Powered by TypePad

« The Times On The Duke Debacle | Main | Nothing New Under The Sun »

August 25, 2006

Comments

Jane

Is there a lack of political will on the part of the Iraqi's?

Don

Hey-the guy has been to Iraq 14 times. Why should I not believe him as opposed to all the clapping seals?

Sue

I don't know if he is right or wrong, but something tells me that 2 months out of an election that might possibly see those supporting the war in Iraq lose, might just have an incentive to change his opinion. Especially in a blue state.

Jane

Oh I agree, but it is still a question worth asking.

Max

Norm Coleman did alot of work in Oil for Food, too and ended up with alot of the 'heat' from that and the passport/border initiative. There was also alot going on outside of Shay's area and, therefor, in Norm's.

Shays has been on the intelligence committee and moved to baseball. His wife runs a 'research bureau.'

It's not new that he would pull out now that Iran report from the State Department's Iran desk is coming out as DIA/NSA integrates the CIA analysts and there is, once again, the 'inevitablility' of Iran; like Iraq. Alot of the people in that work are probably already making moves in Iran and the US to sell off what they don't want and buy what they do; a good time for Shays to bail and move along with them. Less heat for Shays and, maybe, more for someone like Norm or someone like him.

Karl

"He promised to offer a time frame for troop withdrawals when he returns next week from his 14th trip to Iraq."

I see... he's one of those thoughtful moderates who doesn't already have his mind made up.

Why shouldn't Don believe him? Maybe because he's not just a vulnerable incumbent in this cycle. He has been for some time now, as a GOP Rep. in a Blue State. We have a two-year cycle in the House because the Founders wanted Reps. to more directly reflect the sentiment in their districts. He can act GOP on issues like OFF that his liberal constituents don't care about, but is likely to do their bidding on the big issues -- impeachment, Iraq, etc.

Of course, my assessment might be affected by the fact that I've also seen him give credence to supposed sufferers of Gulf War Syndrome who reported unverified symptoms like fluorescent green vomit. Regardless of whether there is a real form of the syndrome, someone who buys that is either not a critical thinker or is grandstanding for publicity (something Shays does frequently).

Gabriel Sutherland

Why does the path to unity require the majority to drop its position and adopt that of the minority?

Do the Moderates ever moderate their minority cousins over to the majority position or does it always have to be the other way around?

Shays is looking for breathing room. I don't think a time table is going help him breathe any easier.

maryrose

Shays is behaving in a way to get himself re-elected. All roads lead to the achievement of that goal. After he wins he will swing back and do whatever is politically expedient at the time.

Aaron Adams

Many republican say they support Lieberman because Lamont advocates what they describe as a "cut and run" approach to the Iraq quagmire. Assuming arguendo that their description of Lamont's position on Iraq is accurate, there appears to be no daylight between Lamont's position and Shays' position.

On principle then it appears the same republicans who oppose Lamont ought to also oppose Shays.

Like that'll happen...

Rick Ballard

"On principle then it appears the same republicans who oppose Lamont ought to also oppose Shays."

You never took Introduction to Logic 101, did you?

The available choices are Shays, Farrel and neither. Choosing Farrel or neither has a heavier negative potential than holding your nose and voting for Shays, which is precisely the logic driving the "support" for Lieberman.

Lieberman and Shays share the same rigidly held and inflexible First Principle, which can best be stated as: "Whatever must be said to keep this job, will be said."

They're not much - they're just better than the alternative.

Engram

A question you might ask Chris Shays:

Isn't it fair to describe the two political options we face as follows?

Option A ("phased withdrawal"): Let the unrestrained slaughter of innocent civilians in Iraq begin.

Option B ("stay the course"): Keep the troops in Iraq until they can facilitate the political climate and train the Iraqi security forces needed to keep that slaughter from ever happening.

Jane

Isn't a phased withdrawal essentially what is really going on? Those of us who support the President want us to withdraw when it is militarily suitable, and those who ascribe to Shays want to be lumped in with the folks who say, "oh dear, this was a really bad idea, but..."

