Danny Gonzalez: Patraeus testifies again: Liberals pile on (Move America Forward)

Move America Forward ^ | April 13, 2008 | Danny Gonzalez

[Syncro]

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Posted By:
MAF Blogger Danny
Permalink

Patraeus testifies again: Liberals pile on

Helen Thomas has written another scathing opinion dripping with contempt for General Petraeus, Ryan Crocker and of course, we can’t forget, the President.

Surprisingly even Democratic would-be presidents Obama and Hillary could not escape her livid criticism.

In their disappointing comments, the Democratic rivals were as cautious as Petraeus.
Clinton said “it’s time to begin an orderly withdrawal of our troops.”
Obama told Petraeus that while he wants U.S. troops out of Iraq, he “would not initiate a precipitous withdrawal.”

Watching the testimony myself, and looking at the comments of liberal columnists, I cannot believe the complete willingness to ignore the situation. Liberals continue to stump from their imagined moral high-horse of ‘we should never have gone in the first place’ and draw the (il)logical conclusion of ‘lets pull-out and withdraw immediately’

Thomas pointed to the testimony of a dissident-general – oh wait, he was fired because he couldn’t do his job.

Odom testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week and urged an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. He claimed the troop surge (escalation) has prolonged instability in Iraq and that the only “sensible strategy” is “rapid withdrawal.”
In a separate speech last week, the outspoken general said, “We are certainly to blame for the chaos in Iraq” but “we do not have the physical means to prevent it.”

I had never heard of this remark before, but now that Thomas has brought it up, I can’t believe this guy ever made the rank of 3-star general! I mean just take ONE good look at any of the charts that Petraues had as part of his testimony and you can easily see that…the troop surge caused a drop in violence.

Charts from Patreus Testimony HERE

Not only do we HAVE the physical means to prevent this ‘chaos’ but Petraeus has DEMONSTRATED the ability to do so! No one can be given more credit than Petraeus for the success in Iraq, and it is he who is responsible today, for the fact that many Iraqis still live safely and feely in Iraq who otherwise WOULD HAVE been murdered or blown up in IED attacks in this past year – if not for the Surge.

When Hugh Hewitt Interviewed Odom over a year ago, it was clear from this excerpt that Odom does not think our forces being present kept anyone in Iraq any safer.

HH: But if we precipitously withdraw, do you expect genocide?
WO: I would call some of the things…I mean, you know, that’s a definitional term.
HH: Do the numbers…
WO: I mean, it depends on what you define as genocide.
HH: Do the numbers matter at all to your analysis? If someone came to you and said 100,000 people will die…
WO: Yes, they matter, and what I’m telling you is that we can’t affect, we cannot improve the numbers of survivors by staying longer.

Well I think its been a year since this statement…and we have stayed longer…and if you just looked at the charts then it’s obvious we HAVE improved numbers of survivors…by staying longer.

General Petraeus is the only person who had demonstrated an ability to make decisions that cause less chaos, less death and increased security…so who’s do you think is the more credentialed opinion?

Helen Thomas is just so funny, in another part of her opinion, she talked about Lyndon Johnson having the cajones to say no to sending more 240,000 troops to Vietnam in 1968. Well what a GREAT decision that was…why just look at what happened as a result.

Even a college student has a better understanding of Vietnam than Thomas, who probably only remembers the LSD-induced love-ins that did SOOOO much to accomplish peace...pat yourselves on the backs hippies.

Thomas wants President Bush to respond like LBJ despite the fact that all the evidence points to another Vietnam-like massacre occurring in the absence of US Military-provided security. Millions died in the violence that followed and if we pull out of Iraq, the same will happen here.

It is clear from this liberal’s interpretation of Petraeus’s expert testimony...no amount of evidence can sway the liberal mind.

---

[Syncro]

...Liberals continue to stump from their imagined moral high-horse of ‘we should never have gone in the first place’ and draw the (il)logical conclusion of ‘lets pull-out and withdraw immediately’

Thomas pointed to the testimony of a dissident-general – oh wait, he was fired because he couldn’t do his job.

Odom testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week and urged an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. He claimed the troop surge (escalation) has prolonged instability in Iraq and that the only “sensible strategy” is “rapid withdrawal.”
In a separate speech last week, the outspoken general said, “We are certainly to blame for the chaos in Iraq” but “we do not have the physical means to prevent it.”

[Syncro]

More on Patraeus at Move America Forward:

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Posted By:
Catherine Moy
Permalink

Gen. Petraeus Thanks All who Support Our Troops

Gen. David Petraeus ended his formal, prepared remarks today in front of the pompous Senators by thanking all of those who support our troops. He said support from home is important to the troops on the ground and that he appreciates it very much.

Congratulations to all of you who support Move America Forward, the largest pro-troop organization in the country. Your prayers, contributions and physical help is recognized by our men and women on the ground and by their leader.

