That is the Democratic position on national security. Makes sense to me (its certainly better than not saying anything), but now they’ve got to repeat that like a mantra until they’re blue in the face. The current GOP response is essentially “but… but… you didn’t like the PATRIOT Act” (or cultists like Jeff Goldstein now deciding that capturing Bin Laden would be “the wrong thing to do”, up is the new down obviously). Pretty limp for them, frankly. I don’t know if the Dems can beat the GOP in the polls on national security, simply because they’ve been so afraid to assert anything, but if they were able to come to some sort of equilibrium it would be a bit of a breakthrough.
I really hope some Republican leader repeats the “Catching OBL is the wrong thing to do” meme. Hopefully on camera or tape, so that the DNC can run campaign ads.
Of course Shrub did say the “I don’t know where he is, I don’t spend much time thinking about him” before the 2004 election and the DNC didn’t run ads with it. Which is another reason we lost.
I think Shrub should have a trial also, and he is responsible for LOTS more death than OBL.
OOh! I know!
Ask for a change in venue!
Like, maybe Cananda.
“eliminate” Osama bin Laden? Bwahaha! Obviously Howard Dean had nothing to do with this paper. Dean thinks the hitler in a head scarf should have a jury trial.
Howard Dean – “I still have this old-fashioned notion that even with people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials.”
Dean again – “Osama bin Laden has admitted that he is responsible for killing 3,000 Americans… This is exactly the kind of case that the death penalty is meant for.”
“Dean thinks the hitler in a head scarf should have a jury trial.”
What a blow to democracy and democratic ideals it would be to give Osama Bin Laden a fair trial if he were captured.
Fucking idiots.
Let’s try it another way, Randy.
Let’s assume OBL is captured and stands trial. President Dean is on the record saying, “We should not delay in executing him.”
You’re stuck with the job of being bin Laden’s lawyer. What’s your first move?
Where does this plan have us redeploying to?
Also, if you are going to mention JeffG in that manner, perhaps you should link back to the initial post instead of attempting to sum up what was a lengthy article with well over 100 comments in just one sentence. Here’s the link:
http://www.proteinwisdom.com/index.php?/weblog/entry/iraq_nuclear_deterrence_and_misdirection/
Howard Dean: “Of course we ought to off Osama, I was asked a hypothetical question about what would happen if Osama was captured. If we can get Osama, we ought to get Osama, however we can get Osama.”
Peddle your talking points elsewhere.
*Canada
Quaker, duros, your arguments only have merit if you’re arguing on the side of the law. However, as the law is biased against the war on terror, it is the job of the Executive to circumvent those laws whenever he believes necessary.
Shorter Frame:
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.
Idiot
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.
Fucking Idiot!
Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah!!
I hate Frank
Democrats Unveil National Security Plan
If Democrats actually had a clue, I would still be a Democrat.
It’s a good thing we’ve never had trials for mass murderers. What do they know any way, they only won WWII.
They need a catch-phrase to replace “The Long War”. Something like “Sloppy Seconds”. “Swift Justice” isn’t quite appropriate as it’s been over 4 years since 9/11 and it’s not as though his name wasn’t around during the Clinton Admin. How about “Light at the end of the Tunnel”. Too long. Hmmm. Maybe “Operation Patriot Action”?
Oliver, you way oversimplified it, you left out implement the 9-11 commission recommendations and beef up port security and homeland security.
it is the job of the Executive to circumvent those laws whenever he believes necessary.
Alas, ain’t it the truth?
Thinking you’re above the law is just vigilantism. If Bush were Batman, I might not mind.
Batman for President!
“…perhaps you should link back to the initial post …”
Oh god why? Why does anyone take asshats like Jeff G seriously when he’s still writing nonsense like this:
“After all, it was no accident that the Axis of Evil included Iran, North Korea, and for the first step in our strategic gambit, Iraq. Taking out Saddam (the low-lying fruit strategy, as it has been called), has had the welcome, incidental effect of drawing terrorists into Iraq, where they are being wiped out at an undisclosed (but probably quite considerate) clip …”
Where to even start? By attacking Iraq, a country that didn’t have nuclear weapons, and choosing the negotiate with North Korea, a country that actually has them, Bush sent the message loud and clear to Iraq and every other wanne-be rogue state that unless they want to get invaded they better get nuclear weapons as fast as possible. Case in point, has Iran acted like a country quivering and quaking in its boots before the threat of Americans on their backdoor? Hardly. They’re even more radicalized in their pursuit of weapons. Meanwhile we’ve given India the go ahead to jump start a new arms race in Asia while we’re starting to see reports that Saudia Arabia has been working with Pakistan to ramp up its own nuclear plans. What a secure world Bush has given us.
