The anti-war organizations recently met at a K street to discuss why they have failed to end the Iraq war. The groups have been spending millions lobbying for legislation including anything from time lines and deadlines, to ending funding. All with the goal of defeat for the United States. There have been 70+ attempts by Congress to pass legislation along this order and ALL have failed to achieve the votes needed to pass and then sustain a veto. So much for the “mandate of the voters”, another lie from the democrat party, the voters only wanted change that would bring about victory not retreat and defeat.
The meeting came to consensus that they did not have the votes to end the war. The new message would be “no endless war” and they felt this would tag the pro-war republicans as wanting a never ending war. This is where Mrs. Clinton came up with the co-sponsered bill between her and Obama that would prevent the Administration from entering into long term military agreements with Iraq.
“No endless war”, no way, how intelligent.Let me make sure I have this right, when we start a war there is going to be and end, wow.
Just face it the anti-war effort FAILED and the country will be better off. Politico article
Filed under: National Secruity, News and Views Tagged: | 2008 presidential primary, 2008 presidential race, anti-terrorism, anti-war, anti-war failure, anti-war legislation, anti-war mandate, barack, barack obama, clinton, congress, congressional failure, deadline, democrat, democratic, democratic presidential race, end war, funding, hillary, hillary clinton, Iraq, iraq deadline, iraq war, k street, lobbying, moveon.org, obama, political, politics, protest, republican, republican presidential race, terrorism, war, war deadline, war funding, war on terror, war on terrorism
The country will be better off fighting a war of attrition in a country that has little value to us? Right…
And if there is going to be an end to this war, when will it be? Five years? 10? We’ve been at it for almost five already. And what is there to show for it? A weak and useless native government that’s only now allowing Ba’ath Party members back in? An infrastructure plagued by insurgents who weren’t there before we invaded? 4000 dead American soldiers?
When something you do isn’t going properly, you change your approach. No rational person can say that our mission in Iraq is going the way it should. Why did we even go in? Ostensibly, it was to find WMDs. Failed at than, so we decided to free Iraq from Saddam. That was a mix of success and failure. Indeed, we deposed him and ended his regime. On the other hand, we threw the entire country into anarchy by completely dismantling the government. Now there is an elected government run by Iraqis. What more is there to do? They need to learn to run and protect their own country, and they can’t do that if American soldiers have to do the dirty work.
The anti-war movement failed because the American people are idiots. They want victory in a war that has no clear objective. They want to defeat an enemy that is as formless as an idea. Hell, sometimes I wonder if they even know what they want. And Congress…well, it hasn’t been useful since the midterm elections. Face it: there is no easy way to end this war. Either we stay in forever, or we are forced to pull out. It’s Vietnam all over again.
The fact remains that moveon.org and all of its soldiers admitted defeat at the recent K street meeting. Your rant also admits this fact. Now the argument that Iraq war was wrong. To admit this would be to suspend the facts of history. Sadam used biological weapons on it neighbor and its own people trying to wipe out a race, genocide. Sadam invaded Kuwait. Sadam attacked Israel. Sadam committed the worlds worst biological disaster burning the oil fields and dumping the piplines into the Gulf. Sadam systematically raped his own people. Sadam defied 18 UN resolutions. Sadam paid $25K to every suicide bommer family that attacked Israel. Sadam tried every day to shoot down our planes. Sadam was cheating “oil for food” deal. The US Congress gave the President authorization to use force.
I t was Sadam’s time to be dealt with. The Iraqi people dealt with Sadam and his sons by hanging them. Story over.
But we didn’t go in with the objective to depose Saddam. That was a by-product of the search for WMDs. Saddam should have been dealt with during the First Gulf War, when he was actually being the aggressor. By invading when we did, we came off as the aggressor. This could have been handled much, much better.
If the administration had said right out that we were going in to finish what we started during the the Gulf War, I would have supported it. But that wasn’t the stated reason. Besides, now that Saddam has been executed, why are we still there? Again, Iraq needs to learn self-rule. We can’t hold it up forever.
That is just wrong, regime change was a U.S. policy and a policy of the coalition of the willing. The first Gulf War did not have a willing coalition. Iraq is learning to self rule alot faster than we did, it took us 7 years to get a Constitution. The Iraq army is standing up and providences are being handed over. Iraqi’s by the ten of thousands are aligning with the Iraqi and U.S. forces to defeat Al Qaeda and the insurgents from Iran. The surge is a success!
It took us 7 years because we did it all on our own. Iraq practically had theirs written for them.
As for the surge being a success…if it worked, why is the government requesting even more soldiers to be sent to Iraq? I thought the surge was supposed to be a one-time deal.
The surge is already scheduled to be drawn down. 9 of 18 providences are already turned over to the Iraqi’s. An Albar providence, which the old media said would never happen, al Qaeda would never fall, is scheduled for march. All of Iraq’s providences to be turned over by the end of the year!
Nothing could make me happier than to be wrong about this, but I don’t think the Iraq war is going to have a happy ending. Good sometimes comes from evil, but not always, and not necessarily now. It was evil to attack Iraq. Wars of aggression are wrong. Pre-emptive strikes are wrong. They are against international law. Even Hitler pretended the Poles attacked first.
We attacked Iraq ostensibly to disarm a man we were responsible for arming, to punish him for using the poison gas we supplied to him, to hang him for crimes we encouraged him to commit.
And now we cannot leave because, unless we secure the country, we will have failed in our clandestine but veritable mission: to control Iraq’s oil fields.
thornypath.com
Hello webmaster
I would like to share with you a link to your site
write me here preonrelt@mail.ru