Even so his question seems like a good one. Are we coddling the Iraqi's? Are they hesitating to take the reins of their democracy because we are enabling them to do just that? I have no idea if that is true, but I think it is certainly worth figuring out.

I don't care how we win this war, as long as we win it.

The Unbeliever

I think we're missing the dodge here:

He said he found a "noticeable lack of political will" among Iraqis "to move in what I would call a timely fashion" and concluded that Iraqi officials would act with greater urgency if the United States this fall set a timetable for withdrawal

The issue now becomes, do the rest of us agree with Shay's notion of "a timely fashion"? I apparently don't, and I'll wager the Iraqis don't either. What if we sent someone else to Iraq with a different level of patience and/or tolerance for difficult situations--like, say, the generals who are running the show as opposed to someone operating on "political time" right before an election--and they disagree with his assesement, repeatedly, in front of Congress and camera crews and everything?

And I wonder, what would Shays think about our own Founding Fathers, who took eleven years between the Declaration of Independance and the signing of the Constitution--not including the time spent sorting through the kinks afterwards (the Whiskey rebellion, etc)?

(Bonus question: Does Shays have any evidence that prematurely cutting out the main military support for the new Iraqi government will force it along an already difficult path even quicker?)

Jane

Okay, so let's find out what the political will is. We are dealing with a different culture, and part of that culture may dictate holding back because it is easier that way or for some other reason. I'm not saying it does, I guess what I'm asking is, is any of that going on?

Now it is entirely possible that just the opposite is going on - the Iraqis are doing everything in their power to make this happen. I'd just like to know where the truth lies, from someone who knows.

It reminds me of a very politically incorrect conversation I had with my Iranian friend. She told me that middle easterners lie when they negotiate. She didn't say that to cast aspersions on people from that region. In fact she went on to say that if you didn't lie in a negotiation in that region you were considered a fool. It is a cultural thing, not an ethical thing.

Since I've heard what Shays has said from others - they won't get to it as long as we are coddling them - I wonder if there is any truth to the statement.

Rick Ballard

If I were given the opportunity to attempt to elicit a firm response from Congressman 'Jello' Shays, I believe that my first question would be "Given the history of the relationship between Iraq and Iran and the current inequality of their respective armed forces, do you believe that it would be wise for the Iraqis to cede control of their territory to Iran immediately upon our departure or should they put up a token opposition before surrendering?"

As far as motivating the Iraqi pols - they understand the benefit of the retention of US forces very well and are probably very reluctant to see them leave. That won't change until the regime next door is deposed.

Terrye

Well Shays really did not say anything. His comments were vague enough to cover his ass. But I agree with Rick here. Anyone who thinks we should just pack up leave really needs to look at a map. Iran is doing everything it can to complicate things in the hopes we will leave and they will move right in. Not good.

And Don, I am not a clapping seal. That was rude.

MayBee

What's the downside of saying you are for a phased pull out? Everyone wants to get out of there sometime. But even if they set a timetable (can Congress do that? can they tell the CiC when to pull out?), and plan on the pull out, when the time comes they'll still only do it if the facts on the ground support it. They'll still have to figure out if we just move back "over the horizon", or to Okinawa, or back to the US, and under what circumstances we'd go back in.
So yeah, say you're all for phased withdrawl, get voted back in, and then figure out the logistics.

PeterUK

I would hazard a bet that the Iranian armour would be rolling westward as the last coalition transports were lifting off from Iraq,in very much the same way the NVA rolled south.

Larry

The U S will maintain significant force in Iraq for at least a generation, assuming the whole M E doesn't go up in multiple mushroom clouds. Germany? Japan? South Korea?

cnj

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=DNW2006082401>Remember the Alamo

Rick Ballard

Sabato may be the worst political prognosticator out there. Simmons and Johnson are not in bad shape at all. Simmons seems to have done the best in the '01 redistricting with Johnson coming off fairly well and Shays suffering a bit.

Simmon's '04 total vote increased by 56K while his Dem opponents increased by 29K. The numbers for Johnson were 24K versus the Dems 32K but her plurality was 61K. Shays sucked with 33K versus 54K for the Dems and a plurality of only 14K. Simmon's turn out was also the highest at 61% of the VAP - there isn't much more to be had there. He also had the highest turnout of the three in the '02 election. He definitely has the class ground operation.