On top of all this, we can cheer the fact that we’ve turned Iraq into the terrorist haven that it never was. Because nothing helps to build a nascent democracy like drawing terrorists INTO a region.
There’s only one way to sum up Goldstein: He’s a fucking idiot.
Let me rephrase about the terrorists not being idiots before I’m accused of being a traitor. They are idiots in that they are religious radicals who have no respect for innocent civilians, but they are not tactically deficient.
randy,
Excellent point. Thre will be more bleeding hearts than you can shake a graphite hocket stick at coming out of the woodwork expalining that the terroists will have won if we don’t try OBL in the 9th Circuit.
BTW, all. The American people aren’t idiots. They know when you say redeploy from Iraq it means ’surrender’.
It is also highly revealing that the point you emphasize is not asking for details of the ‘plan’ to get OBL, but that what Democrats need to do is repeat it incessantly. What a joke. What? Will OBL be driven crazy by Democratic chanting?
Highly illustrative of exactly why Republicans can do an only average job on security and the WOT, and still be light years ahead of the “incessant repeaters”.
Dugger, Another $10 Mr Rove
“Excellent point.”
Yes, Dugger, what an excellent point. If we capture Osama Bin Laden we should draw and quarter him at Ground Zero. Fox can broadcast the whole thing culminating in a solemn ceremony in which his head is spiked on the top of the Empire State Building.
It boggles the mind that conservatives now believe that living up to our laws and principles is to be scorned and mocked.
Or perhaps “redeploy from Iraq” means to respect the sovereign government in Iraq and leave as they want us to and actually go after terrorists as opposed to insurgents who are unhappy with the state of affairs in the country. Let the Iraqis know that if civil war breaks out we will back them with support if it is requested. Do we not have enough respect for them to do something like this?
The American people aren’t idiots because they know that when we went to war with Iraq, most terrorists in the region didn’t go to Iraq. They’re gaining strength in other nations and making plans for a future date. Probably near an election. I would think the best time would be to wait until after democrats take over the presidency and then attack us again to get us to accuse each other of causing their actions. The terrorists aren’t idiots either.
So, Dugger, who exactly would we be ’surrendering’ to?
OBL will be captured if the Dems are actually allowed to have a say in how to capture him. What has the Republican plan been? Apparently to not worry that much about him and maybe he’ll be killed in Iraq somewhere since all the terrorists in the region went there and thus Osama must be there too. How many Rep plans actually contain details and aren’t repetitions of talking points. Come on, surely you of all people have watched Ken Mehlmann or any Rep operative spew the same crap over and over again (not to mention Bush). What a joke indeed.
So, we allow Republicans to continue doing an average job and keep Dems out of office so we can never actually see if their leadership can do better? What?
Oliver, you way oversimplified it
That’s the idea.
They know when you say redeploy from Iraq it means surrender .
I guess the vast majority of Americans are surrender monkeys now, based on your asinine logic.
Will OBL be driven crazy by Democratic chanting?
It would certainly be more effective than Bush’s “hole-smoking” to date.
Sorry, bad link. This one.
See, in my line of work …”
Hilarious.
Redeploy means “redeploy.” Surrender means “surrender.”
Let’s put this another way. In a boxing match, you can either stand still or you can move. You can plant yourself against your opponent and just keep trading blows and hope that you can take more punishment than they can.
Or you can back away for a few seconds and reconsider your approach.
Bush supporters believe that we can take the beating. I’d rather step back and see if we can score a KO before Round 10.
Bush supporters believe that we can take the beating. I d rather step back and see if we can score a KO before Round 10.
Brush supporters think if you advocate that, it is the same as jumping out of the ring, getting in your car and going home.
Redeployment=redeployment.
BD,
In boxing, if you don’t answer the bell, you lose. You’ve surrendered. Sorry. You struggled mightily for that cute metaphor.
Dugger, Is BD Suggesting a Roberto Duran ‘no mas’ straegy in Iraq?
Idiots believe that Democrats can deliver on the promise to “eliminate” Osama bin Laden.
Exactly how is Dirty Harry Reid plan on doing that?
“they will double the number of special forces and add more spies”
Nice plan. Go get ‘em Harry.
Shorter Jeffy “ChickenHawk” Goldstein: We must not run away from a war which I have personally run away from.
Certainly, kiliing or capturing OBL is a symbolic but worthwhile goal. It’s a clear message that the Dems will prosecute actual terrorism rather than attacking nations that have fewer links to terrorism than the US. As a slogan, it works.
Redeployment also works well–and it will enable the US to actually provide some teeth behind our threats to Iran and China. Right now, because of AWOL George’s Iraqi quagmire, all we can do is make empty, Goldstein-like, gestures at ‘em.
