Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/26/2005 5:54:24 AM PDT by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last
To: hipaatwo

Oh great.

Maybe he can run as an independent in 08 as the VP to McCain.


2 posted on 06/26/2005 6:01:44 AM PDT by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

Than why did he vote FOR the war to begin with? They all had a a choice and they gave President Bush carte-blanche. Including the dims.


3 posted on 06/26/2005 6:02:14 AM PDT by stopem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

Thank ypu, Senator Hagel but I will trust Secretaty Rumsfield and the officers of our military to decide what and when we need to win in Iraq.
I rememberr too well the last time Washington made military decisions.


5 posted on 06/26/2005 6:03:34 AM PDT by jch10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
This man has offered NOTHING in the way of a new plan. He repeats the same thing everyone has said before. More troops, We have to get other nations to help us (How Senator?), we have to "train the Iraqi's faster" (they have to be trained adequately, Senator, not "faster". How fast they learn is mostly up to the Iraqi's if we can assume that those training them are professionals.

This creep is just another politician looking to cover his ass because he's planning a run for president.
6 posted on 06/26/2005 6:04:55 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
He lays part of the blame on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who argued before the war that he needed only 150,000 American troops in Iraq. That caused more casualties than were needed, Hagel said.

If the Generals wanted more troops, they would have gotten more troops.
This limp wristed POS should just keep his mouth shut, if he is only giving
his feelings as an example. It appears his next election cycle is in 2010. Lets not forget.

7 posted on 06/26/2005 6:05:09 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude (Rove to apologize for the truth? NOT Today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
The whole Iraqi situation makes him sick to his stomach, he said.

Hagel's comments are making me sick to my stomach. What a RINO. Feeding the leftist-media-panic-the-sky-is-falling-we're-in-a-quagmire flames.

This is just more of the same B.S. I see on the news.

8 posted on 06/26/2005 6:06:48 AM PDT by Allegra (But It's A Dry Heat...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

Yes Hagel listened to Brent Scowcroft, who chummied up to Beijing right after Tianamen Square in 1989, who did not want to finish off Sadaam in 1991, who was more afraid of what would happen if the USSR broke up than he was of the USSR, and who insisted on Bush doing nothing in the Balkans.

Yes Hagel listened to the one "Republican" "adviser" who had always advised doing nothing.

Hagel's complaints based on Hagel's predictions of what will happen in Iraq are nothing other than setting his own marker on a "see I told you so" pointl, knowing that if he is wrong no one will remember he was wrong; because he was just trying to sound a "concern".

His "we did not send in enough troops to start with mantra" is right out of the Dims playbook, and he knows it.


9 posted on 06/26/2005 6:06:51 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

If Hagel is so worried, then why is he mouthing off in public--thereby helping the very folks who WANT us to lose the Iraq war--the Democrats and the rest of the anti-war (actually anti-America) leftists.


10 posted on 06/26/2005 6:07:16 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

Again, I ask.

How do the "deficiencies" that Sen. Hagel cites, translate into "losing" in Iraq? These incidents do present difficulties, true, but nobody EVER said winning would be an easy walk in the park. Should the US wind down and depart from Iraq prematurely, the situation in Cambodia, as that tormented land was turned into a vast killing field by Pol Pot, will seem almost pastoral in comparison.

Now is not the time to go wobbly, Chuck.


11 posted on 06/26/2005 6:07:38 AM PDT by alloysteel ("Master of the painfully obvious.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

And to think people actually voted for this sniveling twit.


12 posted on 06/26/2005 6:08:19 AM PDT by Modok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

With due respect, Senator, none of your suggestions are worth a tin fart.
I respect Hagel's service, but he's clearly got "Vietnam syndrome" and he's being even less constructive than Medea Benjamin.


13 posted on 06/26/2005 6:09:30 AM PDT by RedRover (Fight the Wussification of America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

Hagel found out that being a "Ckicken Little" gets a lot of press.


