My plan...
...calls for rotating Iraqi troops into combat assignments and, once they prove adept at the new role, American forces can encircle the Country and kill anything that moves!!!
:O)
P
Brendan Minater, you are full of sh*t. HAs Hunter ever even HINTED that we would withdraw before the Iraq Army can assume full responsibliites? NO. He stresses VICTORY. Pure and simple.
It's a PLAN FOR HOW TO GET THEM ALL TRAINED PROPERLY. You must be a blithering Rudy/MCCain rump boy if you think this stupidly.
Total BS. This is a liberal hit-piece against Hunter. Hunter supports Bush fully on Iraq and supports the surge specifically. The main difference is that he wants every Iraqi unit to take part for a time to gain expirience.
To paint him as a cut'n'runner and even comparing him with Murtha is only an attempt to make him politcally cold at the very beginning.
Bush has said over and over, "when the Iraqis stand up, we'll stand down." This is just Hunter's take on the same objective.
There are a lot more people who support temporarily relocating the US military a few hundred miles eastward.
From NPR:
Congressman Hunter, you today said that Congressman Murtha was just plain wrong. What is wrong with the idea that the military has done as much as it can, and it's just time to leave?
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER: Well, Margaret, moving -- leaving in a precipitous manner -- that is, before we fully train up the Iraqi military and give them the ability to sustain their own security -- is a recipe for disaster.
And we saw that when we tried to move green Iraqi troops into the battle in Fallujah before they were trained and we noticed they didn't show up for formation the next day.
So we've walked through this series of milestones for the elections and the approval of the constitution and we're moving toward a permanent government. And we are standing up the Iraqi military. We are training them, and they're taking on larger responsibilities every day.
They're taking over areas like Najaf and Sadr City that heretofore were guarded only by Americans, and the decision to leave should be based solely on the judgment of the combatant commanders on the ground who say, "My Iraqi counterparts can now handle this particular area of the country on their own with minimum American support or with no American support." When they can do that, we should leave.
You KNEW you were gonna get this reaction, dintchya? LOL
Liberal spin in action people.
Of course we're not going to remain in Iraq indefinitely. That hasn't been Bush's plan; the plan has always been to withdraw once the Iraqi military is fully capable of defending its own country from invaders.
Hunter is just giving some finality to the president's plan, so that the Iraqis will have stood up their whole military within the near future.
In other words, this is a hit piece.
This is a Wall Street Journal hit piece on Hunter - the WSJ is solidly behind unrestricted trade with the entirity of the third world, and a president who wanted fair trade with China would be a disaster for much of their constituency.
It has been the aim of the administration to drawdown troops from Day one. after the fall of Saddam.
The thirteen or fourteen people still supporting Duncan Hunter are definitely going to be angry about this. Now the Hunter platform has surrender plans to go with big government and protectionism.
This is a shameless hit piece that is full of BS! Hunter's only withdrawal plan is complete victory against the Islamo-nazis!
In my nearly 6 years here at FR, I'm hard pressed to find another thread that is as much bull$hit as this. Though with the quality of articles being posted by the Rudy crowd, rest assured, this distinction will not last very long.
Years ago I used to rely on the WSJ for all things politcal. Unfortunately most people don't understand that they have sold out to the globalist open border cabal. And now they're not even above out and out lying.
LOL The very first line in the article is a fabrication. No need to read any further.