Dugger –
You don’t think we can afford to withdraw and you know we can’t afford to put more troops in. So we’re stuck with what we’ve got right now. But time is not our side my friend. And that has nothing to do with the anti-war sentiments but everything to do with the physical and economic toll of maintaining a nationwide occupation in a foreign land. We have made no significant progress on the security front in the last four years. Why you think the next four are just suddenly going to go our way just because is beyond me.
Dugger,
Which bell is that?
Chinabox, Floats Like A Butterfly
Wow. Simply wow.
Bush, today, to the Iraqi people:
“Pretty soon its time to shut her down and get governing.”
Words to live by.
Shorter Bush; “Git-R-Done!”
Ok “righties”, now repeat the above ad nauseum….and per OW, we are “branding” the idea….now to get started on the t-shirts……
And every repetition of the Democrats plan to capture OBL reminds Blue State America that he is still on the loose. Brilliant.
Imagine what 130k troops redeployed from Iraq to look for OBL could do? He would be caught in about an hour.
Contrary to “Dr” Scholl, it’s probably not that tough a task to get OBL. After all, OBL’s whereabouts are pretty much confined to relatively small area–so it is simply a function of devoting enough resources and, of course, having the will to do so.
Frankly, AWOL George probably isn’t interested in OBL because he and OBL have similar objectives.
Again, getting OBL is just a symbolic gesture; AQ won’t fold overnight. But the US has to take thev fight to AQ and not to Iraq.
I think OBL is probably dead and in cold storage somewhere waiting to be ‘found’ just at the right time to push Jeb over the line in 2008
“… as long as we are dishing out mindless, thoughtless political rhetoric …”
They’re so cute when they get angry.
Exactly how is Dirty Harry Reid plan on doing that?
Exactly how is Dummy George Bush planning on getting us out of the mess he created?
All I’ve heard out of him is the same old Bushit.
Hey we republicans can beat that…we promise to invent anti-gravity and cure the heartbreak of psoriasis….
I mean heck, as long as we are dishing out mindless, thoughtless political rhetoric without demonstrating exactly HOW we are going to do it,, I thought I might get in on the action….
They’re Finally Joining the Fight! Hoooraaaah
t’s great that the Democrats have finally gotten on-board with the War on Terror. It’s a shame that it’s taken them 4 1/2 years. I wonder if they’ll also be as “tough and smart” when dealing with Al Qaeda sleepers in the US – you know, the ones t…
“After all, OBL s whereabouts are pretty much confined to relatively small area”
ROFLMAO!
Let’s see how many qualifiers a leftist can use in one short sentence: “pretty much…” “relatively small”….
But heh, its EASY! Just ask Jade, the military tactician! Shoot, the tribal areas of the hindu kush, childs play for the Jadester….
As bugs bunny used to say….”What a maroon….”
Okay, Dr Pedro, you’re pretty quick to shoot down other people’s ideas; what’s your plan for fighting terrorism? More quagmire in Iraq? Pissing off more of our allies? Crapping on more of the constitution? More torture and habeas bubkis? Saying aye aye, sir, to whatever the Confuser in Chief wants? C’mon! What Would President Pedro do? Put up or shut up.
Dr. Pedro,
Supreme Benevolent Ruler and President for Life of the Soverign Nation of Asshatistan.
Pedro is pissing in the wind.
The only thing he has is disdain.
I think OBL is probably dead and in cold storage somewhere waiting to be found just at the right time to push Jeb over the line in 2008
He’s at the Marriot in Houston.
Ask George HW to ask OBL’s dad. They play golf, don’t they?
framefan: Wowzer! You nailed it!
Yeah, Dugger, what bell? You seem to be retroactively accusing Democrats of not going to war in the first place, which is a slap in the face to all Democrat war veterans.
What do you have against fighting smart? The winners learn to adapt; the losers hope they’ll get lucky.
Frank_D Says:
March 30th, 2006 at 8:41 am
framefan: Wowzer! You nailed it!
Is anyone else besides me pretty darn sure that “framefan” is just Frank_D posting under a different name? Sort of like Frank Burns posting under the name hawkeyeandBJsuck.
Wilbur,
That would be a negative on the duality of Frank D. I was commenting on Frame’s consistent churlishness (Frank was just a convenient example) and not defending him.
Show me the Democrat or American “leftist” who has said that the purpose of redeployment is to bring the troops home so they can go back to their lives as if we’re at peace again. Last I checked, it was President Bush who crowed about unfinished jobs as “Mission Accomplished.”
Look, this is very simple–what we’re currently doing isn’t working. Let’s try something new instead of “staying the course.” Maybe get the troops out of harm’s way while doing so. Maybe go after that asshat Bin Laden.
