Posted on 12/08/2006 4:59:07 AM PST by shrinkermd
Right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh called it "The Iraq Surrender Group."
The conservative New York Post tabloid doctored a front-page photo to depict the co-chairmen of the Iraq Study Group in primate fur, under the headline "Surrender Monkeys," inspired by a frequently quoted line from "The Simpsons."
And conservative commentator William J. Bennett vented in volcanic fashion. "In all my time in Washington I've never seen such smugness, arrogance, or such insufferable moral superiority," Bennett wrote on the National Review website. "Self-congratulatory. Full of itself. Horrible."
Howls of protest echoed across the right side of the political spectrum as conservatives voiced dismay with the findings of the bipartisan Iraq panel, released Wednesday.
The commission's report depicts Iraq as a country sliding into chaos, saying conditions are "grave and deteriorating."
Many conservatives agree with that assessment. But the report's other findings and recommendations, which declare the approach they have backed for nearly four years all but bankrupt, clearly struck a nerve with the most ardent supporters of the war.
That diagnosis has compounded the pain for conservatives who saw voters turn control of both chambers of Congress over to Democrats last month, largely because of mounting frustration with the war in Iraq.
Conservatives were particularly incensed at the study group's recommendation that the United States engage Iraq's neighbors, including Iran and Syria, as part of a broad new diplomatic push to enlist other countries, even those that see themselves as enemies of the United States, to try to solve the Iraq problem.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
"..."It was about as interesting as a small-town phone book," said Danielle Pletka, a vice president of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington think tank, on Fox News. "I was amazed by the report. There were very few concrete suggestions. There were very few deep ideas. And there were very, very few plans for victory."
Nothing more needs to be said
Auckminijob likes it!
If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
Winston Churchill
Maybe if there were some Generals or retired Generals on this panel I might take it seriously. I have yet to read in history where a war was won with commissions, but call me crazy.
I also would like to know since when did our government become a publishing company.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If we don't finish this now we'll regret it within 10 years.
"Mr. Hitler this is Mr.Chamberlain calling. I would like to sit down with you and have a chat. I have some papers here for both of us to sign. What's that? Munich? Sure I can meet you there. Lunch? Sure we can do lunch and then lets sign these papers."
That sure worked out well didnt it?
It's not just conservatives, there's a few liberals out there who can't swallow what the ISG was selling. Jeff Greenfield on Imus this morning was pretty nonplused with the report.
My favorite part of what he said was, after Imus asked about Baker saying you had to take ALL the recommendations, Greenfield said so what are you supposed to to when one recommendation is to increase the troops while another says draw down the troops?
He also ridiculed the idea that the way to solve one "intractable" problem was to try to solve two more at the same time (refering to the Israel/Palistinian problem and Jerusalem I presume).
Then I listend to C-Span, and most of the liberals calling hated the ISG report because it didn't really say bring the troops home now.
BINGO! You're so correct!
Isn't that what got us to where we are today in the Middle East in the first place? Isn't that what caused Bin Laden to go after us? Will we never learn?
"..."It was about as interesting as a small-town phone book," said Danielle Pletka, a vice president of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington think tank, on Fox News. "I was amazed by the report. There were very few concrete suggestions. There were very few deep ideas. And there were very, very few plans for victory."
But it was bipartisan.
The difference is that Vietnam didn't control two thirds of the world's oil.
Oh yeah. Peace in our time, and all that.
Surrender monkeys always do what? Surrender.
This document is the product of cowards or traitors or both. Savage nailed it though. Their formula for Mideast peace is to throw Israel to the wolves. Expect to hear a rising chorus from these anti-Semites in the months to come.
These cowards, traitors, fools, and charlatans are going to cost millions of lives in the not so distant future for "peace in our time". I spit on them and all their "partners for peace"!
GREAT TOON...
GREAT TOON...
I cant bring myself to take Savage seriously these days. I think he is a pseudo-conservative. He found a way to make money and thats it. I dont like the fact that he has gotten friendly with Schumer and I dont like the donations he made.
"Then I listend to C-Span, and most of the liberals calling hated the ISG report because it didn't really say bring the troops home now."
As an engineer, I can tell you that from my experience, nothing that is "designed by committee" ever turns out well.
That's why we need LEADERS.
"I think he is a pseudo-conservative."
I think he's insane.
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.