If these same 'Rat bastards had been around in the 40s, we'd all be speaking German and Japanese today.
posted on 06/19/2006 5:49:13 PM PDT
(Semper Fi - Wanna help kick some liberal arse? It's not just a job here at FR, IT's an obsession.)
I think the Democrats have "Minority-itus"... a condition where the party comes up with a strategy that is sure to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Most people, when push comes to shove, understand that we can not even TALK about pulling our troops out before the job is done.
This is like a S.W.A.T team is staked out on a shopping center where terrorists hold captives, and the people are screaming "Just leave them alone and nobody will get hurt!!!"
We all know that if the S.W.A.T team does that, the next morning there will be a bunch of bodies all over the floor.
posted on 06/19/2006 5:51:42 PM PDT
(I may be a hateful bigot, but I still love you)
A partial withdraw will only put the remaining troops in even more danger.The facts on the ground should dictate the troop levels.
posted on 06/19/2006 5:56:55 PM PDT
"Three and a half years into the conflict, we should tell the
Iraqis British/French/Australians that the American security blanket is not permanent," said Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, top Democrat 6
posted on 06/19/2006 5:58:02 PM PDT
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
The Democratic Party, undermining America for decades.
Of course! They are on the side of our enemies. Naturally they want to reduce the troops fighting against their side.
posted on 06/19/2006 6:01:27 PM PDT
(Liberals are dangerous for America.)
As Arnold says, "Why should we listen to losers?"
posted on 06/19/2006 6:02:24 PM PDT
(REMEMBER: Mean spirited, angry remarks against my postings won't feed even one hungry child.)
"In a statement, Kerry and Feingold said a deadline "gives Iraqis the best chance for stability and self-government" and "allows us to begin refocusing on the true threats that face our country."
posted on 06/19/2006 6:02:53 PM PDT
(Nothing lasts forever, Unless it does.)
The Senate just voted down Kerry's plan 93 to 6 so now the Dems come up with multiple plans because they feel they have some plan.
President Bush's plan is the right one, bring home the troops when the job is done.
posted on 06/19/2006 6:05:31 PM PDT
(DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
Sen Devitto tells us how to fight???
posted on 06/19/2006 6:06:36 PM PDT
(Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
These people are slamming the door in their face again. Its clear to even the most casual observer of American politics the Democrats are invested in our defeat abroad. So here we have the sight of Democratic Senators telling the American people that our well-trained troops can't defeat a bunch of blood-thirsty terrorists. You can't make this up, folks! (laughing) They are headed for a big loss in November.
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")
posted on 06/19/2006 6:07:08 PM PDT
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
Senate Democrats press to reduce success in Iraq
posted on 06/19/2006 6:14:49 PM PDT
by A CA Guy
(God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
If the Democrats had any sense-there would not have been a sliver of daylight between their position on the WOT and President Bush's.
Iraq is part of the WOT and it is moronic and insulting to pretend otherwise.
This should have been a non issue for the Democrats.
Being on the side of America and the men and women of the military while they are fighting terrorism- is always a plus.
Instead, the Democrats have aligned themselves with the terrorists .
And there is no way to spin that as a positive.
We could have won Viet Nam - if the military had been allowed to run the war...but the clueless politicians, who suffer from an occupational hazard - a belief that they are Gods - micromanaged every move.
If they really wanted to see the war come to a successful end, they'd sit down and shut up.
OH, I forgot - the DON'T want a successful end. That's their biggest nightmare...it would vindicate Pres. Bush
Traitorous back of vipers, one and all
posted on 06/19/2006 6:22:45 PM PDT
(LINCOLN: "...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time>")
Hey, Bah---check out the second to last paragraph in this article.
posted on 06/19/2006 6:31:40 PM PDT
You know when it dose become the real time to reduce forces and leave. These dims will try to take credit.
posted on 06/19/2006 6:33:35 PM PDT
(I did use spell check!)
Bunch of Ankle biters.
They just voted on this last week.
Mitch needs to call them on it again.
posted on 06/19/2006 6:38:02 PM PDT
(The Internet is the samizdat of liberty..)
posted on 06/19/2006 6:47:54 PM PDT
(Gentleman, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room - Dr. Strangelove)
In a statement, Kerry and Feingold said a deadline "gives Iraqis the best chance for stability and self-government" and "allows us to begin refocusing on the true threats that face our country."
I am stupid I guess but can someone please explain to me how removing US forces "gives Iraqis the best chance for stability and self-government."
posted on 06/19/2006 7:00:02 PM PDT
Senate Democrats presented two plans for winding down U.S. involvement in Iraq on Monday, one to pull out U.S. combat forces by July 2007 and another to begin withdrawing this year without a deadline for completion.
Which plan does the insurgents endorse?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson