|
Post by phinehas on Feb 1, 2007 19:10:13 GMT -5
news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070201/pl_nm/iraq_bush_budget_dcTime for the Liberals to put up or shut up. If the war in Iraq is unjustified, a quagmire, a war we can't win and a war were one more American soldier's death, to fight it, should not occur......then don't authorize the spending. Simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Feb 3, 2007 17:03:57 GMT -5
I learned a few more interesting tidbits over the past few days.
How many times have you heard prominent Democrat party leaders bemoan the 'fact' that Bush is 'ignoring' the Iraqi Study Group?
Well, turns out that they're lying.
I caught Jim Baker answering Congressional questions on CSPAN and Baker said that, far from ignoring their advice, President Bush was following their advocacy of a 'troops surge' PRECISELY.
The ISG stated three conditions under which a surge would be warranted:
1) the surge was a temporary increase, not open-ended
2) the surge was recommended by the commanders in Iraq
3) the surge provided troops to accelerate the training of Iraqis to take over their own security responsibilities.
President Bush's plans does EXACTLY THAT and Mr. Baker said so explicitly.
Also, how many times have you heard Democrats (and the MSM- as if there is really a difference anymore) that Bush is ignoring the advice of his commanders on the ground in Iraq?
Yep...another lie.
General Casey actually supports the troop surge.
General Petraeus said that he supports the troop surge in his confirmation testimony before Congress, which subsequently voted to approve him to command our forces in Iraq by a vote of 81-0.
Now if Democrats really opposed the plan, why on earth would they vote to approve the conformation of the man who wrote the book on counterinsurgency (literally, I might add) and who supports a plan to which Democrats are- supposedly- against?
An aside- I believe that Democrats correctly recognized the primacy, Constitutionally-speaking- of a President's powers as Commander in Chief during wartime and thus felt obligated to approve the President's choice of commanders. Perhaps this is a welcome sign that they will behave in accordance to the Constitution and not try any backdoor efforts to undermine the effort, such as to 'cap' the number of troops or to withold any funds earmarked for the surge.
Welp...that's a lie as well.
|
|