Maybe he meant to say an objective OPINION.

THE PRESIDENT: That, of course, is an objective.

From today’s LA Times:

WASHINGTON  Even as military planners look to withdraw significant numbers of American troops from Iraq in the coming year, the Bush administration continues to request hundreds of millions of dollars for large bases there, raising concerns over whether they are intended as permanent sites for U.S. forces.

Can we call him a liar yet?

Just don’t agree that packing up and leaving the battlefield to the enemy is not surrender. The enemy will interpret it that way. So will our troops. SO will Islamic extremists worldwide – and thus be emboldened.

Dugger, There’s no easy answer

Invaders voluntarily packing up getting out at an owners request are not surrendering.

Even if staying the course were a complete failure up until this very moment, there is no evidence to support the idea that things are not getting better.

There is no evidence to support Murtha’s opinion, and there has not been an “owners’ request.” (Unless you consider the terrorists the owners — I don’t).

On the subject of surrender. Surrender is to yield to the enemy. That’s not what Murtha and Sheehan want.

Murtha’s of the opinion that our continued presence/occupation is bad for Iraq. He believes it is in Iraq’s best interests if we leave as soon as we can. He says, and I paraphrase, that the best way to achieve victory in Iraq — as you describe and as most would agree — is to withdraw, not to surrender to the insurgents — the enemy. We need to relinquish control to those who should have it — the Iraqi’s.

Sheehan just thinks that we should have never invaded Iraq in the first place and that we should just get the hell out. To her, it’s like seeing a situation where someone invades someone else’s house, causes chaos in that house and nearly destroys it. She’s telling the invader, “You need to get out of the house that you entered illegally. You don’t belong there and you’re pissing the owners off.”

Invaders voluntarily packing up getting out at an owners request are not surrendering.

Don’t think the enemy tries to to take advangtage on internal domestic politics? Check out the Phillipines turn of the century.

And no duros it wouldn’t dry up. It might be just as long, but internal domestic strife over the war/any war could certainly encourage the enemy to fight longer and harder. Isn’t that just common sense?

Dugger

Duuger (was just a kid then)

I have common sense, experience in the military (where morale is a key factor) and can cite anecdotal evidence. Keep in mind I don’t say one should not criticize war, but recognize what the impact of that criticism can be. Its ‘pricier’ criticism and should not be spent lightly – for it can encourage the other side.

Dugger

Dugger, you sitting behind your keyboard typing inanities is surrender.
Seriously, shut up or sign up. Or fuck off.

How’s that for not mincing words? You prick.

mrC

You don t like it when I point out criticism of the war, even when completely valid (or invalid), gives the enemy encouragement.

You’re right. I don’t.

Because 1) you have no evidence to support your claim, 2) even if you did, it wouldn’t matter, and 3) citizens who oppose the war are guaranteed the right to say so.

Quaker (OK, no “timetable” but at least set some milestones a little more specific than “when they stand up, we’ll stand down”.)

Somehow I think the right gives the enemy more encouragement than the left does.

Of course, nobody in the Democratic Party wants to get rid of the program, they just want the Admin. to follow the law and circumvent the Bill of Rights, as they have been. So he isn’t calling their bluff, he, like so many of you here, is mischaracterizing what his opponents have said.

Lets not mince words. Pulling out here on a fixed timetable is surrender. You can wishfully think in terms of ’strategic redeployment’ but the ‘troops’ on the ground on both sides will know it for what it is: surrender. And we have aleady ‘mission accomplished’ the big war, so victory now, IMO, would consist of a substantial reduction in the insurgency and an increased strong presence of the Iraqi military.

Quaker, “We re off the hook! Dugger says that all our leftist whining and complaining will no longer  embolden the enemy!

You don’t like it when I point out criticism of the war, even when completely valid (or invalid), gives the enemy encouragement. But it does. And you have 2008 coming up and can support the Murtha/Sheehan option. The American people will decide.

LB,

Who told you?? Crap. We pulled off Bush senior jetting to Paris in that SR-71 frst time around – but now our (evil) plans are foiled. As Charlton Heston would have said: D*MN you!

Dugger, We Need a New ‘Surprise’ Fellow Bushbot Cultists

Hey, isn t 2008 an election year?

Funny…the Strategic Redeployment timeline endorsed by OW calls for most troops to be home by the end of 2007. I guess OW is trying to make Republicans look good?

As if it might be possible to make any such move in 2008, without it being characterized as a political manipulation…

He was just telling it like it is…

BushHatred strikes deep — Into your heart it will creep