Dems Bring Back Surrender Bill

[red states rule]

Once again, Dems are bringing back their Surrender At All Costs bill in an attempt to appease both the terrorists and their base


Senate eyes Iraq pullout once again
By Sean Lengell
July 11, 2007

Senate Democrats yesterday called for withdrawing most U.S. troops from Iraq by April 30 — less than two months after a similar measure was soundly defeated — as the White House dispatched its top war advisers to Capitol Hill to embolden Republican allies.

Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said setting a troop withdrawal timetable will force Iraqi political leaders to take responsibility for their own country.

"The legislation that we are proposing ... would give commanders the flexibility to the pace of reductions and the units to be reduced, and I think it's the appropriate way to go," said Sen. Jack Reed, Rhode Island Democrat, who co-sponsored the measure with Mr. Levin.

Republicans leaders called the maneuver premature, saying that President Bush's surge strategy is starting to pay dividends and that any major changes shouldn't occur before Gen. David H. Petraeus provides his September report on the state of the war.

"September is the time when this issue will be reopened. Why we have to go through with it again in the month of July is frankly a puzzlement to me," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.

A key progress report being briefed to lawmakers tomorrow will say that the Iraqi government has not met any of its targets for reform, which include establishing laws to disarm militias, giving equal legal protections to all sects and sharing oil revenue among the Kurds, Shi'ites and Sunnis.

But the report said some progress has been made in about a half-dozen areas of the country, including reducing violence in Anbar province, according to the Associated Press
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070711/NATION/107110083/1001

 

[maineman]

turning over security operations in Iraq to the military forces of the legitimate Iraqi government that we have personally trained is surrendering to no one.

who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army?

 

[red states rule]

turning over security operations in Iraq to the military forces of the legitimate Iraqi government that we have personally trained is surrendering to no one.

who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army?

The terrorists have been pulling for the Dems surrender plan since the 06 election

Dems are trying once again to reward them for the patience and support

 

[maineman]

The terrorists have been pulling for the Dems surrender plan since the 06 election

Dems are trying once again to reward them for the patience and support

you didn't answer my questions.

try again:who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army together?

 

[red states rule]

you didn't answer my questions.

try again:who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army together?

Dems say Summer time is Surrender time

I guess Dems believe if the US gives upa nd leaves Iraq - terrorists will stop hating and attacking America and Americans

 

[maineman]

you didn't answer my questions.

try again:who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army together?

one last try:

can you answer these questions?

 

[red states rule]

one last try:

can you answer these questions?

You have asked the same questions many times -and they have been answered many times

Whenever you have to defend the Dems surrender plan - you fall back ont he same old tired talking points

 

[maineman]

You have asked the same questions many times -and they have been answered many times

Whenever you have to defend the Dems surrender plan - you fall back ont he same old tired talking points

you have never answered them.

you still stick by your goofy scenario where AQ in Iraq will, somehow, defeat the sunni insurgent militias, and then will defeat the Iraqi army, and then, with the help of the shiites in Iran, they will defeat Sadr's Mahdi shiite army and then ask Iran to come over and rule Iraq with them...but if they ask for too much power, Iran will kill them..... and you still stick by that goofiness even when the reports come out that show that AQ in Iraq is targeting Iran. Why can't you ever stand and defend anything?

 

[red states rule]

you have never answered them.

you still stick by your goofy scenario where AQ in Iraq will, somehow, defeat the sunni insurgent militias, and then will defeat the Iraqi army, and then, with the help of the shiites in Iran, they will defeat Sadr's Mahdi shiite army and then ask Iran to come over and rule Iraq with them...but if they ask for too much power, Iran will kill them..... and you still stick by that goofiness even when the reports come out that show that AQ in Iraq is targeting Iran. Why can't you ever stand and defend anything?

Keep your white flag handy for the next Dem rally MM

Meanwhile, the troops are ignored who want to finixh the mission

 

[maineman]

Keep your white flag handy for the next Dem rally MM

Meanwhile, the troops are ignored who want to finixh the mission

run away from that goofy stuff. If I had ever put out a scenario like that, I'd run away from it too!

 

[red states rule]

turning over security operations in Iraq to the military forces of the legitimate Iraqi government that we have personally trained is surrendering to no one.

who is this "enemy" we are supposedly "surrendering" to?

is this "enemy" more powerful than shiite militias and sunni militias and the iraqi army?

The terrorists will take over, the slaughter will begin, they will have a country as a base of operations, and oil money to fund their terrorist plans

Meanwhile, Dems wil stick their head in the sand and ignore the problem

 

[maineman]

The terrorists will take over, the slaughter will begin, they will have a country as a base of operations, and oil money to fund their terrorist plans

Meanwhile, Dems wil stick their head in the sand and ignore the problem

the handful of deadenders that the sunnis are beating now in anbar province will take over the entire country? with Iran's help? and defeat the Iraqi army and the mahdi army even though both of those organizations vastly outnumber the AQ enemy? really? please explain how!

 

[red states rule]

the handful of deadenders that the sunnis are beating now in anbar province will take over the entire country? with Iran's help? and defeat the Iraqi army and the mahdi army even though both of those organizations vastly outnumber the AQ enemy? really? please explain how!

Didn't libs say the same thing about Viet Nam as millions were slaughterd?

 

[maineman]

Didn't libs say the same thing about Viet Nam as millions were slaughterd?

AQ was never in Vietnam

 

[maineman]

the handful of deadenders that the sunnis are beating now in anbar province will take over the entire country? with Iran's help? and defeat the Iraqi army and the mahdi army even though both of those organizations vastly outnumber the AQ enemy? really? please explain how!


don't run away. explain your position. explain how the terrorists will take over given the fact that they are vastly outnumbered by sunnis, and shiites and the Iraqi army

 

[red states rule]

AQ was never in Vietnam

But the same thing will happen

Will Dems take the blame when it happens - or will they blame Bush as they do for eveything else?

 

[maineman]

But the same thing will happen

you keep saying that, but somehow, you never can quite explain how that will happen..... why not try to answer my questions above and we can get started.

 

[maineman]

this...right here:

the handful of deadenders that the sunnis are beating now in anbar province will take over the entire country? with Iran's help? and defeat the Iraqi army and the mahdi army even though both of those organizations vastly outnumber the AQ enemy? really? please explain how!


don't run away. explain your position. explain how the terrorists will take over given the fact that they are vastly outnumbered by sunnis, and shiites and the Iraqi army

 

[red states rule]

you keep saying that, but somehow, you never can quite explain how that will happen..... why not try to answer my questions above and we can get started.

so given the tolerance of the terrorists - you believe those stood with the US will not be killed?

 

[maineman]

so given the tolerance of the terrorists - you believe those stood with the US will not be killed?

so...you ARE continuing to say that the small force of AQ in Iraq will prevail and beat the sunni insurgents, the mahdi shiite army and the Iraqi military?

Have I got that right?