Well, I think it's high time I weighed in on the debate to disapprove the sending 21,000 troops to Iraq which was propsed by President Bush.
I have to wonder whether the so-called Democratic majority will be content with just disapproving the President's recommendation, or are they simply hell-bent on embarrassing our Commander-In Chief. If it is the latter, and I seriously believe it is, then SHAME ON YOU DEMOCRATS, AND SHAME ON YOU REPUBLICANS WHO BROKE RANKS AND JOINED THEM!!
Talking out of both sides of one's mouth is a tactic that is known well in Washington, and so you won't be so surprised that I'm having a bit of difficulty with statements like --we support the troops, but not the President. If the ramifications of such totally idiotic statements weren't so serious and the implications so devastating, they could almost be considered laughable.
One thing is certain, at least in my never to be humble opinion, this so-called debate, if that's what you call it, is counterproductive, it's not in the best interests of the United States, and it sends the the dangerously wrong message that America is just paying lip-service with respect to the war on terrorism. I hope it doesn't take another attack on American soil for the Democratic demagouges
to get the message!!
Feb 18, 2007
DEBATE ON IRAQ WAR RESOLUTIONS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
My weighing in….I hate to mention the C word here but Clinton the infamous Democrat himself spent oodles of time seeking peace around the world.
In the II World War around the time of the Berlin Siege the US called for “20,000 troops” only to aide in Peace Keeping in their Berlin quarter ”with great success!”
The President is asking to aid in the “peace keeping.” This is a good sign that it is not full blown war. Just to ward off a bunch of pesky Muslim terrorist/ insurgents who if given the upper hand will create chaos everywhere. The American term “Lip service” translated into Arabic means “Victory”.
Point I am making 20,000 troops is a REAL PEACE KEEING FORCE, not just sending in the UN to make mayhem out of everything like Clinton and his counter parts would do!
OK,
I have one (continuous) comment on this:
A. This was botched from the beginning. Not only from a PR standpoint in selling it to the American people, but from a military plan as well. We didn't go into WWI or WWII with 50,000 troops. We committed the whole of the American might behind our effort. Sending 20,000 more is like adding three drops of sand to the ocean. If we are actually going to go into this to win... LETS WIN. Commit ourselves to drumming out every terrorist in the region, lock down the state and hand it over to a civil IRAQI authority that is ready to lead...not the puppet crap there now.
and B. Put the world on notice that terrorists, no matter where they reside are targets. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Egypt, wherever. If we have to follow them inside your border we will. If you do not assist us in apprehending them then you are accomplices and will be treated as such.
Allies, who are you?, come and stand front and center and be recognized. "Coalition of the Willing"... give me a break Let's not fool ourselves folks this is WWIII, just not the one we thought it would be.
Post a Comment