Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reid Forces Senate All-Nighter on Iraq Wires ^ | Tuesday, July 17, 2007 | NewsMax

Posted on 07/16/2007 7:05:31 PM PDT by Anita1

U.S. Senate Democrats, hoping to raise pressure on President George W. Bush and his fellow Republicans to pull troops from Iraq, have scheduled an around-the-clock war debate starting on Tuesday.

"I think that the American people deserve what we're doing and that is focusing attention every minute of the day on what is going wrong in Iraq," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters on Monday in unveiling the rare marathon work day.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: democrats; iraq; reid; troops; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-67 last
To: lonevoice

I miss Rick - and Jim Talent. Two terrible losses.

51 posted on 07/17/2007 6:09:10 AM PDT by juliej (vote gop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Domandred

...”Byrd’s been dead for a while. They just been pulling a Weekend at Bernie’s for the last few years.”

ROFLMAO.....great movie.

52 posted on 07/17/2007 6:33:19 AM PDT by astounded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 1035rep
Americans did not vote for defeat.

The ones who stayed home to "send a message" did exactly that.

53 posted on 07/17/2007 6:54:38 AM PDT by Just Lori (There is nothing "democratic" about Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

SOB’s ought to be working as hard to secure our borders instead of surrendering to our sworn enemy.

54 posted on 07/17/2007 6:58:08 AM PDT by blam (Secure the border and enforce the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
I think that the American people deserve what we're doing

Think again, Harry.

55 posted on 07/17/2007 7:08:25 AM PDT by GretchenM (What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? Please meet my friend, Jesus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LZ_Bayonet
"Yes, and I wonder whether it was coordinated, far in advance, with ABC News video of soldier in Iraq talking about lack of sleep. ABC News = 'rats" (my post)

Just listened to ABC Radio news, and ABC and Dems are working together: Durbin says "Not a stunt, military not sleeping." and ABC then plays audio of soldier complaining about lack of sleep. They should just rename it "American Broadcasting and Democratic Party Operative Company".

56 posted on 07/17/2007 7:08:41 AM PDT by LZ_Bayonet (There's Always Something.............And there's always something worse!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

I love it when our elected leaders stab our soldiers in the back.......:(

57 posted on 07/17/2007 7:31:35 AM PDT by PEACE ENFORCER (The U.S. Constitution has been Reduced to a Meaningless Document.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
This will take place in a building that AQ WOULD HAVE DESTROYED ON 9/11 save for the actions of American heroes. I wonder if our Congress ever thinks about that. Probably hard to concentrate on that when you've got all that hatred for George W. running through your veins. Some Republican should float a resolution that declares that the Senate declares President Bush to be a superior human to Osama and see how the Dems vote.
58 posted on 07/17/2007 7:51:40 AM PDT by LZ_Bayonet (There's Always Something.............And there's always something worse!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

All Reid is gaining is reinforcement of the idea Democrats would rather lose this war.

Thats going to be a huge issue in the 2008 campaign, and it will revive completely the viewpoint of a McGovern Democratic Party.

Sucks for the troops seeing this, but politically this is going to be a huge boost for the GOP come election time.

Once again the world is reminded Democrats cannot be trusted on America’s national defense issues.

Somewhere, bin Laden is smiling about Reid’s gambit. Way to go Harry....(eyes rolling)

59 posted on 07/17/2007 7:54:31 AM PDT by Badeye (You know its a kook site when they ban the word 'kook')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: astounded

Byrd’s been dead for a while.


Could we get a page to check his pulse to see if he has one.

60 posted on 07/17/2007 8:32:54 AM PDT by sweetiepiezer (Boycott China)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
...a Democratic plan requiring the pull-out of all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of April 2008.

Proof that Dimocrat Party power is more important than innocent lives and American best interest. They are going for broke because they KNOW that if a Dim becomes president before a troop withdrawal, they can't pull out of Iraq because the catastrophe that would follow would be on THEIR heads.

If they succeed in a pullout by April they can waive it has a victory for Dims and blame the resulting massacre on Pres Bush and the GOP.

