’)Senate Republicans Pushing for a Plan on Ending the War in Iraq
The proposal on the Iraq war, from Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, and Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, would require the administration to provide extensive new quarterly reports to Congress on subjects like progress in bringing in other countries to help stabilize Iraq. The other appeals related to Iraq are nonbinding and express the position of the Senate.
The plan stops short of a competing Democratic proposal that moves toward establishing dates for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq. But it is built upon the Democratic approach and makes it clear that senators of both parties are increasingly eager for Iraqis to take control of their country in coming months and open the door to removing American troops.
Did nobody tell Dear Leader before he skipped town? Oh, right, these guys have elections to win next year don’t they?
>> Nir Rosen, who’s actually lived in Iraq, unlike the keyboard jockeys in the USA who swear up and down everything is cool in Iraq, explores some scenarios for Iraqi withdrawl in the newest Atlantic (sub. required):
Wouldn’t a U.S. withdrawal embolden the insurgency?
No. If the occupation were to end, so, too, would the insurgency. After all, what the resistance movement has been resisting is the occupation. Who would the insurgents fight if the enemy left? When I asked Sunni Arab fighters and the clerics who support them why they were fighting, they all gave me the same one-word answer: intiqaam-revenge. Revenge for the destruction of their homes, for the shame they felt when Americans forced them to the ground and stepped on them, for the killing of their friends and relatives by U.S. soldiers either in combat or during raids.
…
What about the goal of creating a secular democracy in Iraq that respects the rights of women and non-Muslims?
Give it up. It’s not going to happen. Apart from the Kurds, who revel in their secularism, Iraqis overwhelmingly seek a Muslim state. Although Iraq may have been officially secular during the 1970s and 1980s, Saddam encouraged Islamism during the 1990s, and the difficulties of the past decades have strengthened the resurgence of Islam. In the absence of any other social institutions, the mosques and the clergy assumed the dominant role in Iraq following the invasion.
>> This article from James Fallows, Why Iraq Has No Army, is another good read. Good read in this sense meaning you can see exactly how this country’s leadership has allowed a situation in which thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans have been killed by an insurgency that tons of people predicted. Yeah, I’m part of the angry left – because the right is destroying us.
Say, doesn’t that Republican demand for a change of plan in Iraq come dangerously close to “criticizing the commander-in-chief while he’s abroad”?
I thought that was a big no-no.
for the irony impaired, I was channelling Dubya above
Certain Republicans are saying we should cut and run… well I just dont think thats right. We gotta stay the course…
“Yeah, I m part of the angry left – because the right is destroying us.”
The reason you’re part of the angry left, Oliver, is because your side has lost control of the house, the senate, and the presidency. Soon the supreme court will be safely in the hands of the right as well.
Before you can make policy decisions in this country you have to convince a majority of people that you’ll do a better job at it then the other guys. You should be angry at yourselves.
Uhhh. They are proposing a quarterly reporting requirement and you guys are your donkeys charging at windmills. Why is it so hard tos tick with reality
And BTW, any adult believe this ” If the occupation were to end, so, too, would the insurgency”
Dugger
Dugger, it’s a bit early to be hitting the sauce, isn’t it? Try that again when you sober up.
Before you can make policy decisions in this country you have to convince a majority of people that you ll do a better job at it then the other guys.
stick is right about that. Luckily the Republicans are making that task easier every day.
Dugger, again, thats from an “adult” who’s actually – you know – talked to an Iraqi, rather than read Instapundit for 3 years.
How is an anonymous Iraqi any more credible than Carrot Top? Unless the interviewee is an actual member of the insurgency, how would they know?
SaveFarris-
Your argument lives on a slippery slope. By your rationale, police officers aren’t qualified to discuss crime and prisons unless they have committed crimes and served time in prison. The anonymous Iraqi may not, in fact, be credible for other reasons, but to say that he’s not credible just because he’s not an insurgent is silly. Environmental exposure counts for something.
BTW, Nir Rosen is a left wing writer who has appeared in the Nation, NPR, Harpers etc and has accused Marines of indiscriminate atrocities in Falluja.
The entire siege of Fallujah was one big atrocity, but don’t start hiding behind “the troops” again. That siege was ordered from the top. Doesn’t clean the blood off the hands of those who were ‘just following orders,’ but let’s place the true blame where it belongs– with the arseholes who started the bloody illegal war.
Also, don’t forget the subject of the original blog post: like rats on a sinking ship, even members of the craven, self-serving Rethug ‘leadership’ are trying to distance themselves from the Bush train wreck before even their heavily gerrymandered districts vote them out in disgust.
I guess those who stick around will find a few zealots to back them at the voting booth, if the trolls here are any indication.
The Rpeublican didn’t even have the deceny to type up their own plan:
“Mr. Warner said he decided to take the Democratic proposal and edit it to his satisfaction in an effort to find common ground between the parties on the issue.”
What was that, I heard recently, about the Dems not having any plans for Iraq? Can we put to rest this “party of no ideas” crap now? The Republicans just got their 06 platform from the Dems.
