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 ...
McCain and Lindsey Graham are supporting the President. So no, all of those remaining aren't on the list.
I also agree. I've never listened to him and when I tried I had to turn him off after 5 minutes.
Soon :)
In the last 2 years, I was really disappointed with some of the big talk radio show hosts who are on our side. I hope they have realized that they have contributed to the demoralizing of many Republican voters and that they will not do this anymore in the future.
So count back with me...Any military action against Iran MUST be concluded several months before the 2008 election..thus you're looking at late spring, early summer 2007 as the latest possible date. So let's say May/June 2007. You'll need several months to position forces, especially naval, to deal with possible Iranian attempts to disrupt the Straits of Hormuz...So the final decision must be made late in 2007..
Was he standing on a milk crate or sitting in a child's booster seat?
Yes, but the terrorists in Iraq are not the ones who attacked us on 9-11. Osama and al-Queda attacked us.
/s
LOL.
Try saying anything like that on one of the daily Vanity/Hannity threads.
That Hannity fan club on those threads have the thinest, most brittle skin of ALL FReepers, Rush's thread fans are right behind them.
;-)
Oh well.
I wish Mark Steyn would take over for one of them. He was substituting one day for Rush and was BRILLIANT, humorous, and very easy to listen to!
Mark Steyn was excellent subbing for Rush. Hannity's whole show is catch phrases and talking about what's coming up on the show in the next hour, next week or next month. Ugh.
In my opinion he is the best pundit in the country right now. Bar none.
Articulate, good sense of humor, and supremely intelligent.
No ranting, no vulgarity, just an all around good guy who loves freedom and America.
You had to have seen David Gergin wetting his pants over the president's mere suggestion that Iran and Syria best knock it off.
Oh my, the President threatened them. Oh my, the sky is falling.
If it wasn't so serious it would have been hilarious.
LOL
Banging head on desk!
The carriers have to be in place in case Iran does something stupid...which is always possible..but that doesn't signify that our clock is now running. The greatest fear I have with Iran is the lack of command and control..IOW could some fringe element try to launch..
The louder and the more ugly the Rats scream and condemn the President's strategy, the more I am all for it. They just cannot get over that they are not in charge of the WH, that "their guy" is not CINC. And I say GREAT! Now get over it!
If he were the main spokeman/talkshow host of the conservative side, we'd have a much better chance to win elections.
Hannity and Rush are too sanctimonious, self-righteous and needlessly confrontational.
All this posturing by Imanutjob is simply that, posturing by a loon.
Add to that The View, Jerry Springer, and a whole list of other mind-numbing, self-idolizing, anti-character building garbage and we are left with an electorate incapable of understanding the simple fundamentals of what we are faced with in this country. I am like you...I think we are doomed also, but I'll go down fighting as well!
When I hear Hannity all I hear is a Rush wannabe using cheap one liners to get people's attention. The last thing I heard him say was to tell everyone to go buy a hugh SUV and thank God for all the wealth He has given us.
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.