COWARDS GIVE UP ON GIS - & GIVE IN TO EVIL

NYPost.com ^ | 17 Feb 07 | Ralph Peters

[Recovering Hermit]

I place the blame for this cluster-f*ck squarely on the "punish the Republicans" voters.

Our troops will die because of this.

Didn't anybody know that this would happen?

Now we have scumbag TRAITORS like Murtha becoming emboldened, and thus embolden our enemies.

I'm so disgusted and pissed that I can't see straight right now.

God help us all...God bless our troops...they must be completely dumbfounded by what is happening here.

[Miss Didi]

Thanks for posting the cover, Peter. Now tomorrow I want to see the Pantsuit's ugly mug under a TREASON headline. After all, she is running for the highest office in the land.

[armymarinemom]

Well said. Ralph Peters has been critical of both parties. I respect his opinion that we need to be less PC and win the war.

[dforest]

They have given in to evil alright. What can you expect from people who put William Jefferson D Louisiana on the Homeland Security panel? Congress IS no friend to Americans. They have shamed themselves.

[El Laton Caliente]

No Lie!!! Ever seen one of "The Revolution is Coming" threads at DU or Kos? They are all "Where can I get a gun and how do I use it. I've never shot one before but it must be easy if the knuckle dragging conservitives do it." LMAO!

I took delivery of 16 receivers from www.NoDakSpud.com this week... ;^)

[voltaires_zit]

Not to justify the vote or anything... BUT... has it ever occurred to Mr. Peters that some folk might honestly believe the president's surge is too little, too late AND that (after watching those who voted to authorize force be pilloried as wishy washy opportunists for opposing the war later) they wanted to be on record in this instance?

[true_blue_texican]

I wish the d@mned press would play this speach on the air but I know they won't.

[KevinDavis]

I noticed that the Blue Dogs voted for it too....

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Ann....you have their number

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Not to justify the vote or anything... BUT... has it ever occurred to Mr. Peters that some folk might honestly believe the president's surge is too little, too late AND that (after watching those who voted to authorize force be pilloried as wishy washy opportunists for opposing the war later) they wanted to be on record in this instance?

..going on the record

[voltaires_zit]

LOL! OK. There is, of course, nothing wrong with roasting the opposition. Have at!

I was just wondering: if someone does believe, for example, that 20k troops for 6 months is wishy washy, insufficient, totally hopeless showboating that isn't going to do a damned thing to fix Iraq, what WOULD be an acceptable way of expressing that in the Congress?

[JayAr36]

I say again; Democrats, fresh from defending Communism are now terrorism's first line of defense.

[DungeonMaster]

I give up on the war against global warming.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

We've reached a low point in the history of our government when a substantial number of legislators would welcome an American defeat in Iraq for domestic political advantage.

----snip----

As a former soldier who still spends a good bit of time with those in uniform, what infuriates me personally is the Doublespeak, Stalin-Prize lie that undercutting our troops and encouraging our enemies is really a way to "support our troops."

----snip----

If our troops are willing to fight this bitter war, how dare Congress knife them in the back?

.Vermin

[bray]

I don't think the Iraqis are calling this showboating. Only you comfortable Dims sitting in your comfortable houses hating Bush call it showboating. The Iraqis call it fighting for their survival. Not that you much care about that.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[voltaires_zit]

> Only you comfortable Dims sitting in your comfortable
> houses hating Bush call it showboating.

ASSume much? Wrong on all counts, btw.

But it is precisely that kind of closed minded, all or nothing, demand for **unquestioning** support that may very well cause Iraq to be lost.

Do feel proud of your "work" then...

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

I was just wondering: if someone does believe, for example, that 20k troops for 6 months is wishy washy, insufficient, totally hopeless showboating that isn't going to do a damned thing to fix Iraq, what WOULD be an acceptable way of expressing that in the Congress?

You would vote against the resolution and offer up your own more robust plan.

But what they did was mere posturing. Cowardly and treasonous.

When you are on a team...you support the team...even if you don't agree with the coach's game plan.

[bray]

Some of us are tired of you seminar posters pretending to be something you aren't. Sorry I got your comfortable house wrong, your mom's comfortable basement.

Pray for W and Our Troops Victory

[Austin Willard Wright]

Gene Taylor voted NAY. Explain to me why Ron Paul voted YEA>

That's not hard at all. Ron Paul regards Iraq as a misgudied Wilsonian/nation-building war and has opposed it from the beginning. Back in the 1990s, he also opposed Clinton's bombing of Kosovo as did the vast majority of conservatives for the same reason. Ron Paul is consistent on this issue, unlike most folks on either the left or right.

[voltaires_zit]

> You would vote against the resolution and offer up your
> own more robust plan.

Excellent idea, if it were an option. More practically, congress critters and the general public aren't in a position to direct the DoD's planning resources, so their only choice is support (or don't support) the plan the president put forward, isn't that so?

And the president is only putting forward this one version of the plan involving a slight and brief surge of troops, now that he's (finally) abandoned the ridiculous position that there were enough troops there to begin with, yes?

> When you are on a team...you support the team...even if
> you don't agree with the coach's game plan.

We aren't "on" the team. We're the OWNERS. Whatever is done, is done in our name. It is incumbent on all of us to ensure that it is done right.