Any source has to be taken with a grain of salt, but you’re comparing him to Carrot Top? Sheesh! You folks really don’t like to have evidence interfering with your understanding of how the world works, do you?
OW
You really believe that we go away and the insurgency ends. Now I grant you if we go away, the attacks on Iraqi soil against US forces cease, so if that is the “insurgency” then it is true , but otherwise a mega dumb*ss point. When we leave, if itsd early, there will be holy hell.
BTW, Nir Rosen is a left wing writer who has appeared in the Nation, NPR, Harpers etc and has accused Marines of indiscriminate atrocities in Falluja. He is hardly the unbiased source – as portrayed here. He is another “true believer”.
Dugger
Are you claiming that Bush has already set benchmarks for success? You better tell the Democrats!
Dugger –
Suggesting that “I was only following orders” is not a defense during war is not to compare someone to a Nazi. It’s citing legal precedent. And you’re an ass for saying otherwise. Well, you were an ass anyway, but this confirms it.
just following orders, the classic Nazi response.
What a nice person Corrigan is and how typically left wing: comparing the US Marines to Nazi’s. Can we now expect a ground swell of revulsion against Corrigan on this site. I mean, after all, back during the last election campaign we were assured so many times about how the left just loved our service men. Well, how about it? Anybody here on the left not OK with Corrigan and his little Nazi analogy for the US Marines?
Dugger
Err…their “plan” is to demand that 1) Iraq demonstrate more sovereignty 2) US convince Iraqis that the occupation will not last forever 3) the administration give a quarterly report.
1) Gradual steps toward increasing sovereignty have been taking place since we invaded. Are the Democrats offering anything new?
2) Bush has stated repeatedly that the US is “working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.” Are the Democrats offering anything new?
3) I’m sure OW can’t wait to hear more administration talking points about Iraqi successes. Instead of the Democrats proposing benchmarks for success, they want the administration to tell them what the benchmarks should be. Leadership at its finest.
And JWG –
The Republicans are hyposctires for attacking the Dems for not having a pan and then when the Dems came up with a plan, the Republicans took it as the basis for their own. Let never be said that the Republicans don’t know where to go when they want good ideas: The Democrats.
Damned if you do…damned if you don’t. That’s surprising.
The Dems don’t have a “plan” for success. If I am wrong, please hit the main points for me.
Or you could do the job yourself. I’m as responsible for Corrigan’s comments as I am for yours.
I’ve never called them insurgents; an insurgency presumes the presence of a real government. Iraq does not have one. At a minimum, the Kurds are doing their own thing and have the guns to back it up.
There are multiple agenda’s in play in Iraq, including a jockeying for power among the various factions.
The fighting will not stop with a US withdrawal. But US troops can stop dying.
It’s time for the press to start judging Iraq according to the terms laid out by the Bush Administration at the start of the conquest. And to stop pretending that this started as an excercise in democracy.
Let it be noted that one one but myself said a word about Corrigan’s clasic Nazi analogy to US Marines. And you wonder why the military does not like and will never trust the left. Frame even went so far as to defend Corrigan.
Dugger, Yeah tell us how much you Like us Next Election
Dugger, there were soldiers besides Nazis who “just followed orders.” Before Nazis, even.
Corrigan didn’t explicitly say that the U.S. military were Nazis. If he had, most if not all of us would have condemned him. You took his choice of phrasing and made a crapload of assumptions about what he meant. ASSUMPTIONS.
And the military employs liberals. Someday, I’m sure you’ll get it through your skull that liberals have volunteered, fought, and died in American wars, and I doubt the military refuses to honor them because they were liberals. “Sorry, ma’am. Your son doesn’t get a flag and a 21-gun salute. Y’see, his bunkmates said he was for gay rights and that he voted for John Kerry. Who, by the way, is another stinkin’ military liberal.”
If you want to support the troops, Dugger, you’re going to have to support the ones who disagree with you, too.
How’s that narrative of grievance coming along, Dugger?
You know, Dugger, that people often use vernacular without knowing where it comes from? “Just following orders” is one of those phrases that you and I and many people attribute to Nazis, but which others just attribute to hearing other people use it as a defense.
As far as I’m concerned, I need to hear clarification from Corrigan. Either he meant it the way you think he did (and if so, he needs to own up to it, because it’s a chickenshit thing to say), or he tossed it into the conversation without realizing the gravity of what he said (which is no less dumb, but far less provocative).
BD,
C’mon. ” Corrigan didn t explicitly say that the U.S. military were Nazis’ You can do better than that. And that crap about the military employing liberals is completely off the track So what? He used that analogy against all soldiers, left or right. I could care less what party they belonged to. None of them deserve cheap shot crap like that. Those soldiers are out there dying right now for you and me while we have this nice debate.
Google “I was only following orders”. Just about every reference indicates it was the common defense of Nazis at Nuremberg. It is universally recognized that way, especially when used in reference to soldiers in the field and put in quotes as he did – to set it off. Already, two defenses of Corrigan here and one 5th amendment. My only point. That quote sat there for a while. All of the leftie “friends of the military” let it pass without comment. Even when exposed not even a token negative to Corrigan.