14 posted on 06/26/2005 6:10:04 AM PDT by SIDENET ("You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

More troops = more targets for Saudi scumbags.

Thanks for your input Chuck. We'll get back to you.


15 posted on 06/26/2005 6:10:25 AM PDT by SBprone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
U.S. troops and others could work harder to train local militias in small Iraqi towns to help identify and take on insurgents. Allies who don't want to enter Iraq could help patrol its borders, blocking terrorists from entering the war-torn country. The training of Iraq's military and military police should be accelerated immediately.

Middle Eastern nations should become more engaged, he said....

Ummm, aren't we already doing all of that...?

...but it doesn't help when administration officials criticize Egypt and Saudi Arabia for not moving quickly enough toward democratic practices.

And if 43 kept silent, you'd damn him for that, wouldn't you, Chuckie?

Gad, what a poseur.

16 posted on 06/26/2005 6:11:32 AM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
Same but higher degree of propaganda from MSM, Democrats & RINOS like Hagel. Iraq has going WELL. We are on a political time line in Iraq & its going on schedule. However, if Americans don't have the staying power in Iraq, then we have lost WWIII with Islam. We can not cut & run like we did in Vietnam.
17 posted on 06/26/2005 6:11:42 AM PDT by Skip1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
It's Amazing how they do this.

First it was "Bush wants to restart the draft!". That stupid trick didn't work because it was obvious he never said that.

So next they said

over here: and then over here:
(let's start the draft) See! They are calling for the draft!
Which was still stupid because there was obviously no need for more troops so now they:
over here: and then over here:
(we need more troops) See! We need to restart the draft!

18 posted on 06/26/2005 6:11:50 AM PDT by avg_freeper (Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
"We are destroying the finest military in the history of mankind, and the (National) Guard, too,"

Can't be much of a military that is destroyed by losing 1,750 men. This guy's as bad as Durbin. Overheated and ridiculous.

20 posted on 06/26/2005 6:15:29 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo

While I can't stand Hagel (a McCain wannabe), I agree that we probably sent too few troops into Iraq.

The way this conflict is Vietnam like is that we are focused on not losing instead of winning. If we really want to win the WOT, we will probably have to institute a draft and raise the number of troops back to mid-80s levels.

It was a huge missed opportunity when, post 9/11, Bush urged people to "go shopping" instead of enlisting. It also didn't help that Rumsfeld wanted to keep the force small because (a) he wanted to free up resources for Modernization and (b) he believed the Army force structure was obsolete.

Fighting the war the way we are now is like trying to fight WWII with a 1930s force structure. Before all this is said and done, we'll probably need to occupy a large swath of the Middle East. Syria and Iran, definitely. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, perhaps. It would also help if we'd stop going soft on pseudo terrorist regimes (e.g., the PA, Hammas, and Hezbollah in Lebanon).


21 posted on 06/26/2005 6:15:38 AM PDT by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
Hagel has learned well what works for McPain.

He makes me want to puke.

"Grim face"?

A drama queen as well.

Leni

22 posted on 06/26/2005 6:16:11 AM PDT by MinuteGal (Florida Freepers: Check out the Florida Forum. Click the Florida Flag on Your Profile Page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hipaatwo
More than 200 Nebraska American Legion members, who have seen war and conflict themselves, fell quiet here Saturday as Sen. Chuck Hagel bluntly explained why he believes that the United States is losing the war in Iraq.

Sen. Chuck Hagel addresses more than 200 Nebraska American Legion members in Grand Island on Saturday.

The American Legion members should have brought duct tape for his mouth. I'm sure this will be on terrorist TV in no time. How could they sit there silently while this clown is encouraging our enemies?

23 posted on 06/26/2005 6:17:36 AM PDT by Trteamer ( (Eat Meat, Wear Fur, Own Guns, FReep Leftists, Drive an SUV, Drill A.N.W.R., Drill the Gulf, Vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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