Farell has a very decent ground operation and her numbers in '04 when she ran against Shays were astoundingly good. The increase in Dem voters in CT as a whole (House vote) from '00 - '04 was 86.5K and ,as noted, her organization accounted for 54K. Her real problem is that there aren't many more to be picked up and there is no way of telling how many of her '04 pick ups will be 'sticky' in a mid term.

This will be Shay's toughest election but Johnson and Simmons are out for a brisk walk.

Go back and marvel at Sabato's brilliance in '04 - he's a contrary indicator.

Semanticleo

You guys still cling to the notion that Iraq is some sort of 'Sudetenland' and your shrinking ranks closely resemble the lone voice of Churchill, don't you?

Get over. Your concern for the plight of the Iraqi's who really want democracy has been noted. As one poster here declared, with some cathartic honesty;

"Yep, Cleo...how clever of you to figure out that the admin is possibly (I would say certainly) being disingenuous when it says or implies that it has no interest in permanent bases in Iraq." (Noah)

So now that the prime objective for invading Iraq is accomplished, what further need of
remaining, except that some (many) of you
are loathe to admit error, and you cushion
that security blanket with an apparent 'concern' for the Iraqis we stab in the back by leaving. Maybe you should have thought of that before you blithely signed on for the FUBAR, Iraq.

maryrose

Cleo,
Iraq as a secure democracy deters Iran and if Iran gets feisty we bomb them . It's win/win.

maryrose

Rick;
Sabato predicted that many senate seats in the South would stay in democratic hands in 2004. He was completely wrong in this prognostication so I take his words with a grain of salt.

clarice

Sabato, Zogby, Morris--Oh to be a pundit..Say whatever you want and do not disappear in shame when proven dead wrong.

PeterUK

"So now that the prime objective for invading Iraq is accomplished,"

" Maybe you should have thought of that before you blithely signed on for the FUBAR, Iraq."

Two contrary ideas before breakfast.

Rick Ballard

Clarice,

That's what makes Cost and Barone so refreshing. I read Sabato's jabber and the way he's stacking probabilities in order to get to the possible outcome is simply risible. The money just isn't there.

I wish Cost would finish up his dissertation so he could devote more time to handicapping.

clarice

Me, too. They are the only two analysts I pay any attention to. (Well, to be perfectly honest, I regard the others as fairly good contrary indicators.)

But , really, why would people continue to pay good money to people who are so consistently wrong?

Rick Ballard

I don't know what the value of a good illusion might be. Certainly, if I were raising money for the Dems, I would use Charlie Cooks and Larry Sabato's "analysis" as a hook. After all, it's difficult to raise money for a sure loser - you have to be able to point to something and say "Lookee here, this looks like '94, we can take it - if you'll cough up some dough."

I'd like to say that '06 is more like '98 but it just isn't. There aren't enough weak Dem seats in play.

clarice

I must say I am in awe of their ability to keep this shill game going on this long. I wonder though, Rick. After all that media crap on Lebanon I think the public is giving up on considering them credible and when you consider election after election of Reps following fkae polls and coverage of them.........

If this really is working, you're my agent. We're hitting the boards.

cnj

Zogby is the worst of all. Blatantly biased. That guy was predicting a Kerry win as far back as in May'04. .. and the exit polls fiasco.
Sabato, even if he is wrong, does not to appear to be biased.

If the Republicans hold the House, then http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/04/will_democrats_win_control_of.html>Barone's Hypothesis will be vindicated.

Rick Ballard

Clarice,

There's no dough in a busted hustle. People like Tom Maguire, Thomas Lifscomb and a hundred others are dismantling the edifice of lies and corruption that mask our intended enslavement in a manner which bodes well for the nations future.

Do you think Junior Sulzberger's manifestation of the edifice complex will be finished before he is? If they can finish it within the year, it may be, otherwise I'd bet against.

There is no Comrade Uncle Walty sitting under Sauron's baleful eye to convince us that victory is defeat. Certainly, the "opinion makers" still have some sway - but their boast of "we'll give Kerry 15%" turned out to be 5% - and it wasn't enough.

