* Democrats Force Surrender Now
Posted on 05/16/2007 1:17:59 PM PDT by pabianice
Sadly, the war in Iraq appears to be lost. The Democrats, like terriers shaking a rat (Iraq) using a plan of funding war for three months -- salami tactics -- causing the Army command to recognize that the Congress, not the President, is effectively in charge, have achieved their goal: implementing withdrawal.
The Democrats will be responsible for affecting army morale. No one will want to lead the last charge and be responsible for or themselves suffer the last death or be taken prisoner before the order to stand down is issued. When and if -- God forbid -- the war and the acts of terrorism now faced daily in Iraq follow our retreat across the ocean to our homeland shores, the Democratic leaders who forced the withdrawal will be held responsible. While they will reject responsibility for the deaths and destruction that occur here in our homeland, the American public will remember the dire predictions of what would follow giving up the fight, and switch their support and recall the valiant efforts of George W. Bush to save us from those consequences and honor him in larger numbers than those who mistakenly now loathe his very name.
The Democratic Party will reap the political whirlwind,
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
NO....
They won’t...
Their friends in the Media’s Gay Mafia will see to that one.
bump
I’m afraid you are right. The media will spin terror attacks in the US as “blowback” from “Bush’s illegal war” that never would be happening if we’d just left Saddam in place.
* Democrats Force Surrender Now
I give the media alot of credit for being able to sway public opinion but the gallop poll today showing that 70 plus percent want stability in iraq before withdrawal gives me hope that they see beyond the BS.
This is an existential struggle; no more or less. The treasonous rats are siding with our implacable enemies.
I think they will pay a price.
Most people I speak to have a sense of foreboding; an expectation based on a general cumulative appreciation that there are causal elements for which the effects are imminent. In short, people really aren’t planning for retirement, looking to coddle grandchildren, imagining their future as generations before have imagined theirs.
I am of the duck and cover generation of the 1950’s. We went in one of two directions, moonbat or conservative.
I was blessed to append to the conservative outlook.
Many of my boomer friends chose insanity and are reaping the results of their choices. They bought the massive fraud of the 60’s lock, stock, and barrel. I am sorry for that, but choices are God’s freedom to man. I can’t fault God that he granted all of us the freedom to choose.
Agree 100%.
No, it isn't. What this writer, and so many others, fail to realize is that we're in a long, long war - this isn't some 30-minute sitcom; this is a war against a vicious, terrorist, 8th century sub-human ideology that won't quit just because we do. This won't end until the terrorist thug islamofascists are either all dead or until they realize we won't give up, and then they'll slink back to their hellholes for the next 400 years and we'll have another period of peace. This isn't like defeating an organized army from a so-called civilized nation; this is proving to these terrorists that we won't quit until they're incapable of inflicting their brand of viciousness on us at random.
thanks, bfl
They're going to have a hard time spinning, after the cores of several major cities are destroyed by nuclear bombs. At that point there will be nothing left to spin. The "truth" about the enemy we are up against (which Ed Koch understands, as explained in his article) will be impossible to deny.
It certainly looks like the Democrats are going to end up in full control of the Congress and the Presidency for the next four to eight years, starting in '09. This will give them titular "control" of the military as well - a military which will become increasingly disheartened and demoralized.
If the country is attacked on a catastrophic level with the Democrats in control, I predict you will see the 'rats do, literally, _next to nothing_ to respond and retaliate. They have become intellectually and morally incapable of "fighting back", because to them, the REAL "enemy" is America itself. For them, it would be "wrong" to be so judgemental that they would attack another nation (for the sake of argument, Iran, for supplying the terrorists with the weapons they will most surely use). Really, who is Nancy Pelosi going to declare war on? (other than US, that is)
For this reason, if events combine a nuclear attack on America during Democratic rule, the visibile and obvious helplessness of the Democrats to react, combined with a military that longs to protect and defend America but has its hands tied by a Democratic Congress/Presidency, could presage a modern "Seven Days In May" scenario: a miltiary takeover of the government of the United States.
And I also predict that what's left of "conservative America" would not only do little to oppose such a takeover in such dark circumstances - they would actually welcome it, as the Right welcomed General Pinochet in Chile when the excesses of Allende threatened to tear the country to pieces.
