| Gov. Times | 0 | |
| WaPo | 0 | |
| CNN | Dead wrong: Man attends own funeral after mix-up over body’s ID |
0 |
| Politico | 0 | |
| McClatchy | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Brutal Honesty:
"We [the US] tax everything that moves and doesn’t move, and that’s not what we see in Pakistan," she said.
- Sec. of State Hillary Clinton - 10/29/09
Are you happy now, Democrats? (RELATED: HOUSE FAILS TO OVERRIDE VETO)
(5/3 Update: Dems back off the timeline ‘requirement.’ )
——
The Democrats political games with the war supplemental are already starting to affect the military:
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The standoff between President Bush and congressional Democrats over a war funding bill already is delaying some military training and orders for spare parts, Pentagon officials said.
Bush on Tuesday vetoed legislation passed by the Democratic-controlled Congress that would continue to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but set a timeline for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.
The bill would have required U.S. combat troops to begin to withdraw on October 1, with a goal of a complete pullout within six months.
“This is a prescription for chaos and confusion,” Bush said, explaining his veto of the legislation. “It makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing.”
The president and congressional leaders have agreed to meet to discuss a compromise. (Full story)
In the meantime, military officials said some effects are already or will soon be felt.
According to the Pentagon, the Army two weeks ago told commanders to purchase fewer parts, delay repairs on training equipment and postpone nonessential travel.
This month, the Army also will freeze hiring for civilian jobs, release temporary workers and sign no new contracts.
An Army official said these disruptions will hurt military readiness.
[...]
Without new funds, orders for what the Army considers the No. 1 lifesaver against roadside bombs, MRAPs — Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected vehicles — will be canceled. About $3 billion for the vehicles is tied up by the stalled legislation.
“We can build what we can get the funds to build. It’s strictly an issue of money,” outgoing Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker told a Senate panel in March.
The vehicles provide four to five times the protection of an armored Humvee. They have V-shaped hulls that deflect blasts from improvised explosive devices — IEDs — outward and away from passengers.
This is obscene.
So much for their BS about “supporting the troops”! Not that most of us ever believed it anyway.
The President is set to meet with House and Senate ‘leaders’ today to discuss a ‘compromise.’ Don’t back down, Mr. President.
BTW, here’s the transcript of the President’s presser last night explaining his veto.
Update: The House, by a vote of 222 to 203, failed to override the President’s veto of the war supp.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
81 Responses to “Are you happy now, Democrats? (RELATED: HOUSE FAILS TO OVERRIDE VETO)”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
I’m not sure what core you think you’ve penetrated to, Severian, or how you feel you got there. All you’ve done so far is say the opposite of what I’ve said and tell me that I don’t think the things I say I think. That doesn’t strike me as particularly incisive.
BTW Doc, I suspect you made a typo, substituting “k” for “t” in which case I’m greatly relieved you don’t consider me worthy.
What we’re saying is that it’s war. People die in war and it’s a horrible, horrible thing. Unfortunately, when you have an enemy that hides behind women and children, you are going to have women and children die. I wish it wasn’t that way, but I live in reality. What if your “limited strikes” killed innocents, as I’m sure it probably would. Does that make you uncaring and callous?
We have the ability and technology to kill every living thing in Iraq, but we’re not. If the enemy had that technology, do you think they would hesitate to use it?
You’ve put your finger on the real problem, NC Cop: yes, war is war, and innocents die. To choose an example that I think everyone can agree on, while innocents died in WWII, there’s no doubt that the greater good for the entire world was being served there. Germany and Japan were on the march; several countries had already fallen before we got involved. Nations needed our help, and we were there to give it.
Saddam, on the other hand, had been effectively caged in since the Gulf War. There had been no extraterritorial forays; portions of his country were even off-limits to his own aircraft. There were no WMDs. He was not the threat that Hitler was, so the comparison that people often make doesn’t ring true.
Coming around to the point via the scenic route: the invasion of Iraq has never struck the Left (of which I’m a member) as absolutely necessary for the safety of the world–not even for our own national safety. The deaths, therefore, seem avoidable; gratuitous, even. Yes, the people we’re fighting are using children as shields and bomb delivery systems and so on, but would they be putting children in our crosshairs if we hadn’t invaded? It doesn’t seem like it.
(And yes: the deaths you describe–the ones, I guess, I am prescribing–would be cruel and callous. Being cruel and callous when one sees the necessity is one thing, though, while cruelty that could ultimately have been avoided is something else yet again.)
I see. So we are only to take action when it is for the good of everyone, not us, is that it? If a country is just plotting and planning against us, we should just sit there and take it. Brilliant.
Please define “caged”. Saddam was skirting the “oil for food” program making millions of dollars. Those dollars were financing terrorism. Saddam was giving payouts to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. In my book, that’s financing terrorism. He had also attempted to assassinate a former U.S. President. Caged, indeed. Just because he didn’t have tanks rolling across borders doesn’t mean he wasn’t a threat. Which reminds me, you never did answer my question of: What does a country have to do to be considered a threat by you?
Hindsight is 20/20. Don’t forget that members of the “left” including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi were cheerleaders for the war when it began. They saw a chance to show how they could be tough on defense. When no WMD’s were found and the insurgency started to grow, public opinion turned, and so did the democrats. I don’t want someone who is afraid of the polls, or Fox news for that matter, running the country. England, France, Russia, Germany and the all too useless U.N. all thought that he had them as well as the previous president, Bill Clinton. If you want to blame the intelligence agencies, that’s one thing, but you can’t blame Bush. On a personal note, I will always believe that he had those weapons and got rid of them before the invasion.
I believe I already covered this part, but just to reinforce it, take a read at some of the quotes of PROMINENT democrats on the “left”:
Iraq Quotes
Yet the deaths of 500,000 children due to our sanctions that helped “caged” Saddam during the 8 years of Clinton don’t bother you a bit, huh?
Which once again begs the question: When does it become a “necessity”?
What I’ve pointed out, Doc, and what you’ve had no response to, is your startling lack of concern for the tragedy and death toll that your liberal policies always produce. You’ve had no comment about the fact that the same cut and run policies in Vietnam resulted in millions of dead. Your lack of concern for the lives of the people you wish to abandon is self evident. You may try and salve your conscience, if you even have one, by whining about violence and death in Iraq while we’re there, and ignore the fact that the Islamists make the VC look like the Salvation Army in the death and retribution game, and will turn Iraq into a killing field of astounding proportions if you and your ilk have your way and get us to withdraw. You like to talk around the issue, but your lack of humanity is easy to see.
the Left (of which I’m a member) – Doc
No! Really!?! Who’d have guessed? Damn, you nearly fooled us all!
Ah well, I’ll at least give you some credit for being honest about it and not, as is so often the case, stating that you’re a lifelong Republican, and then going on to spout the official moonbat talking point of the day.
No WMDs, except for the 500 or more that were found, and the dual use programs, stockpiles of radioactive materials, mobile labs, illegal missile programs, etc. etc. etc. It’s amazing what you choose to ignore.
And you guys have the gall to claim that you are the “reality based” community.
Yeah I know Doc, and so is the Army Reserve. But not to the extent that this land could not defend itself. That thought is completely illogical. – Lorica
NC Cop:
Again, you were absolutely correct earlier: war is war, and varying degrees of crap are what emerge from it. There are, unfortunately, few black and white issues when it comes to war, and we need to decide which shades of gray we can live with.
Would I jump in front of a moving car to save my own kid? Yes. I actually have, in fact. Would I jump in front of a moving car in order to save some kid I didn’t know? That’s not so clear. I’ve got to think about my own kid. If I’m dead, I’m not going to be much use to her. Similarly, it sucks when innocent people in foreign countries are killed by their leaders. It doesn’t make me happy. I like it even less, though, when our guys are the ones doing the killing.
I read several of the quotes you linked to (and admired the uniformly flattering photos of Pelosi). You get no argument from me that everyone at the time–Left and Right–was saying that there were WMDs. (Except poor old Hans Blix, if you’ll remember: he was the only guy who was right, and everyone was treating him as if he didn’t know what he was talking about.) When we realized the error, though, why did we keep going? And going? And going some more? If you find out that the guy you’re beating the crap out of didn’t actually have sex with your wife, you don’t keep pounding on him. You stop and go look for the guy who actually did have sex with your wife.
So when do we stop? I’ve had countless discussions about this on various sites from both Right and Left Blogistan. Lefties want the war to end now. The right wants to wait until the job is done–to stay the course. What I can never get people to explicate for me is just what “done” looks like. To dive back into the World War II comparison, we knew that we’d won when the countries we were fighting surrendered. That was pretty clear-cut. What does victory look like in Iraq? I’ve never heard anyone, in the Administration or online, come up with a definition of “victory” that could be used to measure our progress. “When they’re ready to stand up, we stand down” is vague. Do we fight in Iraq until all terrorists in the world are killed? Until they all surrender? Do we keep going until our collateral casualties equal or surpass the number killed by Sadaam? If you can give me your vision of a concrete victory in Iraq, you’ll be just about the first in four years who has done so. At least then we’ll have some basis for discussion and for measurement of progress toward our goals.
When war becomes necessary can sometimes be one of those “I’ll know it when I see it” things. I don’t have an ironclad list of criteria in mind. Afghanistan? Yes. Gulf War? Mehh–probably. The current war in Iraq? Not to my mind. Yes, I read what you wrote: Sadaam was paying suicide bombers. He wasn’t paying the bad guys who really interested me, though: the ones on September 11.