It's not just the lies about Lebanon or the TANG memo at all. It's the fellows like Tom and Thom and you and I who keep saying, not just "they're lying" but "they're lying and these are the specific lies they are telling - and, here, this is the truth".

Every day in which we point at the emperor's bony ass and laugh brings us a day closer to the day in which the 'emperor' will finally be buried.

CNJ,

I can't say that Sabato is intentionally doing anything - he's just always wrong in one direction.

The Unbeliever

Actually Rick, I think they DID deliver the full 15% in 2004. There's no way an utter joke like John "Magic Hat" Kerry should have gotten that close to the Presidency--if the media wasn't in the tank for the Dems, he never would've broken 40%.

sam - not in my name

And the beat goes on...
----------------------------------------------
I Hope And Pray We Don't Get Hit Again-BUT.....
----------------------------------------------

READ MORE: 2008, Supreme Court, George W. Bush
I hope and pray we don't get hit again, like we did on September 11. Even one life lost to the violence of terrorism is too much.

If I somehow knew an attack was coming, I wouldn't pause for a second to report it in order to prevent it from occuring.

But on the other hand, I remind myself that without the ultimate sacrifice paid by 400,000 U.S. soldiers in World War II, tyranny could well have an iron grip on the world, and even on this nation.


If the Nazis had prevailed, tens, if not hundreds of millions more would have been killed.
That realization has led my brain to launch a political calculus 180 degrees removed from my pacifist-inclined leanings. An entirely hypothetical yet realpolitik calculus that is ugly, and cold-hearted but must be posited:

This is a type of calculus that Pentagon war games planners and political consultants do all the time- a combination of what-if actions and consequences that are unpleasant to consider but are in the realm of plausibility.

What if another terror attack just before this fall's elections could save many thousand-times the lives lost?

I start from the premise that there is already a substantial portion of the electorate that tends to vote GOP because they feel that Bush has "kept us safe," and that the Republicans do a better job combating terrorism.

If an attack occurred just before the elections, I have to think that at least a few of the voters who persist in this "Bush has kept us safe" thinking would realize the fallacy they have been under.

If 5% of the "he's kept us safe" revise their thinking enough to vote Democrat, well, then, the Dems could recapture the House and the Senate and be in a position to:

Block the next Supreme Court appointment, one which would surely result in the overturning of Roe and the death of hundreds if not thousands of women from abortion-prohibiting states at the hands of back-alley abortionists;

Be in a position to elevate the party's chances for a regime change in 2008. A regime change that would:

Save hundreds of thousands of American lives by enacting universal health care;

Save untold numbers of lives by pushing for cleaner air standards that would greatly reduce heart and lung diseases;

More enthusiastically address the need for mass transit, the greater availability of which would surely cut highway deaths;

Enact meaningful gun control legislation that would reduce crime and cut fatalities by thousands a year;

Fund stem cell research that could result in cures saving millions of lives;

Boost the minimum wage, helping to cut down on poverty which helps spawn violent crime and the deaths that spring from those acts;

Be less inclined to launch foolish wars, absence of which would save thousands of soldiers' lives- and quite likely moderate the likelihood of further terror acts.

I am not proud of myself for even considering the notion that another terror attack that costs even one American life could ever be considered anything else but evil and hurtful. And I know that when I weigh the possibility that such an attack- that might, say, kill 100- would prevent hundreds of thousands of Americans from dying who otherwise would- I am exhibiting a calculating cold heart diametrically opposed to everything I stand for as a human being. A human being, who, just so you know, is opposed to most wars and to capital punishment.

But in light of the very real potential of the next two American elections to solidify our growing American persona as a warlike, polluter-friendly nation with repressive domestic tendencies and inadequate health care for so many tens of millions, let me ask you this. Even if only from the standpoint of a purely intellectual exercise in alternative future history:

If you knew us getting hit again would launch a chain of transformative, cascading events that would enable a better nation where millions who would have died will live longer, would such a calculus have any moral validity?

