JCS...Change of strategy needed.

[Bullypulpit]

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)

 

[dilloduck]

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.

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.

 

[dilloduck]

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.

BTW---have em fix the Israel thingy too-----since we don't have troops there I bet the politicians can accomplish this one easy !!!

 

[red states rule]

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

 

[Bullypulpit]

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.

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.

 

[red states rule]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w77sLtz754[/ame]

 

[dilloduck]

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.

not an option ?? why??

 

[dilloduck]

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 ??

 

[Avatar4321]

why do people think we can negotiate with regimes that want us dead?

 

[Bullypulpit]

not an option ?? why??

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.

 

[dilloduck]

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.

I wanna see you negotiate with the Turks after you announce that our troops will be based in Kurdistan !! Really Bully, which of these neighbors do you trust enough to hold up thier end of the deal? "Hey Mr. Laden, come out of your cave--we got an offer for ya ! "

 

[Stephanie]

Well nothing to worry about.....
A couple of kneepad Senators are over right now.......Kissing...I mean NEGOTIATING...

I'm sure they'll negotiate our safety, just like they did, during the Clinton yrs..

 

[glockmail]

...
...

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)

You are such a fool on this issue. The overall plan is probably to take out Iran and Syria. You Liberals and your terrorists buddies won't know what hit them when this happens.

Rummy did his part, and is now comfortably retired. The new guy is an ex CIA director. Does that tell you anything?

 

[Bullypulpit]

You are such a fool on this issue. The overall plan is probably to take out Iran and Syria. You Liberals and your terrorists buddies won't know what hit them when this happens.

Rummy did his part, and is now comfortably retired. The new guy is an ex CIA director. Does that tell you anything?

I'm the fool? You should really think about what you're saying. The US military is so overstretched now that the idea of "taking out Iran and Syria" is ludicrous, if not outright delusional. All Rummy did was screw up an already bad situation. As for Bob Gates, the "New Guy" you couldn't even name, he's one of Poppy Bush's operatives. Gods know, we've needed an adult in this administration since it came to power in 2000.

And, I don't have any "terrorist buddies" ya little weenie. That accusation is as empty as your pin-head.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm the fool? You should really think about what you're saying. The US military is so overstretched now that the idea of "taking out Iran and Syria" is ludicrous, if not outright delusional. All Rummy did was screw up an already bad situation. As for Bob Gates, the "New Guy" you couldn't even name, he's one of Poppy Bush's operatives. Gods know, we've needed an adult in this administration since it came to power in 2000.

And, I don't have any "terrorist buddies" ya little weenie. That accusation is as empty as your pin-head.

How about compromising Syria and Iran----you like that better? Exactly what do you think Gates is going to do. Play "lets make a deal" with Iran and Syria?

 

[Gunny]

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)

Do you EVER think before you type? The criticism that there aren't enough troops has come from the LEFT for the past couple of years. So the President decides to at least temprorarily increase troop level (which also blows your "stay the course" accusations as well), and that's wrong too.

The real truth here is that it's lose/lose with you libs, period. Y'all are ridiculous.

 

[glockmail]

I'm the fool? You should really think about what you're saying. The US military is so overstretched now that the idea of "taking out Iran and Syria" is ludicrous, if not outright delusional. All Rummy did was screw up an already bad situation. As for Bob Gates, the "New Guy" you couldn't even name, he's one of Poppy Bush's operatives. Gods know, we've needed an adult in this administration since it came to power in 2000.

And, I don't have any "terrorist buddies" ya little weenie. That accusation is as empty as your pin-head.

I can see my lesson to you of the reality of the situation went completely through your empty skull without touching a single synapse.