“US Marines, Nazi analogy? Nothing to see here. Nothing that interests me? BTW soldiers, we would like your vote next election (stupid Nazi b*stards that you are.)”
Dugger
By the by, the military employing liberals is not “crap.” It’s a direct response to your baseless comment that the military–as in, the whole military–hates the left.
BD,
No. It makes absolutely no difference what the political affiliation of the military (person) is as regards Corrigan’s remarks – thats the crap. Otherwise the military as a whole, like labor as a whole the other way, supports Republicans. Of course, individual union members and individual military may feel different than the majority.
Dugger
Dugger also thinks communists are plotting against him from their secret based under his bed.
Yes, one typo and incoherence reigned. If I were you I’d look into the radio signals coming from your night light.
frame,
Take a break frame, too much verbiage, too little thought lately. I would comment on the incoherence of that last post but I’m such a crappy typist that I won’t.
Dugger
no framykins,
It means I’M YOUR DADDY. It proves there is no substitute for calm analysis and non-paranoid thought. If you had listened to Dugger the Mighty’s thoughtful questions and speculations, you would not be in this humble pie position of having to shift to talking about how important lying and obstruction are instead of blowing cover and leaking.
And, actually, my radio waves are telling me Woodward is two guys.
Dugger, Have a Real Nice Day
Take a breath and try to stop distorting the facts for one second there big boy. First off, nice plural on reporter. Last time I checked Woodward was only one guy. Second, this doesn’t change a damn thing regarding Libby’s indictments for perjury and obstruction and neither does it have anything to do with why Fitzgerald didn’t charge him with a crime for disclosing classified information. Why you ask? Because apparently, Fitzgerald was unware of any of this before he brought his indictments. Third, you say “well before” as if July doesn’t follow June on the calendar. You’ll note that whoever disclosed this information to Woodward did it in June 2003 and Fitzgerald specifically says in the indictment:
At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified.
Which means whoever disclosed this information did themselves leak classified information to someone who wasn’t authorized to receive it. All this means is that yet another administration official beyond Libby and Rove was involved and that Woodward, is, much like yourself, a hack.
No speculation here at all. Just the facts.
hey frame,
WHO’S YOUR DADDY!!!!!
Woodward’s revelations re Plame seem to indicate other people, other reporters, other ‘uncleared’ persons knew Plame was CIA earlier. Looks like my anlysis, which suggested Plame was blown, well before Libby/Novak/WaPo was right. And it looks like Fitz’s statement that Plame was the first government official to go to reporters is being disputed – by Woodward.
Time for thirty paragraphs speculating about how Woodward is an agent of evil genius Rove.
Dugger, Look Upon Him Ye Mighty and Despair!!
Dugger –
Huh? Whendid I de-emphasize leaking classifed information? Leaking classified information is a serious, serious breach of the public trust, not to mention against the law. Nothing Woodward said changes anything I’ve said about Libby’s indictments and what Fitzgerald believed about the information that Libby leaked, namely that it was classified. Indeed, Woodward’s revelations only deepens the administrations involvement in the leaking of classified information to reporters. How Fitzgerald responds, well, we’ll see. But this doesn’t change anything I’ve said about Libby.
Indeed, I can’t figure out why you’re so excited by Woodward’s revelations anyway. Aren’t you the guy arguing that Wilson’s cover was no longer classified because her cover was blown by Aldrich Ames? I don’t know, man. Sounds like the all-mighty Nappy-Dugger is floundering around for any port in a storm, no matter how off course and ultimately unhelpful.
Please tell me what I’m backpeddling away from. I stand by everything I’ve said because Woodward’s revelation changes nothing in terms of Libby’s indictments or what Fitzgerald said about Valerie Wilson’s classified status. Nothing whatsoever. You’ve changed the rationale for your argument so many times now I wonder if you even know what you’re arguing for at the moment.
And indeed, there are a lot of people questioning Woodward’s credibility including his own colleagues at the WaPo:
“Woodward’s statement said he testified: “I told Walter Pincus, a reporter at The Post, without naming my source, that I understood Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA as a WMD analyst.”
Pincus said he does not recall Woodward telling him that. In an interview, Pincus said he cannot imagine he would have forgotten such a conversation around the same time he was writing about Wilson.
“Are you kidding?” Pincus said. “I certainly would have remembered that.”"
Back pedal away, frame. And good luck with your new found emphasis on lying and obstruction. BTW, who’s telling the truth: Woodward or Fitz re the first offical to go to reporters. The paranoid left is trying to destroy Woodward. Will htat be your tactic also?
Dugger
LOL. Now we’re going to post repeatedly until one of us gives up and gives the other the last word! I love it. I will fight you into the depths of hell like the Balrog you are, Nappy-Dugger.
hey, frame, congratualtions. You get last post here. Could mena you won the debate.
Dugger
With my last breath, I spit at thee; For hate’s sake, I stab at thee!
Do I win?
No.