Any at all?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-shaw/i-hope-and-pray-we-dont-_b_28011.html

sam

War
It's nothing but a heartbreaker
War
Friend only to the undertaker

08/25/06 KUNA: Iraqi soldier killed, seven injured in two attacks in Kirkuk

08/25/06 AFP: Two Marines to face hearing in Iraqi civilian death

08/25/06 DoD Identifies Marine Casualty: Staff Sgt. Gordon G. Solomon, 35

08/25/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Pfc. William E. Thorne, 26

08/25/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Sgt. Marquees A. Quick, 28

08/25/06 dailymail: Front line Iraq 'too dangerous' for Prince Harry

08/25/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Sgt. Jeremy E. King, 23

08/25/06 DoD Identifies Marine Casualty: Staff Sgt. Dwayne E. Williams, 28

08/25/06 AFP: Roadside bomb kills Iraqi army officer in Khan Bani Saad

08/25/06 AFP; Two bakers killed in Tikrit

08/25/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill two in 2 people in Nasiriya

08/25/06 Reuters: Three killed, three wounded by makeshift bomb in Balad Ruz

08/25/06 Reuters: Turkey bombed Kurdish rebels at Iraqi border

08/25/06 Reuters: Nine killed in attacks in Baquba

08/25/06 Reuters: Roadside bomb kills Iraqi soldier in Rashad

08/25/06 Reuters: Six wounded in hand-grenade attack in Hawija

08/25/06 IRIN: Threatened teachers fleeing Iraq

08/25/06 AFP: Insurgents kill seven as Iraq violence rages

08/25/06 Reuters: Body of Iraqi soldier found near Qaim

charmed

The longer it takes for the US to exit Iraq the more Americans will shift to the left politically and the more persistent that shift will be. Looks like another quagmire for the righties.

Terrye

sam and charmed:

Saddam is still alive, maybe you guys should start championing his return to power. I am not sure the Iraais would like that, but what the hell when he started putting hundreds of thousands in mass graves as least he would make the left happy.

Terrye

In fact most people were getting pretty tired of war in Korea. But today, Truman is credited with not only liberating South Korea but stopping the growing communist movement in the region from going after countries like Japan. Sometimes it takes distance to see these things.

For instance the people on the left and the Democrats are hoping there has been enough distance since the days of Carter and company to ensure that most Americans will have forgotten the fact that if Jimmy had dealt with these crazy bastards back then we might not be dealing with them today.

As for Iraq, I think the constant negativity has worn on the American people, they just want it to settle down over there and they are hoping that if it does the anti war people will shut up and go away.

However, that does not change the fact that the same people who constantly claim we must work with the UN obviously do not believe in enforcing its resolutions. And the same people who constantly talk about the loss of innocent life, obviously do not care how many innocent people a tyrant like Saddam can and has killed. The same people who say we must abide by the rule of the law, have no interest in dealing with the huge scam that is the oil for food program, etc.

In other words even if the Democrats win they will not change the world. The Iranians will not stop threatening to wipe out the US and the Jews, the terrorists certainly will not stop blowing people up and if we abandon Iraq and leave the people who trusted us to die then we will once again be known as the people Osama talked about...the people with the soft underbelly...the people who run away when you make them bleed.

How long will we stay Left when the Democrats have to deal with the real world and not some Michael Moore film fantasy? Let's see, Jimmy had one term didn't he?

Bob

I love it when liberal whiners like sam can only parrot what other say... they need to quote music, poetry and now the Huff 'n' Puff Post to frame their thinking for them.

Now let's talk about your new hero Russell Shaw... this guy has never written anything, technology speaking, that he didn't cull from other publications or news. The guy seems to be doing the same with his latest attempt at political commentary. Maybe when this proves to be just as big a failure, he can get a teaching job at one of those "open minded" universities and help more young people like you become just as pathetically insignificant!

lurker

I still haven't forgotten Jimmy Carter - even to this very day. After all, how can anyone forget after seeing Carter mingling with Fidel Castro and other far left wing dictators??

I still remember the highway robbery interest rates under his presidency.