By then, we may have reached the point where the only pathway to restore America will be to surrender control to a group willing to take the necessary steps to right the ship of state, in the face of electoral/legislative helplessness, division, and gridlock.
I guess to think this much is to be blasphemous. But consider: look at Chile during Allende, and Chile today. Could that nation have arrived where it is now, if the military had NOT intervened?
Such things will could never, will never happen here, right? Right?
- John
I see you point very clearly. I kind of agree with Rush that one day, the Rats will pay a price because everything they stand for is based on hatered of President Bush.
The hatered that continues to boil in the left and the Rats has to be like an undetected cancer. Someday it’s going to be too late to stop it and it will eat away at them.
Truman abandoned South Korea in 1949, pulling out almost all our troops against the advice of military men and Republicans, who said the region would be ripe for invasion
In 1950, Kim il-Sung's North Korean army invaded and occupied most of the South.
In 1950, Truman sent troops back to Korea, to rewin South Korean freedom
In the remaining 30 months of Truman's administration, 30,000 Americans died fighting in Korea
Democrats pulled out of South Vietnam and want to pull out of Iraq.
Democrats are not only lily-livered, they are stuck on stupid.
I seriously doubt it. They did not face the whirlwind after Vietnam. They merely put the blame elsewhere, which they will manage to do here with their incessant lies and the complicity of their chums in the media.
Liberals usually manage to shift the blame to others. That's because most people really don't pay much attention and are swayed by the loudest and most persistent argument.
And if there is one thing Liberals do well, it is make a loud and persistent argument and turn lies into accepted truths. Examples of their successes at this are endless.
In the end, Bush and the GOP will take the blame. Take it to the bank.
‘They did not face the whirlwind after Vietnam.’
First, this isn’t Vietnam, so the comparision is invalid.
Second, the Democrats did face the end result of their despicable actions in 1973, 74, and 75 by refusing to uphold our end of the Paris Peace Accord.
Third, Democrats to this very day are still known for being ‘weak on National Defense’.
Just my opinion.
What if anything has come to pass or have those folks you know realized for buying into a bad bill of goods? I think it would be interesting to hear those accounts.
To the Islamists any perceived victory in Iraq will be a “sign” to them that jihad against western civilization and particularly America is supported by the almighty and is to be carried to every end of the earth.
Radical Islam is not military but religion-based - and all perceived conquests to them justifies increased slaughter of the infidel.
Of course this isn't Vietnam. But the principle is the same and that was my point.
Second, the Democrats did face the end result of their despicable actions in 1973, 74, and 75 by refusing to uphold our end of the Paris Peace Accord.
How? Carter was elected. The GOP was routed in 1976. But even before that the Democrats continued to have majorities in the House until 1994 and the Senate the '80s - and that change had little to do with their "national defense" stands.
The blatant antiwar, pacifist Left cost us a war and most of our 60,000 dead as the War went much longer than it should have (or would have) if America had been united and the Liberals themselves had not been running it until 1969.
Those facts have been ignored and never faced by the voters - even after the debacle ended in millions dead and the Boat People migration showed the lie to their habitually defeatist position.
The antiwar crowd has never been called to account for their traitorous behavior and votes which led directly to that defeat. Never. If you can demonstate "how", please let us know. I'd be happy to hear it. I was around then and deeply interested and involved through the whole period, and I think I would remember it if they were.
Third, Democrats to this very day are still known for being ‘weak on National Defense’.
Sure. Big deal. Maybe that's why they lead in the 2008 projections of power to this day? Their stance has only hurt them with people who care deeply about national defense - and those people are mainly Republicans. Most Democrats could now care less and the polls show it.
"Independents" care more about social issues and are emotionally driven. They will likely be swayed to vote for Liberals because of these and will probably ignore the serious national security implications until it is too late. After all, they have pretty much already forgotten 9-11 and are more concerned about other things. They are as easily distracted as a box full of puppies.
“Second, the Democrats did face the end result of their despicable actions in 1973, 74, and 75 by refusing to uphold our end of the Paris Peace Accord.
How?”
They refused funding, the refused to come to the defense of South Vietnam when the North Vietnamese broke the agreement.
Its in the congressional record.
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.