM PST by HOTTIEBOY (I'm your huckleberry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Moreover the man has shown extreme ambiguity and uncertainty in his answers to many questions.

Sounds like he's telling the Senators what they need to hear in order to vote for his confirmation. Cynical, but the only method that works.

Extreem honesty doesn't work. Ask Robert Bork.

16 posted on 12/05/2006 10:17:27 AM PST by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

President Bush is a Lincoln surrounded by McClellans. Where have you gone, William Tecumseh Sherman?


17 posted on 12/05/2006 10:17:43 AM PST by RedRover (They are not killers. Defend our Marines.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Elections have consequences and thanks to "them" for not voting the 110th congress will be pulling the troops or cut funding, either way we are leaving Iraq


18 posted on 12/05/2006 10:17:51 AM PST by italianquaker (Democrats its time to fish or cut bait, no more blaming Prez Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Defeat is in the air. Dontcha know many think they won by losing in November. Soon we can get Iraq behind us and go to war with Mexico. All we need is a leader... (sound of crickets chirping).


19 posted on 12/05/2006 10:18:07 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

By maintaining the current course, defeat is assured. Patton and McArthur and Pershing and Sherman and Washington would be horrified at the military position we find ourselves in.


20 posted on 12/05/2006 10:18:35 AM PST by PC99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-186 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