GOP senator predicts troop decrease in fall

[Gunny]

Sen. Jeff Sessions, a prominent conservative and supporter of the war in Iraq, yesterday said lawmakers "have to be realistic" about the surge of U.S. forces in Iraq and most likely will begin withdrawing those new forces after September.

cont ... http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070527-111503-2313r.htm

Sorry, but I must be completely missing the boat on this one. A 6-month "surge" will accomplish exactly WHAT?

 

[maineman]

about as little, long term, as a twelve month surge or a twenty-four month surge would.

I think the only consequences that Sessions is considering this surge would alter are domestic political consequences here at home.

In Iraq, I firmly believe that the bad guy are gonna "mix it up" whenever we decide to leave.... the only consequence that will be substantively different between our leaving in six months or leaving in two years will be the number of American casualties.

 

[Gunny]

about as little, long term, as a twelve month surge or a twenty-four month surge would.

I think the only consequences that Sessions is considering this surge would alter are domestic political consequences here at home.

In Iraq, I firmly believe that the bad guy are gonna "mix it up" whenever we decide to leave.... the only consequence that will be substantively different between our leaving in six months or leaving in two years will be the number of American casualties.

I could maybe see a 24-month increase, without telegraphing the time-limit issue to the enemy. Six months military-wise is barely enough time to stand-up and get into the field before withdrawing.

 

[Truthmatters]

They will probably make noises like they are going to do this for the upcoming election.

They will start pulling some into Afganistan for a short time to show the Iraq numbers are decreasing and then send them back right after the elections are over.

 

[Gunny]

They will probably make noises like they are going to do this for the upcoming election.

They will start pulling some into Afganistan for a short time to show the Iraq numbers are decreasing and then send them back right after the elections are over.

You OBVIOUSLY don't know a DAMNED thing about military deployment.

 

[no1tovote4]

cont ... http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070527-111503-2313r.htm

Sorry, but I must be completely missing the boat on this one. A 6-month "surge" will accomplish exactly WHAT?

The attempt is to give enough security that the training of Iraqi troops would be able to be sped up, thus allowing us to leave sooner.

Amazingly it was part of that report that the Ds were attempting to use to bash Bush with when it came out. Now that he is implementing ideas from that report they conveniently forget that he is doing as they advised.

 

[Gunny]

The attempt is to give enough security that the training of Iraqi troops would be able to be sped up, thus allowing us to leave sooner.

Amazingly it was part of that report that the Ds were attempting to use to bash Bush with when it came out. Now that he is implementing ideas from that report they conveniently forget that he is doing as they advised.

So much for THAT stance. They'll have to hurry up and alter it to reflect opposition to whatever Bush is doing.

I got money says before it's all over, they'll be blaming Bush for leaving Iraq.

 

[Truthmatters]

Only for not leaving earlier.

He wont leave it anyway.

He plans on leaving the mess to a Dem and blaming them for the mess left behind.

 

[CSM]

Only for not leaving earlier.

Hmmm...I guess we shall see.

He wont leave it anyway.

He's not there, the troops are. I bet they get pulled out sooner than later.

He plans on leaving the mess to a Dem and blaming them for the mess left behind. Well then it seems to me that if the Dems (who have all the answers) are afraid of that, they should nopt run in 08.

Whoever gets elected should be expected to provide whatever leadership is required to "fix the mess". If you are implying that the Dems cannot or will not do that, then why should we vote for ANY candidate from that party?

 

[TheStripey1]

cont ... http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070527-111503-2313r.htm

Sorry, but I must be completely missing the boat on this one. A 6-month "surge" will accomplish exactly WHAT?

Kill more americans and iraqis...

so uhhh, gunny? how long do you want the surge to go on? Longer than six months? Permanently? Wouldn't that then be called an escalation rather than a surge?

 

[TheStripey1]

So much for THAT stance. They'll have to hurry up and alter it to reflect opposition to whatever Bush is doing.

I got money says before it's all over, they'll be blaming Bush for leaving Iraq.

No, gunny... I blame him for entering Iraq in the first place.

 

[Gunny]

Kill more americans and iraqis...

so uhhh, gunny? how long do you want the surge to go on? Longer than six months? Permanently? Wouldn't that then be called an escalation rather than a surge?

I don't know that I particularly have been in favor of a "surge" to begin with. More troops using the same tactics isn't going to amount to much.

I am in favor if a change in tactics if it is we who are going to fight and/or stop this war. If we did it MY way it would definitely be called an escalation.

As it stands, I favor holding the Iraqi gov't to their word -- a gradual replacement of US forces with Iraqi forces.

 

[Gunny]

No, gunny... I blame him for entering Iraq in the first place.

Really?

I blame Saddam Hussein.

 

[Bullypulpit]

cont ... http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070527-111503-2313r.htm

Sorry, but I must be completely missing the boat on this one. A 6-month "surge" will accomplish exactly WHAT?

It is nothing more than a salve to George Bush's ego. The Pentagon is already planning to draw down troop levels this fall, so my question is, if the Bush administration is already making plans to reduce troop levels in the fall, why don't they do it now?

So Dubbyuh can say he faced down Congressional Democrats and "stuck by his guns". Between his ego and political maneuvering by both parties, alot more of our troops are going to die for nothing more than a game of political one-upsmanship.

All these fuckers need to whipped naked and howling into then wilderness.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Really?

I blame Saddam Hussein.

Saddam was a threat to no one outside his own borders. Every justification trotted out by the Bush administration for invading Iraq was flawed and deceptive, based on a mixture of the Administration's delusional thinking and cherry-picked, spun and fabricated-from-whole-cloth intel.

 

[CSM]

Saddam was a threat to no one outside his own borders. Every justification trotted out by the Bush administration for invading Iraq was flawed and deceptive, based on a mixture of the Administration's delusional thinking and cherry-picked, spun and fabricated-from-whole-cloth intel.

Hmmm...I guess the iran Iraq war was a hobby nad the invasion of Kuwait was "summer vacation". How could anyone think ill of Saddam with his history of peaceful coexistence?

 

[Shogun]

I bet no one in the world familiar with 20th century conflict could laugh at that same joke directed at the US of A....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I bet no one in the world familiar with 20th century conflict could laugh at that same joke directed at the US of A....

You realize that there are lots of pictures of LOTs of diplomats and politicians from a host of countries shaking Saddam's hand?

 

[maineman]

You realize that there are lots of pictures of LOTs of diplomats and politicians from a host of countries shaking Saddam's hand?

and you, of course, realize that Saddam was our buddy when he was fighting Iran?

 

[Shogun]

SNAP!


boy.. you just walked right into that one, didnt you gynosarge?