61 posted on 07/17/2007 8:35:22 AM PDT by Toadman ((molon labe))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1
"Reid said that without the Republicans' procedural hurdle, a simple majority of the 100-member Senate would vote for the troop withdrawal, with "a number of Republicans spineless poll-obsessed jellyfish" supporting it."

Fixed it.

62 posted on 07/17/2007 9:26:50 AM PDT by mbennett203 ("Bulrog, a tough brute ninja who has dedicated his life to eradicating the world from hippies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

We should withdraw from Iraq — through Tehran. Here’s how I think we should “pull out of Iraq.” Add one more front to the scenario below, which would be a classic amphibious beach landing from the south in Iran, and it becomes a “strategic withdrawal” from Iraq. And I think the guy who would pull it off is Duncan Hunter.

How to Stand Up to Iran
Posted by Kevmo to TomasUSMC
On News/Activism 03/28/2007 7:11:08 PM PDT · 36 of 36

Split Iraq up and get out
***The bold military move would be to mobilize FROM Iraq into Iran through Kurdistan and then sweep downward, meeting up with the forces that we pull FROM Afghanistan in a 2-pronged offensive. We would be destroying nuke facilities and building concrete fences along geo-political lines, separating warring tribes physically. At the end, we take our boys into Kurdistan, set up a couple of big military bases and stay awhile. We could invite the French, Swiss, Italians, Mozambiqans, Argentinians, Koreans, whoever is willing to be the police forces for the regions that we move through, and if the area gets too hot for these peacekeeper weenies we send in military units. Basically, it would be learning the lesson of Iraq and applying it.

15 rules for understanding the Middle East

Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas — like liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes, Iraq is having a civil war as we once did. But there is no Abe Lincoln in this war. It’s the South vs. the South.

Rule 10: Mideast civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil war, with one side vanquishing the other; b) like the Cyprus civil war, with a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps everyone in line. Saddam used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is us. If we don’t want to play that role, Iraq’s civil war will end with A or B.

Let’s say my scenario above is what happens. Would that military mobilization qualify as a “withdrawal” from Iraq as well as Afghanistan? Then, when we’re all done and we set up bases in Kurdistan, it wouldn’t really be Iraq, would it? It would be Kurdistan.


I have posted in the past that I think the key to the strategy in the middle east is to start with an independent Kurdistan. If we engaged Iran in such a manner we might earn back the support of these windvane politicians and wussie voters who don’t mind seeing a quick & victorious fight but hate seeing endless police action battles that don’t secure a country.

I thought it would be cool for us to set up security for the Kurds on their southern border with Iraq, rewarding them for their bravery in defying Saddam Hussein. We put in some military bases there for, say, 20 years as part of the occupation of Iraq in their transition to democracy. We guarantee the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan as long as they don’t engage with Turkey. But that doesn’t say anything about engaging with Iranian Kurdistan. Within those 20 years the Kurds could have a secure and independent nation with expanding borders into Iran. After we close down the US bases, Kurdistan is on her own. But at least Kurdistan would be an independent nation with about half its territory carved out of Persia. If Turkey doesn’t relinquish her claim on Turkish Kurdistan after that, it isn’t our problem, it’s 2 of our allies fighting each other, one for independence and the other for regional primacy. I support democratic independence over a bullying arrogant minority.

The kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in that area. They fought against Saddam (got nerve-gassed), they’re fighting against Iran, they squabble with our so-called ally Turkey (who didn’t allow Americans to operate in the north of Iraq this time around).

It’s time for them to have their own country. They deserve it. They carve Kurdistan out of northern Iraq, northern Iran, and try to achieve some kind of autonomy in eastern Turkey. If Turkey gets angry, we let them know that there are consequences to turning your back on your “friend” when they need you. If the Turks want trouble, they can invade the Iraqi or Persian state of Kurdistan and kill americans to make their point. It wouldn’t be a wise move for them, they’d get their backsides handed to them and have eastern Turkey carved out of their country as a result.

If such an act of betrayal to an ally means they get a thorn in their side, I would be happy with it. It’s time for people who call themselves our allies to put up or shut up. The Kurds have been putting up and deserve to be rewarded with an autonomous and sovereign Kurdistan, borne out of the blood of their own patriots.