I know I haven’t addressed all your points, but I’ve tried to hit the main ones. This post is getting pretty long.
Wrong. Flat out and undeniably WRONG.
Food for oil was a joke, filled with corruption and bribery from Saddam.
While his citizens may have sufered, he did not.
Not to mention other countries going under the radar still trading with Saddam. Early on after the first part ofte war, when they were searching for WMDs, one of the things they did find wsa newly made FRENCH ROCKETS that were sold to Saddam within the last 2 years in violation of the embargo – the so called caged in you talk about.
To ‘cage him in’, as you say, take cooperation from other countries, if there are only a few that are truly keeping to the embargo and ‘caging him in’ but others are doing business behind your back with Saddam – doesn’t make him as ‘caged in’ as you may think.
Unfortunately we learned of the oil for food scandal after the war, when the new Iraqi government and the US were going over Saddam’s papers.
Let me point out that Blix, in the quotes you provided, didn’t say that Iraq was necessarily blameless, but he was the one saying, “If” and, “It looks like” and “let’s find out the facts”–really the only one on either side of the discussion who was open to both sides of the WMD issue and wanted to wait until inspections were complete to make up his mind.
When the Iraqi’s can stand on their own, their army and police trained, and they can defend themselves against terrorist from Iran, and insurgents within.
It takes time.
Meanwhile we help root out terrorists, make Iraq safer, remove bombs, bomb making material, IEDs and weapon caches, capture or kill Iranian operatives, ect.
Because of hte media there is very little reported of the good that is happening in Iraq, and while yes, it is still a dangerous place, it is getting better, and there is more going on there than just killing – there is rebuilding schools, infrastructure, new businesses opening up all over hte place, reaching out to village leaders who in turn help joint Iraqi and US operations by turning in inurgents and terrorists….there is alot going on that just doesn’t get reported by the media, because…as they say…if it doesn’t bleed, it doesn’t lead.
Yeah Sanity, we should have left well enough alone, after all, Saddam was “contained.” Just like North Korea is “contained” by the wonderful UN brokered armistice and sanctions. Of course, we still have to maintain a massive troop presence in S. Korea, 50 YEARS later, and the Gargoyle is making nukes, exporting guided missiles and nuclear technology, and has presided over massive famine and economic failure that has led to the death of millions, in addition to running gulags that make the Soviet ones look like Club Med. But he’s “contained” and not a threat to anyone! Why, North Korea is hardly a bother at all.
Doc still has the blinders firmly in place:
So just to be absolutely clear: you have little or no interest in preventive measures against terrorists. They don’t show up on your radar until they launch a 9/11-style attack. After they kill a couple of thousand people, then you’ll be persuaded to take action. And then only against anyone who can be clearly shown to have had a hand in the specific attack.
Significantly, you don’t say exactly what action you would support (military strikes? sending a state trooper to Tora Bora to serve a restraining order?), and you’ve still failed to provide any reasoning to support the idea that terrorism will somehow stop if we simply close the ports, raise the drawbridge, and hide under our beds behind a moat.
Seems to me you’re much more concerned with collateral casualties among the Iraqi population (which, by the way, could be cut alsmost to zero overnight if AQ and its allies simply withdrew) than you are about future casualties here from reinvigorated islamofascist attacks. But then, you did say you’re a member of the left, so it’s not entirely surprising.
Wasn’t “containment” the goal of Vietnam?? Seems to me that concept doesn’t work very well at all. – Lorica
On the other hand, Lorica, Vietnam didn’t turn out to be the threat that we were told it was going to be. The dominoes never fell.
The dominoes never fell? What are you, completely ignorant? First Vietnam, than Laos and Cambodia, fell to the Communists in succession. Talk about being completely blind to anything that doesn’t fit your partisan world view.
Ignorance is not a virtue, but liberals seem to treat it as one. Ignorance is not only bliss, but apparently a requirement to be a liberal.
The millions of people slaughtered after the communists took over, might disagree with you……if they were alive to tell it. But then again, as long as they are not your relatives, you don’t care.
Really???
That seems pretty clear that he is saying Iraq is NOT cooperating with the disarmament requirement of the United Nations. This is approximately 2 months before the invasion began.
Not much gray area in that one either. This was also Jan. 2003 as the U.S. began to surround Saddam. Blix may have been against the war, but I do not read much from these quotes saying that he didn’t believe Saddam had those weapons.
Holy toledo, why the anger from everyone? I just followed a link to what seemed like an interesting thread, hoping to have a civilized back-and-forth. It’s not like I’m actually affecting national security policy or anything.
