|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 10, 2007 17:16:28 GMT -5
Sorry, but his first caller on the subject today was right.
"Redeployment" was the Democrat's shorthand for "surrender" and it's architect and chief supporter was John "ABSCAM Jack" Murtha.
Now mebbe Matt can spin his viewpoint, saying that Murtha would never have intended the troops to actually re-enter the chaos that would take place in Iraq within minutes of the last helicopter leaving the Green Zone- and I suspect that that might indeed be what Murtha ultimately had planned- but "redeployment" is "redeployment".
Frankly, I'd have more respect for Matt if he just came out and advocated bringing the troops home tomorrow and admitted that he had agreed with the Defeatocrats all along. "Redeployment" is merely the martial equivalent of being "sort of pregnant".
|
|
|
Post by solinvictus on May 10, 2007 18:28:33 GMT -5
Yeah, euphemisms like "strategic redeployment" or "tactical withdrawal" or "planned re-allocation of forces" basically means you've decided the situation is untenable and you'd better get the hell out of Dodge.
|
|
|
Post by deovindice on May 28, 2007 12:48:36 GMT -5
Matt is not one to admit when he's wrong, meaning he's not always intellectually honest, but he is intelligent. I believe that Matt came to see how the war was packaged in Bush's statist agenda, and came to view it as wasteful and unwinnable. He then blamed the public for "having no stomach for war" and used this as a way out.
|
|
|
Post by billt on May 28, 2007 13:07:18 GMT -5
obviously matt wont admit to being wrong...when he claimed that $2 per unit profit was NOT any more than $1 profit per unit, honesty had left the debate!
the military is now being used as a police force between warring factions in iraq, that is NOT their job!
|
|
|
Post by deovindice on May 28, 2007 13:44:26 GMT -5
Which means that the Constitution is being further ignored in that the Posse Comitatus Act is being violated..............and in a foreign country at that!
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 29, 2007 10:04:26 GMT -5
deo-
Only if you want to grant the Iraqis United States Constitutional protections.
Is that a path you really want to start down?
|
|
|
Post by brandon on May 29, 2007 18:35:09 GMT -5
Matt is not one to admit when he's wrong, meaning he's not always intellectually honest, but he is intelligent. I believe that Matt came to see how the war was packaged in Bush's statist agenda, and came to view it as wasteful and unwinnable. He then blamed the public for "having no stomach for war" and used this as a way out. I think that he can be intellectually honest and change his mind at the same time. He's never one to bite his tongue when he believes something. Perhaps he's on the fence now that the war has become a long drawnout moneypit. Matt's not a flipflopper. However, I don't agree with blaming the American public either. If the American People believe that the government should pull out of the war, then who is our government to defy us? The government serves at our will. The government should not blame the citizenry for disagreeing with its policies. I didn't listen to the segment so I can only go by what you guys are saying, but I disagree with Matt's position - if such - that the American People are somehow to blame for the U.S.'s defeat.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 29, 2007 20:36:51 GMT -5
How did the American public come to oppose the war (if they really do so)?
Did they come to the conclusions themselves?
Or did the tactics of the Democrats, enhanced and repeated without challenge by their lapdogs in the MSM, literally force them to come to that conclusion?
I can't help but think that, if the MSM were as biased against WW2 as they have proven to be regarding Iraq, we'd all be speaking German east of the Rockies and Japanese west of them.
If the Dems and the MSM get their collective manties in a wad over losing 6 soldiers in a single day, what would they say about losing 600 or 6000, as happened at places like Normandy, Okinawa, Iwo Jima and a host of others?
Secondly, one must admit to a bit of admiration for the sheer hubris and arrogance of the Left.
They tell us that we must end the war now because "the American people demand it".
However, when it comes to abortion, they want the American people to leave that decision to them, even though MORE people oppose abortion on demand that oppose the Iraq war.
Democrats: do we listen to the people all of the time or only when you Dems agree with their conclusions?
|
|
|
Post by brandon on May 29, 2007 20:41:13 GMT -5
Once again here we are...
The answer to every debate: "The Democrats did it."
|
|
|
Post by richbrout on May 29, 2007 20:59:49 GMT -5
as opposed to " we are in there and we got to support the troops or we'll be fighting them here"
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 29, 2007 21:02:54 GMT -5
I guess you could say I'm Republican. More so than Democrat if we had only those 2 choices. But I've NEVER supported the idea that the Iraq/Afghanistan struggle is "keeping them busy" elsewhere. There is so much more involved here.
|
|
|
Post by deovindice on May 30, 2007 8:12:15 GMT -5
deo- What? That was really more of an attempt at levity than a serious statement. I was being a smartass. But then.............while it is not really a breach of our Constitution, it does mean we are operating outside of our own principles.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 30, 2007 14:06:36 GMT -5
deo-
My apologies.
It's just that we have a few here that DO want US constitutional priviledges extented to non-citizens.
At times it can prove difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 30, 2007 14:08:50 GMT -5
Once again here we are... The answer to every debate: "The Democrats did it." brandon- Yet again, you missed the point. Democrats listen to the people when polls tell them the people agree with the Democrats' position. Democrats do NOT listen to the people when polls tell them the people do NOT agree with the Democrats' position. I merely ask if the people's position on Iraq is "nature" or "nuture".
|
|
|
Post by bamagatr on Jun 3, 2007 12:58:01 GMT -5
Which means that the Constitution is being further ignored in that the Posse Comitatus Act is being violated..............and in a foreign country at that! Let's don't be comitatin' no posses around here, your hear?
|
|