yep, I do know the answer, sad and revealing as it is…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Todd asks the Kossacks: “are you so blind with your Bush hating, that you will risk taking this country down just to ensure that Bush is a failure?”

You know the answer. And it goes further than that. They are not “risking” taking down the U.S. THAT is their plan.

Their intention is to so emascualte the U.S. military by forcing a defeat in Iraq that we will never again be able to gather the political will to lead the world, or use our military for anything other than meals on wheels.

These left wing kooks hate the military as much as they hate Bush and want to place all us “Little Eichmans” at the mercy of the U.N.

They either don’t realize, and probably don’t care, that such a plan would place us at the mercy of China or any other aggressive power. But in their minds, we deserve to be #2.

What must really gall these losers is that the Democrats, whom they falsely thought won the 2006 elections on the basis of pulling the U.S. out of Iraq NOW, will leave troops in Iraq for as long as it takes.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

USA TODAY reports:
“Major attacks decline in Iraq”
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070813/1a_lede13.art.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Hmmm, no comments from Sen. Harry “The War Is Already Lost” Reid; Not a whew or a congrats, or anything.

DNC silence regarding success speaks volumes.

The only thing they fear more than success in Iraq is success brought about by President Bush’s leadership.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

DAMMIT! Now there’s peace in Ramadi?!

Rove is brilliant!

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/011320.php#comments

Like or Dislike: 0  0

DemocRats are Traitors.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Good and accurate analysis, Todd.

My take is that the Dems and wobbly Republicans are actually going to admit that the surge (more properly Operation Phantom Thunder) is “sort of working”. But what they’ll do is say that the Iraqis are blowing it because they can’t make political progress at the national level, therefore so sorry but we must leave ASAP the consequences be damned.

I think they’re wrong, because 1) only a military victory will lead to political progress, 2) there’s lots of progress, it’s just on a local level, and 3) most of our “benchmarks” etc are artificial and designed more to suit Washington’s priorities more than Baghdad’s, and 4) it takes any new government time to get it’s act together – look at the early days of our republic for pete’s sake.

But it is the case they’re going to try and make.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I would trust Osama or Saddam before I would trust Turbin Durbin. At least they are a true to ‘something’ and Turbin is a traitor to everything.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I recorded the Fox special on the Surge and Politics. It’s pretty good and I’ll upload some video if you’re interested.

I think the interview with Dems Dick Durbin and Bob Casey show that they are pulling for defeat in Iraq. That is not an exaggeration. They went to Iraq on recess to criticize the Iraqi Parliament’s recess and pose a counteroffensive against the success of the surge. They admitted the surge was working BUT…. we need to pull out anyway making all their valiant work a total waste of time and life.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

One move chess players.

Ranting away about how doomed the war in Iraq is, but at the same time giving a full on rah rah rah to Democrats
1) Congressional Democrats who have effectively done NOTHING either win the war or facilitate the retreat (and yes, retreat is a defeat). Maybe that’s why the Democrats’ Congress is polling at a whopping 3% when Americans are asked if they approve of Congress’ handling of the war
2) Dem Presidential candidates who have pledged to keep tens of thousands of forces in Iraq if elected (referring to Senators Clinton, Obama, and Edwards as they’re the only 3 that have a chance at the nomination let alone the Oval Office).

So, why is this war still W’s, neocons’, and Republicans when it was authorized, promoted, and supported by Democrats, continued by a Democratic Party controlled Congress, and there are pledges to continue it if a Dem is elected President?

Could it be that it’s easier to point fingers at the Republicans than it is to really examine the unusually bi-partisan origins, nature, and future of the war in Iraq?

OR, could it be that those who rant and rove about how the war is W’s, neocon’s, Republican etc are only acting like one-move chess players and only seeing the past or the here and now as opposed to thinking a mere 1 move ahead?

That one move…is when General Petraeus reports (as is already being reported by even the msm) that the surge is showing success;
that sending more troops to Iraq=less violence, and
that every time troop levels were dropped for political reason, violence has escalated.

BDS at KOS? Noooo, never. (rolleyes)

Like or Dislike: 0  0