Such a gentleman. Especially when you stack him up against Ted “The Swimmer” Kennedy and other blowhards in the Senate. What is wrong with the folks who keep electing the likes of Kennedy. This guy is pickled. Done. Put a fork in him.

Kennedy and other lefties grilled Petraeus, whose expertise and honesty overwhelmed the nitpickers.

The very condensed message from Petraeus who, at this hour, faces more Senate questioning.

Things are a whole let better in Iraq than a year ago. American troops are the best ever. We are winning (my words). We need to be careful about pulling out troops or we will give al Qaeda a “safehouse,” if you will, from which to operate its killing operations.

I’m going back to listening here. Will down some Tums so these America-haters to make me lose my breakfast.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

It’s difficult to imagine they are so blatantly antiAmerican!

See this :

Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left

And a review:

**********************************

By	Kat Bakhu (Albuquerque, NM United States) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left (Hardcover)

I had long wondered why people on the Left had the propensity to speak more positively about people who would slit their throats than they do about their own country, which affords them more freedom and opportunity than anywhere else. David Horowitz has answered that question thoroughly and convincingly in his Unholy Alliance. Where I felt bewildered and confused, I now feel crystal clear. Unholy Alliance is such a great book.

It begins with the leftist movements at the beginning of the 20th Century, and works its way up to the present day, exploring the anti-American attitude of these movements in detail. Horowitz shows that the enemies of the US back then are largely the same group today, operating under the same misperceptions, making the same mistakes, and pursuing the same impossible utopia.

Individual chapters are included on the Patriot Act (I was persuaded that it is a GOOD thing); the democratic flip-flop on Iraq once G.W. Bush implemented what they agreed with Clinton needed to be done; the driving components of the current anti-war movement; as well as chapters on individual personalities who are major spokespeople of the Left. Horowitz covers a lot of ground, and he covers it concisely and clearly. Unholy Alliance is richly informative without ever being boring or plodding.

This book is so illuminating that I simply cannot do justice to it here. I love people who reason so clearly that they help me get my own reasoning clear. Horowitz is just that type of person! In the terrain of mindless clichés (no-blood-for-oil, etc.), he is a breath of real fresh air.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Progress, Actually -- ...in Iraq, which is why the Democrats have forgotten about benchmarks.

[mware]

Might as well watch this video from youtube.

Skip over to the 3:40 minute point for the good stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzuC825pm6Y

[peeps36]

Helen could give good advice on being fat and disgustingly ugly but she has no business telling a 4 Star general how to fight a war. We don't need war fighting advice from liberals who never saw a fight they didn't run away from. Let the queer eye liberals do the shopping and the men in the military do the fighting.Thank you.

[Syncro]

Funny video

Matthews showed the part about Obama on hardball earlier today.

His comment after the clip showed was somethin' like Well, I guess they are for Obama (SNL)

[Fred Nerks]

http://www.watsoninstitute.org/events_detail.cfm?id=710

Excerpt:

From 1977 to 1981, General Odom was Military Assistant to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs, Zbigniew Brzezinski. As a member of the National Security Council staff, he worked upon strategic planning, Soviet affairs, nuclear weapons policy, telecommunications policy, and Persian Gulf security issues...

http://foundation1.org/wp-en/2008/02/28/the-brzezinskiobama-axis/

Excerpt:

Brzezinski views history through the lens of Marxism, which, despite its atheism, has much in common with Islam. Both Communism and Islam are universalistic ideologies that reject the idea of the nation-state. Both do not regard adherence to treaties between nations as obligatory. Both Communism and Islam are militaristic and expansionist creeds that do not recognize international borders. Brzezinski’s globalism has become evident in Jimmy Carter. Under Brzezinski’s influence, Carter lowered the defense budget and pursued a soft line toward the Soviet Union. We can expect an Obama White House to pursue a very soft line toward Islam...

[freema]

12/17/98

SOME U-S OFFICIALS SAY THE OBJECT IS TO OVERTHROW THE IRAQI
RULER. THAT WOULD BE DESIRABLE, RESPONDS RETIRED GENERAL WILLIAM
ODUM, FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY WHO IS NOW
WITH THE HUDSON INSTITUTE (A POLICY THINK TANK). BUT HE BELIEVES
IT IS EASIER SAID THAN DONE:

// ODUM ACT //

I THINK THE ONLY WAY THAT SADDAM WILL GO IS IF WE TAKE
GROUND FORCES AND GO TO BAGHDAD AND CAPTURE HIM. IF YOU
REALLY WANT TO END THE SADDAM PROBLEM, YOU HAVE TO
OCCUPY IRAQ. AND UNTIL WE ARE WILLING TO DO THAT, I
THINK IT IS JUST SO MUCH TALK.

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/12/17/981217-react-l.htm

[Hardastarboard]

President Harry Truman and President Lyndon B. Johnson, who both understood that war was too important to be left to the generals in the field.

Actually, LBJ was largely the reason we didn't just kick the living sh!t out of the NVA. He wanted to meddle, picking bombing targets from the White House 8,000 miles away.