Dov, Sev took you to task for being an idiot, so I don’t have to, Thank You Severian. Your answer is exactly why I believe that Libs shouldn’t be teachers. They are abit to concerned about the agenda, and not truly concerned about the overall scheme of things. Whatever fits the agenda, that is the motto of todays Liberal party.
Doc, in all honesty, you are to blind to continue discussing this with. I get abit tired of wasting my time, going over and over and over and over everything with you guys. I just wish there was a way to get you all in the same room and start pointing out the real facts of history, and not this fantasy fairytale you all have been taught. It is very exhausting. – Lorica
You’ll appreciate this Lorica, knowing you to be a student of the classics (found this at HotAir, which saved me from digging the books off the shelf in the library):
This has been known since at least when this was written, in 1517. So, the facts regarding how the world works and how enemies respond to weakness has been known for at least 500 years. We all know it has been known by people who are willing to look at reality for as long as there have been people. But still the modern liberal acts like somehow this is all up for debate and unproven.
After finding no audience for his inane comments, Doc pulls another tried and true (figuratively speaking of course) liberal “debating” technique, suddenly attempt to shift the focus to the tone of the conversation, and “what? Lil’ol me ain’t important, I’m just yada yada yada…”
We’re tired, tired of fools with no knowledge or understanding coming around, spouting the same old tired talking points that have been shot down dozens if not hundreds of times before. We’re tired of the ignorance, the blind partisan hate, and the inanity. We realize that unlike your protestation of “I don’t set policy” idiots like you and your fellow travelers in the Democrat party do set and influence policy and the mood of the country with your idiotic talking points and deliberate lies, as well as encouraging the very enemy we are fighting. We’re tired of the willful ignorance and the deliberate dishonesty.
While it may or may not be true that everytime a bell rings, an angel gets it’s wings, everytime a terrorist car bomb goes off, a liberal spouts another talking point, and everytime a Democrat politician wails about the war being lost, a terrorist smiles.
Holy moses, Lorica, are you going to start attacking teachers now?
See, thanks for proving my point, Doc. The present Liberal will do anything not to address the problems, let things come to a boil point, then do whatever it takes to deflect the real issues that have caused the problem. Like I always say, it is easier to nail Jello to the wall, than to get a Lib to admit they are wrong. – Lorica
Absolutely, but the fools we have to suffer, will always believe it is better to surrender than to fight. I am certainly happy our founding Fathers were not todays Liberals. – Lorica
You’re off the mark here, Lorica.
I spend a lot of time on conservative blogs, mainly because I already know the Lefty ideas about things and I want to find out what the other side says.
When I’m over at, for example, Confederate Yankee, I’m happy to admit my ignorance of firearm-related issues, and the posters there will explain either the technical aspects of guns or their perspectives on the second amendment–this is information and ideas that are new to me, and I’m happy to get them.
Before I got to this point at CY, however, I had to run the gauntlet for months as the generally conservative posters attacked me for being a troll, and then made assumptions about my opinions and closed-mindedness on the issues, accused me of hypocrisy, and so on and so on. The interactions were, at first, absurdly mean and sarcastic, but they gradually mellowed so that now I can express my opinion about an issue without being attacked for it. I might get corrected, and I may or may not accept the correction as being valid, but at least the discussion is civil. In the end, I’ve learned either some technical information or a little bit about what the other side is thinking on an issue. I learned some eyeopening information about the militia (that we’re all apparently signed up for, whether we know it or not) because one of the conservative posters sent me a link to the federal law establishing the militia. There’s no way I would have found that info at a left-wing site.
I’m willing to be patient here, if need be. As I mentioned before, there’s no point in hanging out at DailyKos because I already know how those folks feel about the issues, and I want to get the full picture. I got the impression from a post up above that NC Cop has been over in Iraq. Is that correct? If so, then his opinions about Iraq-related issues mean something. I’ll pit what I think against what he does, and, if it really seems like he has a point based on knowledge and experience, I’ll probably change the way I feel on the issue. I am, after all, in the “reality-based community,” and I’d like my opinions to be grounded in reality.
Some issues, on the other hand, are pure judgment calls. Take, for example, the issue that started this thread: the veto of the war-funding measure. Either you think that Bush is the obstacle or that Congress is the obstacle, but the issue is not open to scientific proof or anything like that–it’s pure opinion.
I know that some here–maybe most–will now say, “You’re a typical liberal piece of crap, Doc. You’re pretending to be open to persuasion, when actually you like roasting and eating fetuses,” or some such. Like I said, I’m willing to be patient. If the posters here are interesting and have something to teach me that I didn’t know before, I’ll wait it out until they decide that I’m not the archetypal Liberal they have in their minds. If there’s nothing to learn here, I’ll move on. I can take plenty of abuse before that happens, though. I don’t have to like it, but I can take it.
Man, what a whiney, self-absorbed, self-important, narcissistic little rant that was…