Skip to comments.
Kerry: Reduce U.S. force in Iraq by 100,000 by end of next year
AP ^
| December 8, 2005
Posted on 12/08/2005 2:10:01 PM PST by ncountylee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 next last
To: ncountylee
John cut and run Kerry, you sir, are disgusting!
61
posted on
12/08/2005 2:42:51 PM PST
by
teletech
(Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
To: ncountylee
Sen. Kerry and today's spin on the Wheel of Policy. Tune in tomorrow when Kerry spins the wheel and comes up with a completely different strategy to spout. We'd like to thank our sponsors, Commie Pinko Flip Flops and Heinz ketchup for when you need something to look like blood when faking war injuries.
62
posted on
12/08/2005 2:43:48 PM PST
by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: Names Ash Housewares
Damn this guy is all over the place!...............
It's only 5:50 p.m. EDT. He could change his position two more times before 6:00 p.m. EDT.
63
posted on
12/08/2005 2:50:35 PM PST
by
TomGuy
To: ncountylee
FYI. At a bit after 5 I caught my local NBC with a picture of JFK, giving the dems talking points on Iraq and it was concluded with something to the effect that the dems are reiterating what Bush wants!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OOHRAH!! A light bulb went on!!
64
posted on
12/08/2005 2:55:02 PM PST
by
freema
(Proud Marine Mom-What fools they are who doubt the ability of liberty to triumph over despotism)
To: ncountylee
Hey, Kerry has "combat" experience. He was in Vietnam.
He knows everything there is to know about losing a war.
65
posted on
12/08/2005 2:58:28 PM PST
by
manwiththehands
("Attack (Democrats) until they stop twitching and then attack some more." -J. Peter Mulhern)
To: ncountylee
I'm for John Kerry's proposal if he can get an agreement from Zarqawi, bin Laden and Zawahiri to turn over 100,000 terrorist fighters for imprisonment and torture. He could come back with a little slip of paper in Arabic and tell the Senate "Peace In Our Time".
a very very high degree of sarcasm intended
66
posted on
12/08/2005 3:04:33 PM PST
by
HardStarboard
(Read Stephen Hayes "Spooked White House" - Weekly Standard. It explains a an awful lot.)
To: ncountylee
I think Kerry et al are afraid we have this thing under control and are trying to rectify the situation before it becomes too obvious for the MSM to lie about it.
67
posted on
12/08/2005 3:13:00 PM PST
by
arthurus
(Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
To: Bryan24
We need a permanent base in the region and Iraq is very nicely situated. I surely wouldn't rule it out just because Kerry is "accusing" W of intending that.
68
posted on
12/08/2005 3:15:08 PM PST
by
arthurus
(Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
To: Baby Driver
The Dims have not lost touch with reality. They are not on ơur side, America's side, in this war. Keep that in mind and the Dims' words and actions make more sense. They desire the destruction of the American military in Iraq and, failing that, a political defeat will do.
69
posted on
12/08/2005 3:18:06 PM PST
by
arthurus
(Better to fight them over THERE than over HERE.)
To: ncountylee
Maybe we should let the C-in-C set the policy.
To: Frank_Discussion
"Why the HELL would we want to send THAT message?"
Ha, I agree.
To: ncountylee
These Democrats trying to control the President's use of force are just desperately trying to make something seem like a concession. Reminds me of a kid trying to train a 20-year-old dog: "Shake. Come on boy. Shake. Come On. Shake. Ok. Sit. Sit. C'mon, Sit. Sit. OK. Stay."
72
posted on
12/08/2005 3:31:05 PM PST
by
dangus
To: TomGuy
73
posted on
12/08/2005 3:33:54 PM PST
by
GW and Twins Pawpaw
(Sheepdog for Five [My grandkids are way more important than any lefty's feelings!])
To: Names Ash Housewares
"Kerry foreign policy advisor Rand Beers told reporters Kerry would not rule out the possibility of sending additional U.S. troops to Iraq."
I call bullshit on that one. Rand Beers talking about sending more troops? C'mon, Rand.
To: dannyboy72
Good point. Makes me realize something. The fact that he wants to WITHDRAW 100,000 shows he is not starting from an estimate of home many troops are needed, and then saying, "We can reach that goal by withdrawing X many troops." Rather, he must be basing his number on a political calculation of what sounds like a good number:
Suppose we have 161,810 troops there. If we withdraw 100,000 troops, we would have 61,810 remaining. How in the world would someone get such a number?
On the other hand, if a leader looked at how many troops we need to server our military purposes, he would say, "We need 85,000 troops." Then he'd figure that would mean pulling 81,810 troops. He probably would say 82,000 or maybe even 80,000. Certainly no-one would ever say 100,000.
75
posted on
12/08/2005 3:39:27 PM PST
by
dangus
To: dangus
Oops "85,000" should be 80,000.
76
posted on
12/08/2005 3:40:19 PM PST
by
dangus
To: ncountylee
I say put this knucklehead in a swift boat and send him up the Tigris on a secret "Christmas" mission. With any luck we'll be able to find his bloated body floating down river by New Years.
77
posted on
12/08/2005 3:51:15 PM PST
by
PsyOp
(The commonwealth is theirs who hold the arms.... - Aristotle.)
To: ncountylee
Will the Media ever get tired of this motor mouth idiot?
Seems like he is on tv everyday spouting off.
If President Bush or, anyone else for that matter, wanted advice on how to conduct a military operation Kerry, Kennedy, Dean and Pelosi would be the last people on earth they would take advice from.
Kerry is a traitor and a liar, Kennedy's brain is cooked from alcohol, Dean and Pelosi are just insane. None of them have any military credentials but the media keeps them on the airwaves continuously anyway. Damn, I am tired of this bunch.
78
posted on
12/08/2005 4:11:12 PM PST
by
jerry639
To: ncountylee
Kerry, he's the jerk who was for the war before he was against it. He's the same jerk who was for more troops before he was against more troops. He was the same jerk who complained about armor for our troops then voted against funding it. Truly a voice of steadfastness and reason (not).
79
posted on
12/08/2005 4:15:28 PM PST
by
Cautor
To: ncountylee
Because sKerry claims to not be privy to the same intelligence the commander in chief has, on what basis does he have to be making command recommendations? He's unfit for command.
80
posted on
12/08/2005 4:57:47 PM PST
by
PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
(How long do we have to pretend that the vast majority of Democrats are patriots?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson