JCS...Change of strategy needed.

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bullypulpit, Dec 20, 2006.

  1. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    After meeting on December 13th with the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon, Chimpy McPresident and Darth Cheney were informed by the JCS that,

    <blockquote>The chiefs do not favor adding significant numbers of troops to Iraq, said sources familiar with their thinking, but see strengthening the Iraqi army as pivotal to achieving some degree of stability. They also are pressing for a much greater U.S. effort on economic reconstruction and political reconciliation. - <i><a href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/13/AR2006121301379.html>The Washington Post</a></i></blockquote>

    This in contradiction to Chimpy's, and various neocon, chicken-hawk talking-heads, desire to increase troop levels in Iraq. The time for a military solution in Iraq is past. The only realistic solutions are political...not military.

    But since Chimpy has repeatedly claimed to listen to his generals and field officers, will he listen to advice which so pointedly runs counter to his stated desires? My guess is no. His own underlying cognitive difficulties and psychopathologies will not allow this. But what else would you call doing the same thing over and over with the expectation of a different result but insanity? (edited 12/20 @ 0802)
     
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    Cool--pull out all the troops and you democrats head on over there with yor briefcases and entourages. tell em to be nice to each other and to kick out Iranians, Syians, and Al queada.
     
  3. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    BTW---have em fix the Israel thingy too-----since we don't have troops there I bet the politicians can accomplish this one easy !!! :doubt:
     
  4. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    WashPost Interviews Bush, Demands He Bend to Will of Democrats, Er, The People
    Posted by Tim Graham on December 20, 2006 - 07:32.
    President Bush submitted to a 25-minute interview Tuesday with the three Washington Post White House correspondents: Peter Baker, Michael Fletcher, and Michael Abramowitz. The transcript in today's Post leaves the definite impression it was another game of asking "when will you submit to the will of the Democrats, er, the people?" The tone of questioning suggests Bush is denying the reality that America is now in the capable hands of a MoveOn.org majority, and demands that he "listen" to their wish list, since his wishes are no longer viable:

    Given the election results, is increasing the troop level in Iraq even a viable possibility or option?

    Yes, Mike, all options are viable.

    – given the political will out there?

    Well, all options are viable. I think what the people want is -- they want a couple of things. They want to see Democrats and Republicans work together to achieve a common objective, and they want us to win in Iraq....

    But the election results seemed people wanted to bring the venture in Iraq to closure. That seemed to be the strong lesson. And what indications are there that you're actually listening to that sentiment?

    Oh, Mike, look, I want to achieve the objective....There's not a lot of people saying, "Get out now." Most Americans are saying, "We want to achieve the objective."

    But there are a lot of people who are saying, "Let's get out with a phased deployment over a certain period of time."

    If they felt -- if that leads to victory, it needs to be seriously considered. And I'm considering all options and listening very carefully to a lot of good people who have got different opinions about how to proceed.

    The Posties also tried to force the president to acknowledge we've lost Iraq, that it's a "fiasco," to quote one of the reporter/authors at the Post. Bush explained that he is speaking to four audiences when he talks about progress on the war front: the first is the American people. But the second is the enemy, the third is the Iraqi people, and the fourth is the troops. He wants to send a message of determination and resolve. Then he turned to the "objective" press:

    Anyway, you just need to know that's who I'm speaking to when I speak. And to you, of course. You're the objective filter through which my -- (Laughter.)

    I suspect your message gets out. (Laughter.)

    I do want to say something about the press. I hope you realize that, one, I enjoy the relationship, and two, know it is vital for my presidency. You can't exist without me, and I can't exist without you. And I generally respect the hard work of the press corps. I don't necessarily generally respect every word you write, but nevertheless, I do respect the fact that you're a hardworking group of people seeking the truth. And we're necessary for each other. And that relationship can either be a positive relationship or a suspicious, harmful relationship. And I have worked hard to make it a positive relationship. And I think it is, generally, I do believe it is. And I bear no ill will, and I don't think you do, either.

    We appreciate that, and you've certainly been good for business --

    Good. That's what decision-makers do, Peter, people who seize the moment and make decisions to lead give people things to write about.

    I suspect the liberal base of the Washington Post's audience won't like Peter Baker suggesting Bush has been "good for business." They'll suggest he's been horrible for the country, regardless of the Washington Post Company bottom line.

    http://newsbusters.org/node/9759
     
  5. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    That's not an option, yet. John Murtha's plan seems the most feasible one. Withdraw to those bordering Gulf states, which will still allow US troops on their soil, and Kurdistan. Then bring in the states bordering Iraq...Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Kuwait, <i>et al</i>, to the table to help secure the peace between the factions in Iraq, and quash Al Qaeda. America can't go this alone, but that is the path this Administration is setting America on, and we will pay the cost for decades to come.
     
  6. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w77sLtz754[/ame]
     
  7. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    not an option ?? why??
     
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    What's the hesitation, Bully? I'm sure the dems can get this coalition going right now. Time's a ticking--people are dying--now you want to drag it out ??
     
  9. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,544
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    why do people think we can negotiate with regimes that want us dead?
     
  10. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Given that Chimpy and Co launched this war of choice on the a tissue of half-truths and lies, they must do everything in their power to see to it that the Iraqi people have a fighting chance and a peaceful society.

    If that involves "...with regimes that want us dead...", so be it. We negotiated with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War, we negotiated with the North Vietnamese. Negotiation is the process of coming to agreement with those you disagree with. If you only listen to the cozening of those who only say what you want to hear, reality always come up and bites you on the ass...sometimes fatally.
     

Share This Page