Posted on 01/10/2007 2:30:20 PM PST by STARWISE
Unswayed by anti-war passions, President Bush will send 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq and build the American presence there toward its highest level to quell worsening bloodshed. The move puts Bush on a collision course with the new Democratic Congress and runs counter to advice from some senior generals.
Set to announce his decisions in a prime-time speech Wednesday night, Bush was to acknowledge making major mistakes in Iraq, primarily failing to deploy enough U.S. soldiers and demand more Iraqi troops and cooperation to confront the country's near-anarchy.
In advance of Bush's address, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said U.S. military operations have been "handcuffed by political interference by Iraqi leadership" — but now will proceed under rules allowing troops to confront Shiite militias as well as Sunni insurgents.
(snip)
The new Democratic leaders of Congress met with Bush and complained afterward that their opposition to a buildup had been ignored. "This is the third time we are going down this path. Two times this has not worked," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Why are they doing this now? That question remains."
Senate and House Democrats are arranging votes urging the president not to send more troops. While lacking the force of law, the measures would compel Republicans to go on record as either bucking the president or supporting an escalation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Carried live online by: C-span
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I was hoping but not expecting that Bush would be announcing the Raid on Iran to take out Iranian offensive capability. Anything less is just More Of Same. Iraq is a sideshow that has been turned into the Main Event while the major bad guy is sitting across the border building nukes and sending warriors into Iraq from an effectively unlimited well and Israel is in its last days. What is the use of building a wall of forces surrounding Iran if Iran is sacrosanct? Chaos in Iraq is not a real problem. We can use Iraq effectively, peaceful or not, as staging against Iran or just to close some loopholes for Iran as we drive against Iran's offensive and nuclear potential. Why have we made Iraq the be-all and end-all of strategy and tactics? So long as Iran exists unflattened nothing we accomplish in Iraq will last past the removal of our troops and nothing we accomplish in Iraq will stop Iran from nuking Tel Aviv. Yes it is Viet Nam all over again with much worse consequences when the Democrats force us to finally run away. Iran is the USSR and China of the 60s and Ha noi, too, but without the Communists' aversion to suicide and with no compunctions about launching nuclear war.
That's it exactly.
I bookmarked your thread. You're so good about chronicling things like this. Makes me wish I found FR sooner. Thank you :)
How am I second quessing?
We loved it....in fact Jonathan called at the beginning of DICK's rebuttal and I missed it...I'd rather talk to Jonathan than listen to that traitor.......Hubby and son liked the speech and love their CinC...pray for our troops in harms way both overseas and here.
I'm a married woman, so don't get the wrong idea, but she isn't even much to look at.
OK, I accept :)
We are still there.
"If not for the Iraq war, why did we lose the Senate and the House?"
I know we lost Muslim and Hispanic votes. Do we abandon principles just to get votes? I don't know, wouldn't we wind up like the Democrats? They have no principles to speak of.
Well laugh all you want. McCain stands with the Pres in re: to this issue.
I hope your mom will put in a word to the man upstairs to make me as patient.
God bless her and your family. I bet she told you wonderful stories of days past. My great-great grandmother raised me, she had a long and fruitful life as well, it was wonderful... and I thank God for her.
Did you listen to the speech, read the articles about the new way forward?
Miss Marple, anyone who blames what happened after Katrina on President Bush is so unintelligent that they aren't worth the time of day. Of course, that's just my opinion. ;)
A lot of Republicans refused to vote for Republicans. I wasn't one of them tho...
"I'm on the same exact path you're on"
Thank you! I was hoping that someone would reply. That means he has 90 days before he has to report to the morons in Congress and ask for money. Also means AF and other services are going to be taking surge money out of pocket for awhile.
I say cut flying hours for any Congressman that wants to take an AF plane and cut the State Department from using AF planes and crews. Takes the State Department forever to reimburse. Clip their wings -- all of them and save money for our troops.
Most people don't realize when the AF flies anyone including the President, they get reimbursed but it takes some agencies forever to reimburse so they are caught with expenses on the books waiting.
I say ground all unnecessary trips and allow the AF to support our troops!
Thanks see post #s 74 & 80 :)
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.