And why should we care how the terrorists view us? You think we’re going to somehow change their minds and their hatred just by handing them defeat? Do you know nothing about zealots at all? If we “surrender,” they become emboldened, if we “defeat” them…guess what? They get emboldened. They’re not out for winning themselves a peaceful life, they’re out for winning themselves a peaceful afterlife.
Who we should be worrying about are the ordinary, middle-of-the-road Muslims–and our PR with that population is terrible.
The Bush “strategy for victory” was asinine. “In order to achieve victory, all we have to do is win.” Give me a break.
BD,
Sorry for delay in responding.
No. Democrats went to war – along with Republicans. Been my point all along. Dems voted for war and then they and their supporters starting pretending their vote for war wasn’t a vote for war.
And I’m all for fighting smart. But giving up in Iraq ain’t smart IMO. But no amount of Democratic or RINO Newspeak baloney will transform ’strategic redeployment’ into anything other than what it is – surrender. Our troops know that and the terrorist/insurgents know that – even if the American left pretends otherwise.
Dugger, Congratulatuions Gen Custer on your Strategic Redeployment at Little Bighorn!
Dugger, Congratulatuions Gen Custer on your Strategic Redeployment at Little Bighorn!
Perhaps if he had Strategically redeployed, he wouldn’t have gotten massacred.
BD, if you leave the battlefield in Iraq to the enmey, I don’t care whether they go to Saudi ow wherever -we have deserted the battlefield. Period.
And it wasn’t just the CINC ‘crowing” about mission accomplished! it was me and a bunch of soldiers. That mission was accomplished very damn well, thank you. (BTW, why does the left hate it when soldiers take pride in winning a hard fought battle?)
And we should care how the terrorist view us if in fatc that ‘view’ encourgaes more attacks than otherwise. I could care less if they hate my decadent infidel guts as long as they have sufficient respect for the likes of an AC-130H so as not to attack.
And who says it isn’t working? it takes along long time to satbilize a region. We ‘mission accomplished’ the big war early. The insurgency is a diffrent proposition.
Dugger, Look. We are there. Might as well do it right.
Lead. Follow. Or get the hell out of the way
Somewhere in all your sloganeering you decided to miss every single one of my points.
About that mission–could the right, once and for all, clarify what that mission was? Because if the mission was only to make Saddam run away, we should have left immediately after we caught him.
The enemy we face isn’t going to “respect an AC-130H so as not to attack”–all they’ll do is not attack the AC-130H, and instead go after, say, a nightclub in Bali.
All your talk about the battlefield leads me to believe that you’ve forgotten the lessons of not only 9/11, but also 3/11 in Madrid and 7/7 in London–that the battlefield is the entire world.
The remnants of Al-Qaida in Afghanistan ceded the country to our superior firepower, but they didn’t meet us afterwards and sign a treaty, hand over their sabers and hope for mercy. Instead…they redeployed. To our ally Pakistan. And later, after the climate was ripe, to Iraq.
That doesn’t sound like “surrender.” Why is it “surrender” if we do it?
Furthermore…
“I believe strongly it was the right strategic decision,” Rice said Friday.
“I know we’ve made tactical errors, thousands of them, I’m sure,” she said in a speech at Blackburn’s Chatham House — a center for independent research on global.
“I am quite certain there are going to be dissertations written about the mistakes of the Bush administration,” she said.
“But when you look back in history what will be judged on is” whether the “right strategic decision” was made.
Never has it been better illustrated how the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
BD,
On mission accomplished. The mission was to defeat the Iraqi military. It was our military vessel. The military controls what goes up on that vessel. The military won the major ground war in Iraq. The military acomplished their mission. Its that simple. Guess who the military commander is?? Entirely appropriate.
Now you may well argue that there are other missions or jobs for other than the military (and secondarily for the military) that remain to be accomplished. Agree.
Agree that the terrorism battlefield is WW. We are in Iraq now.
In Afghan we have a sufficient military presence to control the situation. In Iraq ’strategic deployment’ means pulling out altogether. IE, Iraq is not as stable as Afghan. Pulling out now will be seen by the terrorists as a clear cut defeat and will encourage more terrorism – IMHO.
And Condi did not say “excuse our mistakes because our intentions were good.” Reread the quote. She spoke of tactical errors- which all armies, all leaders, all states make. Many are not honest enough to admit it.
Dugger, Absolutely a P*ss Poor Typist
This story came with a warning: NO LIBERALS SHOULD READ THIS AS IT MIGHT CAUSE THEM TO THINK ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN IRAQ.
http://tinyurl.com/j8pbl