Posted on 12/31/2007 5:25:50 AM PST by vietvet67
Any time our government takes us to war, there is bound to be strong disagreement, but Iraq has been particularly divisive. At times it seems as if some Americans -- certain liberal Democrats in particular -- are eager to declare or even hasten our defeat.
Our missteps in Iraq have been numerous enough to discourage any patriot. Yet leading Democrats are beyond the point of discouragement. They are pessimistic; even hopeless. They have been this way for a long time.
At the first sign of difficulty, they deemed the war a mistake and victory impossible. They quickly adopted the language of defeat and surrender. Some declared the surge a failure before it began and General Petraus a liar before he uttered a public word about its effects. Others are quick to believe reports of alleged atrocities by our own troops, as if seeking an American disgrace. Now, leading Democrats seem to believe that recovery from past mistakes is impossible, and that any hint of success can be only illusory.
Why do so many Democrats cling so tenaciously to hopelessness, failure and despair in Iraq, even in the face of important recent successes?
The reason for this defeatism among Democrats lies beneath mere power politics, electioneering or disdain for President Bush. The real source of defeatism is rooted deep within the liberal mind.
Defeatist Democrats oppose the war in Iraq, not so much because they fear failure, but because they believe failure is inevitable. They believe the Bush Administration's goal of helping Iraq establish a democratic government is a fool's errand. They believe that the Western values on which democratic government is based -- and the Judeo-Christian truths from which those Western values are derived -- are not valid for Iraqis.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
BINGO!
We have the right answer.
They would rather fight the war on climate terror (WOCT) than the WAR on TERROR.
This is the multiculturalist agenda: To elevate other cultures, the multiculturalists inevitably must strain to find beauty in many cultures that are not so beautiful; some in which children were sacrificed, in which violence is a way of life, in which discrimination is systematic, in which women are treated as property, and in which totalitarianism, ignorance and occultism have resulted in great human suffering. The more lovely they can make other cultures appear, the smaller and less significant appear traditional Western values.
Do Democrats Really Want Us to Fail in Iraq?....
YES!!!!!!!
Yes, Yes, and Yes.
They wanted us to lose in Korea.
They aided the Communists in Viet Nam.
They wanted us to lose the Gulf War.
It is the goal of the Democrat Party to completely destroy the United States and remake it modeled after the ormer Soviet Union under Stalin with them in charge. The State, meaning them, will own each subject. Thye subjects will have no rights, only privileges granted by the State.
They are aided by the main stream media, and, in my opinion, far too many citizens in accomplishing this goal.
this guy must be making a last ditch attempt at winning the “2007 DUH!” award
Its not even worth arguing anymore. Course this time they lost for a change, thanks to our amazing military.
Pray for W and Our Troops
This also explains why they are so hell bent on "their" interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.
It's illustrated quite well with the lone bumper sticker on my big 'ole American truck, which says:
"A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a subject"
'Nuff said.....
Liberal-left multiculturalism of some Democrats may describe the motives of a few elitists, but the motives of rank and file Democrats are a little less arcane. Just as they did during the Vietnam War, most Democrats had rather see our soldiers killed and our country defeated in Iraq than allow a Republican President to receive credit for defeating our country’s enemies.
One can only hope a just God has an appropriate place in Hell reserved especially for these Democrats.
As citizens, I don’t think we should ever again let congress get away with delegating their war powers to the executive branch. These faux wars just turn into political fodder all the while our military is in harms way.
Don’t try and understand them,
Just ‘round them up and brand them.
Rawhide!
Yep, and since they can't openly proclaim that, their strategy is to destroy the opposition, the Republicans via George Bush. First it was the "Republican Culture of Corruption" until too many Democrats were caught in the web, then they turned from for to against the war. Now that, too, is failing and they are flailing at each other but make no mistake the goal is just as you state - complete dominance of our government.
All the other, global warming, smoking, obesity, national healthcare, illegal immigration, "they are still mad about the 2000 election", etc., is just window dressing to cover their real goal of complete control.
Their strategy is destruction of all that exists in order to rebuild the world in their image, becoming gods on earth.
As long as a Republican is in office, the answer is YES.
No I don’t think the Democrats want the war in iraq to fail. I firmly believe that they want the Republicans to fail and most specifically President Bush. Trust me if the Democrats had thought of going to Iraq first, it would be a huge success story all over America.
Amazing how pro-war they were when we were bombing Yugoslavia.
YES.....they despise Bush sooooo much that they would rather have their country in RUIN then to support him in his effort to stop terrorism.
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line.”
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
“Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
“We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs.”
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-
“Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
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.