I still remember his failure to bring those hostages home. And learning that the deal Jimmy Carter brokered with Iran preventing our hostages from getting remunerations from Iran for their treatment.

lurker

What about Greg Mitchell, Bob?

lurker

Has Ali-cleown signed her contract yet?

Extraneus

Yeah, that HuffPo post was really a window to the humor of their souls. But speaking of their souls, it always strikes me as instructive that virtually all of the left's criticisms of the "war" are dishonest. For example...

1. Are they truly concerned about our troops, worried that too many are dying? Please. Not only has this been a historically unmatched victory in terms of the low number of casualties, it can be easily argued that they wish for more rather than less.

2. Do they really think we're "less safe" as a result of toppling Saddam and killing thousands of suicidal fanatics? Again, ridiculous to think they really believe that.

3. Perhaps they're actually worried that the Iraqis themselves are worse off now than when at risk of Uday's taking a shine to one of their daughters? Ahem.

4. Maybe they think it would be strategically smarter for us to station troops in Okinawa rather than right there in the heart of the Middle East? This is possible, I guess, but then they'd have to agree to be labeled dangerous fools.

Except for the fact that there's money being spent in Iraq that they'd rather get their hands on, which they rarely argue, they actually haven't voiced an honest objection as far as I can tell, notwithstanding that HuffPo poster's idiotic "calculus."

SunnyDay

I wonder if they read any of the responses to Shaw's posts. Even the other lefties think he is an idiot.

Bob

Here's something silly sam can add to his dishonest list of casualties:

"But one can also find something equivalent to combat conditions on home soil. The death rate for African American men ages 20 to 34 in Philadelphia was 4.37 per 1,000 in 2002, 11 percent higher than among troops in Iraq. Slightly more than half the Philadelphia deaths were homicides."

And it's from the http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/25/AR2006082500940.html>WP

Sounds like these kids would be better off suited up in Iraq then sitting ducks in Philly... another fine Democratic controlled wasteland!

Yes and lurker you are correct... many if not most of the problems we have today in the ME is due to Carter inability to stand up to Mullahs when the time was right. This proved them right that America was weak and wanted never again to fight a war on foreign soil... he gave them in effect "Carter" Blanche to do as they please... and Clinton was no better!

PeterUK

"If an attack occurred just before the elections, I have to think that at least a few of the voters who persist in this "Bush has kept us safe" thinking would realize the fallacy they have been under."

Is this an incantation to raise the spectre of the Madrid election bombings?

"If 5% of the "he's kept us safe" revise their thinking enough to vote Democrat, well, then, the Dems could recapture the House and the Senate and be in a position to:"

Yes

"Block the next Supreme Court appointment, one which would surely result in the overturning of Roe and the death of hundreds if not thousands of women from abortion-prohibiting states at the hands of back-alley abortionists".

Shroud waving par excellance,whate ever happened to contraception?

Be in a position to elevate the party's chances for a regime change in 2008. A regime change that would:

"Save hundreds of thousands of American lives by enacting universal health care".

Britains National Health Service is bankrupting the country,an extra £500million recently pumped in disappeared without effect.People's lives are in the gift of the NHS,doctors and bureaucrats can decide whether one gets treatment or dies,it wasn't just the Health Service which was nationalised is was the individuals health.The citizens health is in the gift of politicians

"Save untold numbers of lives by pushing for cleaner air standards that would greatly reduce heart and lung diseases"

This means greater restrictions on automotive and industrial output,huge rises in energy costs.A litle parable,domestic heating was made smokeless by law,thus tying the consumer to smokeless fuel sources.gas and electricity prices have recently risen by 66%

"More enthusiastically address the need for mass transit, the greater availability of which would surely cut highway deaths"

Proposals for mass transit systems always omit the impossibility of catering for the huge diversity of destinations.When the railways were rationalised,many branch lines disappeared,these were the feeders for the
main lines.In Britain,these had been built in the railway boom of the 19th century,when land was cheap and planning laws unrestrictive.The sheer cost of building such a system now is prohibitive.

"Enact meaningful gun control legislation that would reduce crime and cut fatalities by thousands a year".

Hand guns have been banned in Britain for several years,the once unarmed police would not look out of place in Baghdad.Gun crime is up.A once armed country with little or no crime is now a war zone in inner cities.