Should Turkey decide to make trouble with their Kurdish population, we would stay out of it, other than to guarantee sovereignty in the formerly Iranian and Iraqi portions of Kurdistan. When one of our allies wants to fight another of our allies, it’s a messy situation. If Turkey goes “into the war on Iran’s side” then they ain’t really our allies and that’s the end of that.

I agree that it’s hard on troops and their families. We won the war 4 years ago. This aftermath is the nation builders and peacekeeper weenies realizing that they need to understand things like the “15 rules for understanding the Middle East”

This was the strategic error that GWB committed. It was another brilliant military campaign but the followup should have been 4X as big. All those countries that don’t agree with sending troups to fight a war should have been willing to send in policemen and nurses to set up infrastructure and repair the country.

What do you think we should do with Iraq?

Posted by Kevmo to Blue Scourge
On News/Activism 12/12/2006 9:17:33 AM PST · 23 of 105

My original contention was that we should have approached the reluctant “allies” like the French to send in Police forces for the occupation after battle, since they were so unwilling to engage in the fighting. It was easy to see that we’d need as many folks in police and nurse’s uniforms as we would in US Army unitorms in order to establish a democracy in the middle east. But, since we didn’t follow that line of approach, we now have a civil war on our hands. If we were to set our sights again on the police/nurse approach, we might still be able to pull this one off. I think we won the war in Iraq; we just haven’t won the peace.

I also think we should simply divide the country. The Kurds deserve their own country, they’ve proven to be good allies. We could work with them to carve out a section of Iraq, set their sights on carving some territory out of Iran, and then when they’re done with that, we can help “negotiate” with our other “allies”, the Turks, to secure Kurdish autonomy in what presently eastern Turkey.

That leaves the Sunnis and Shiites to divide up what’s left. We would occupy the areas between the two warring factions. Also, the UN/US should occupy the oil-producing regions and parcel out the revenue according to whatever plan they come up with. That gives all the sides something to argue about rather than shooting at us.

63 posted on 07/17/2007 12:04:49 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq -- via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1

The more frantic the Dems become on getting our troops out of Iraq, the closer I know we are to victory. The Dems sense of urgency shows how much they are invested in our defeat. Stunt or not, they are undermining our troops’ morale, negating their sacrifice, and sending the wrong message to the Iraqi people and the enemy. This is TREASON writ large.

64 posted on 07/17/2007 12:09:39 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anita1; SunkenCiv; MEG33

Just so we're clear...

...Harry Reid doesn't speak for ME.

65 posted on 07/18/2007 2:09:47 AM PDT by Seadog Bytes (OPM - The Liberal 'solution' to every societal problem. (Other People's Money))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seadog Bytes; AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ...

Well put, SB. It’s almost as if they have no other issue... maybe those empty theaters for “Sicko” turned into a cold glass of water in their faces, and they realized they don’t have an issue to ride next year...

Did U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd get a cot tonight?
7/17/07 | me
Posted on 07/17/2007 10:11:14 PM EDT by mdittmar

66 posted on 07/18/2007 7:53:54 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Profile updated Friday the 13th, July 2007. Trisdecaphobia!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Anita1


WW II - Analogy

During World War II — the Japanese developed a way to demoralize the American forces. Psychological warfare experts developed a message they felt would work. They gave the script to their famous broadcaster “Tokyo Rose” and every day she would broadcast this same message packaged in different ways, hoping it would have a negative impact on American GI’s morale.

What was that demoralizing message? It had three main points:
1. Your President is lying to you.

2. This war is illegal.

3. You cannot win the war.

Does this sound familiar?

Hillary, Harry, John, Teddy, Nancy, and etc. have picked up on the same message and are broadcasting it on CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc., to our nation’s citizens and our troops?

The only difference is that they claim to support our troops before they demoralize them. Come to think of it, didn’t Tokyo Rose tell the troops she was on their side, too?

67 posted on 10/10/2007 3:35:18 PM PDT by CHICAGOFARMER ( “If you're not ready to die for it, put the word ''freedom'' out of your vocabulary.” – Malcolm X)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-67 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson