WaPost: Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable

The Washington Post ^ | Thursday, May 3, 2007; Page A01 | Jonathan Weisman and Shailagh Murray

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

It wasn’t extreme enough to suit him ,...I think.

[Badeye]

You can never tell with a kook like Kucinich.

[Marine_Uncle]

Got limited time before I have to get ready for work. But thought this article has some major significance. It is in regards to a little known office withing Maliki's government that appears to be screwing around with how the Iraqi military is operating when it comes to dealing with the Shia militias.
The article mentions a women who is responsible for the firings of some good Iraqi generals.
It can be found Here.
Perhaps if you can view it and re-post it as a stand along article all can view. If article is accurate regarding this women and her cronies, it explains why the Maliki government is going soft on the Shia militias.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Will post it if not already done.....

[IamConservative]

Thanks. Surprised Kucinich didn’t vote Aye.

Did he vote for the original measure? I suspect he is against the (now dead) legislation because it didn't require that we surrender, tuck tail and run immediately.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Already up with some good discussion revolving around....

"just how much to we trust the Washington Post to give us the truth."....:

Maliki's Office Is Seen Behind Purge in Forces

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

mMore from the links at post #2:

The Republicans Don't Even Want to Win This War

**************************************EXCERPT*****************************

If you really wanted to win this war (whatever the hell that means), you could put some real effort behind it. Twenty to thirty-thousand more troops? Who are the Republicans kidding? If you really thought we absolutely, positively had to win this war, you'd start a draft and put a million guys smack dab in the middle of Iraq.

Were we having questions about surges or drafts in World War II? No, we put on our boots and went to kick some Nazi ass. Why aren't we doing that here?

Because the Republicans are full of shit. They don't really think this is an "existential" war. What a laughable thought. What, if we don't win in Ramadi, we're going to cease to exist here? Why aren't these guys laughed out of the room already?

Here we are negotiating with contemptible fools. How much of a surge would you like? How long would you like to stay? Oh really, you think the Iraqis might take over Cleveland if we leave?

"They are going to follow us home." John McCain says this. God, remember when John McCain was a man. He was a damn hero, a patriot and as honest a guy as you could find in politics. Where have all the heroes gone?

If John McCain and Bush and the whole Republican Party thought they were actually going to follow us home - that the Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis would get on a boat, come here and fight us in San Antonio and Detroit and Boca - they'd start a draft in a second. And so would I.

If we had a real existential war and we would be taken over if we lost, who wouldn't fight? Really, Iraq is going to take us over? Come on, who but a contemptible fool would say something like that?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Sounds like some comments we see here......

[mware]

I think you are correct. The Dem’s are going to attempt to reach their goal by gradually pushing the envelope. This bill will pull a time line but will introduce penalties if Iraq does not meet certain deadline.

[ArmstedFragg]

Superb!!

[Syncro]

Yes

[jveritas]

Then that is really stupid.

[Nonstatist]

Not stupid, just political. Politics is all about posturing.

[NeoCaveman]

Thanks. Surprised Kucinich didn’t vote Aye.

Kook Spinach's claim to fame is being so anti-war he won't vote to fund it on any condition.

[jveritas]

Posturing and then losing is very stupid. This is called “Arabism”.

[Syncro]

No argument there, that's just the way liberals do things.

Their plan will backfire.

One politician on TV yesterday mentioned if the Democrats keep playing these games, Bush can get some emergency emergency money for funding the troops(while Reid Peloski and Co diddle around with their treasonic actions.)

[phillyfanatic]

Correct. Now let us pray the Dems make utter fools of themselves by demanding an immediate end to the war , not just in Iraq , but in our war against global Islamofascism. Someone will and yet the media will not exploit that, naturally. They will blame Bush for the statements that the foolish Dems will make.

[Syncro]

This is called “Arabism”.

Quite apropos considering the Liberal's allies.

[Syncro]

Now let us pray the Dems make utter fools of themselves by demanding an immediate end to the war , not just in Iraq , but in our war against global Islamofascism.

They have already made the term Global War on Terror politically incorrect to use. They don't know it exists because of the ostrich sand in their eyes.

[Badeye]

I was under the impression he did vote for it the first time around. But he’s at the opposite end of my state (ohio) and rarely offers a sane comment...so I don’t follow him much.