"Fund stem cell research that could result in cures saving millions of lives"
This seem a very socialist solution in a capitalist country,there is a case for tax relief on R&D,but when governments get involved,you end up with the AirBus.

"Boost the minimum wage, helping to cut down on poverty which helps spawn violent crime and the deaths that spring from those acts".

This is the standard canard of the left which jars with the reality.Western countries have seen periods of great poverty when crime was far less prevalent.Root causes here are the left's undermining of the underpinnings of society.

"Be less inclined to launch foolish wars, absence of which would save thousands of soldiers' lives- and quite likely moderate the likelihood of further terror acts".

Without entering into an evaluation of the definition of foolish wars,it is only necessary to note that 9/11,the Khobar Towers 7/7 were all perpetrated by those who were not at war with the victims,or at least the victims were not knowingly at war with the perpetrators.How the left have come to correlate war as a causal element of terror is one of the wonders of post-modern thinking,if not a damning indictment of the education system.

"I am not proud of myself for even considering the notion that another terror attack that costs even one American life could ever be considered anything else but evil and hurtful. And I know that when I weigh the possibility that such an attack- that might, say, kill 100- would prevent hundreds of thousands of Americans from dying who otherwise would- I am exhibiting a calculating cold heart diametrically opposed to everything I stand for as a human being. A human being, who, just so you know, is opposed to most wars and to capital punishment".

Yes,the survival instinct is a wonderful thing.

"But in light of the very real potential of the next two American elections to solidify our growing American persona as a warlike, polluter-friendly nation with repressive domestic tendencies and in......."

Sorry,I have to take a vomit break

lurker

This from the real Iraqi people.

"Iraq: Media Manufactured Perception"

Mostly good news!

The Iraqis want us to stay.

Extraneus, HuffPo's argument is that we're pouring money into Iraq instead of pouring money into looking for Osama bin Laden and his second man.

Geesch! That's alotta money to pour into two men!

As for those supporting the raising of minimum wage and taxes is seriously due for Economics 101.

lurker

PUK, all that HuffPo's proposing will raise our deficits and harm the US economy that's been booming under Bush.

lurker

PUK, there is a NHS doctor or nurse that has been blogging the results of a nationalized health program instated in England. Do you know the URL of this blog?

lurker

This is also happening in Canada:

Secret Rationing System

Bob

lurker if you have 24 minutes, watch this video on http://www.onthefencefilms.com/video/deadmeat/>Canada's National Health Care system... or lack of. This seems to be the one the moonbats want most.

My mom is Canadian and most of her 5 sisters and brothers, who lived in Canada, didn't make it to their 65th birthdays. I think one made it 72. The sad part is that they all died of common ailments... nothing you'd get worked up over here in the states.

lurker

HuffPo post being discussed and dissected over at Aces.

Somehow, that's not surprising, Bob.

What gets me are the costs of health care in USA, even if covered by insurance.

The moonbats want to wipe out Cigna and Aetna and chunk out the other two.

Pofarmer

Defenselink.mil

"WASHINGTON, Aug. 25, 2006 – Violence in Baghdad has decreased over the past five weeks, and the Iraqi government is committed to reconciliation, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Iraq's Deputy President Adil al-Mahdi said here today.

Following a meeting at the Pentagon, Rumsfeld and al-Mahdi spoke about progress in Iraq with reporters. The secretary praised the work of Iraqi security forces, which he said now number more than 267,000. He said there has been a reduction in the levels of violence and in the numbers of attacks, particularly in areas U.S. and Iraqi forces have been able to clear.

While U.S. and Iraqi forces together have made progress in reducing violence in Baghdad, Rumsfeld stressed the Iraqi people and their government hold the key to long-term stability and security.

"The important thing is for the Iraqi government to achieve success with respect to their reconciliation process," he said. "This is not purely a military problem, and it is not going to be solved purely by military forces." "

"WASHINGTON, Aug. 25, 2006 – Iraqi and U.S. troops have used an “isolate, clear and hold” strategy during Operation Together Forward to dampen insurgent activity in some troubled Baghdad neighborhoods, a senior operational officer said in the Iraqi capital today.

The operation “is part of a larger effort across Baghdad to significantly reduce the amount of violence that was hindering progress in our area of operations,” said Army Col. Robert E. Scurlock Jr., commander of the 1st Armored Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team. He spoke to Pentagon reporters via a satellite connection from Camp Liberty, Iraq. The 2nd Brigade’s area of responsibility is in western Baghdad.

Scurlock said his soldiers and Iraqi troops of the 1st Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division, began a sweep of Baghdad’s Amiriyah neighborhood Aug. 13. This operation, he said, was conducted in concert with other anti-insurgent operations launched across Baghdad.

The security sweeps were conducted to rid violence-prone Baghdad neighborhoods of murderers, kidnappers and other terrorists, Scurlock said. The Iraqi capital city was experiencing about 52 insurgent attacks daily during July, he said, and now it sees about 31 such attacks per day.

Isolated attacks on civilians, Iraqi security forces and coalition forces have taken place since the sweeps were completed, Scurlock acknowledged. But, “these attacks are still fewer than the average we’ve seen in recent weeks,” the colonel said. "

Pofarmer

Anybody who thinks "universal health care" and "mass transit" are going to do anything but create more expenses are just idiots. Govt managed health care is in the process of failing everywhere it's tried. I will admit that our system has some serious problems, including cost, but nationalizing won't solve anything, just add more entitlement spending to a system that already has too much.

Pofarmer

There are right at 2,000,000 men and women in uniform, correct? Right now, even with the increased numbers in Iraq, there are about 150,000 currently deployed in both Iraq and Baghdad. How is having less then 10% of our troops deployed there stretching the military thin? It seems to me we need to be reprioritizing other deployments, which is what Rumsfeld is doing. If we can't stand deploying such a small percentage overseas, we really need to look at our force structure, not bitch that we are "stretching the military thin". We don't need to just build a garrison force in the U.S.

Specter

Notice how sam's posts are getting shorter and shorter....LOL

PeterUK

Spector,
Yes,The Incredible Shrinking Sam.

SunnyDay

Healthcare - IMO, providers and insurance companies in the healthcare field should be nonprofits. I think it would help lower prices a lot.

They used to be that way, then the states decided they needed some of that money. I remember when VA decided to start taxing BC/BS. That was the beginning of the end of affordable health insurance.


Specter

As more has come out about what Shays actually said, I blogged about it here.

Rick Ballard

That's a good piece, Specter. As Tom noted initially, Shays has been beating this drum for some time. His endless search for differentiation through nuance makes him an easy target for the MSM.

Good to see Unready Neddy leap for the tailgate of the passing wagon. Miz Clinton's little helpers must be giving him remedial triangulation and straddling lessons.

As time passes the entire feckless crew is going to arrive at "pick me because dusty rose is so much prettier than blush pink".

Specter

Thanks Rick. It is just more of Lamont grasping at any straw to try to gain points back. The race is still close though....

Cecil Turner

Nuance aside, only an idiot could believe setting a timetable would result in improved political will amongst our Iraqi allies (as compared to our opponents there). Of course, you'd think it'd also be obvious that raising the minimum wage wouldn't eliminate poverty, any more than clean air regulation necessarily makes air cleaner. Unfortunately, there appears to be a national epidemic of fuzzy thinking, and it's particularly acute when it comes to war strategy.

clarice

It is a good piece, Specter, and yes,Cecil, fuzzy thinking seems to be an epidemic.
So does media mendacity , and this latest about Editor & Publisher's editor Gred Mitchell is a doozy.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22273_Rewriting_History_at_Editor_and_Publisher&only

Dan Riehl and others have been writing about it, too.

Specter

Incredible. Over at Confederate Yankee he attempts to trace back into who made the change. Turns out that mediainfo is owned by adweek who is owned by VNU Business Media who just happens to own E&P. Interesting connection.

clarice

It certainly may explain why E & P is the semi-offical pimp of the MSM, wouldn't it?
Riehl and I now have our first disagreement. He thinks Mitchell should be fired. I think he's the perfect man for the job.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame