+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19

Thread: McCain takes on those who want to cut and run

  1. #1
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789

    McCain takes on those who want to cut and run

    Heh I just remember what I liked about McCain

    AIDING & ABETTING

    By JOHN McCAIN

    IRAQ is today in the throes of another critical moment in its post-Saddam history. There is both great hope and great difficulty, with a new constitution and an ongoing insurgency, with parliamentary elections in a month and violence plaguing many areas.

    At home, the American people wish to see us succeed in helping bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people, but express increased uncertainty among the way forward. Now is the last time we should send a message that withdrawing troops is more important than achieving success.

    Unfortunately, the Senate considered two amendments this week — one of which was approved with 79 votes — that did just that. In the version that passed, 2006 is designated as "a period of significant transition to full sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

    These words are likely to be examined closely in Iraq, by both friends and enemies. They suggest that the Senate has its priorities upside down, and I voted to reject them.

    Anyone reading the amendment gets the sense that the Senate's foremost objective is the draw-down of American troops. What it should have said is that America's first goal in Iraq is not to withdraw troops, but to win the war. All other policy decisions we make should support, and be subordinate to, the successful completion of our mission.

    If that means we can draw down our troop levels and win in Iraq in 2006, that would be a wonderful outcome. But if success requires an increase in American troop levels in 2006, then we must increase our numbers there.

    Morality, national security and the honor our fallen deserve all compel us to see our mission in Iraq through to victory.

    But the amendment suggests a different priority. It signals that withdrawal, not victory, is foremost in Congress' mind, and suggests that we are more interested in exit than victory.

    A date is not an exit strategy. To suggest that it is only encourages our enemies, by indicating that the end to American intervention is near. It alienates our friends, who fear an insurgent victory, and tempts undecideds to join the anti-government ranks.

    And it suggests to the American people that, no matter what, 2006 is the date for withdrawal. As much as I hope 2006 is the landmark year that the amendment's supporters envision, should it not be so, messages like these will have unrealistically raised expectations once again. That can only cost domestic support for America's role in this conflict, a war we must win.

    The sponsors may disagree with my interpretation of their words, saying that 2006 is merely a target, that their legislation is not binding and that it included caveats. But look at the initial response to the Senate's words: a front page Washington Post story titled "Senate Presses for Concrete Steps Toward Drawdown of Troops in Iraq."

    Think about this for a moment. Imagine Iraqis, working for the new government, considering whether to join the police force, or debating whether or not to take up arms. What will they think when they read that the Senate is pressing for steps toward draw-down?

    Are they more or less likely to side with a government whose No. 1 partner hints at leaving?

    The Senate has responded to the millions who braved bombs and threats to vote, who put their faith and trust in America and their government, by suggesting that our No. 1 priority is to bring our people home.

    We have told insurgents that their violence does grind us down, that their horrific acts might be successful. But these are precisely the wrong messages. Our exit strategy in Iraq is not the withdrawal of our troops, it is victory.

    Americans may not have been of one mind when it came to the decision to topple Saddam Hussein. But, though some disagreed, I believe that nearly all now wish us to prevail.

    Because the stakes there are so high — higher even than those in Vietnam — our friends and our enemies need to hear one message: America is committed to success, and we will win this war.

    Sen. McCain (R, Az.) is one of only 19 U.S. senators — including just 13 Republicans — to have voted against a Senate resolution Tuesday pushing for an eventual draw-down of U.S. troops from Iraq.

    http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/op...ists/31358.htm
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  2. #2
    Staff Emeritus Confed999's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Sep 03
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    10,026
    Country: United States
    At one point in the emotional debate, Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) told of a phone call from a Marine colonel.

    ''He asked me to send Congress a message -- stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message -- that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,'' Schmidt said.
    Source
    No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
    I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
    even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
    He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

  3. #3
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    9,165
    Country: United States
    yes, murtha the coward, the coward that won a Bronze Star with Combat V, two Purple Hearts and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry.

  4. #4
    WAB Bartender Defense Professional
    Military Professional
    Bluesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    8,518
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis
    yes, murtha the coward, the coward that won a Bronze Star with Combat V, two Purple Hearts and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry.
    One can have physical courage and no moral courage. I'm NOT saying this about Murtha, and I honor him for his service, but Scmidt's colonel's quotation speaks to his moral courage as a politician, and doesn't say nothin' about his physical courage in combat.

    But here's what I will say: anybody that would abandon the brave Iraqis who have quite literally bet their lives on our word and faithfulness to it is no friend of mine.
    "The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
    - George Orwell

  5. #5
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis
    yes, murtha the coward, the coward that won a Bronze Star with Combat V, two Purple Hearts and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry.
    I wouldn't say it, but then again I didn't. Another Marine did.
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  6. #6
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    .
    Attached Images  
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  7. #7
    Staff Emeritus Confed999's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Sep 03
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    10,026
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis
    yes, murtha the coward, the coward that won a Bronze Star with Combat V, two Purple Hearts and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry.
    It wasn't an insult, it was a reminder...
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluesman
    But here's what I will say: anybody that would abandon the brave Iraqis who have quite literally bet their lives on our word and faithfulness to it is no friend of mine.
    Amen...
    No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
    I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
    even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
    He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

  8. #8
    Dirty Kiwi Parihaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Posts
    16,010
    Country: New Zealand
    Quote Originally Posted by Confed999
    At one point in the emotional debate, Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) told of a phone call from a Marine colonel.

    ''He asked me to send Congress a message -- stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message -- that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,'' Schmidt said.
    Source
    I notice that Colonel of Marines didn't ask for his name to be forwarded along with his message

  9. #9
    Dirty Kiwi Parihaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Posts
    16,010
    Country: New Zealand
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluesman
    But here's what I will say: anybody that would abandon the brave Iraqis who have quite literally bet their lives on our word and faithfulness to it is no friend of mine.
    and yes, I agree with that too.

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor smilingassassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Dec 03
    Location
    Vancouver Canada
    Posts
    2,749
    Country: Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by parihaka
    I notice that Colonel of Marines didn't ask for his name to be forwarded along with his message
    Given the level of venom spat Schmidt's way for merely conveying one of Murtha's fellow Marines statement I'd say it was a smart thing to do.

    I, like most of the republicans, some democrats and most intelligent people belive it is a moral sin to take the stance of Murtha. We shouldn't cut and run while Iraqi's are standing side by side with Americans. It just serves to prove another dogma created by the terrorists, that Americans run away when they get a bloody nose. Murthas suggestion would also serve to show the rest of the ME that Americans have simply fullfilled their own self interests (taking out Saddam)and are willing to forsake the interests of civilized Iraqi's.

    I don't care if the mans been to Vietnam, he's simply WRONG.

  11. #11
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    What I find interesting is that the only veterans the Dems care about are those came out of the military as leftists. They talk about how outrageous it is to "insult" veterans and how much moral authority they have when talking about matters of war because they've "been there," yet they rip veterans themselves (The swift boat vets) or just flat ignoring what they have to say.

  12. #12
    Senior Contributor smilingassassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Dec 03
    Location
    Vancouver Canada
    Posts
    2,749
    Country: Canada
    Yup its pure politics.

  13. #13
    Contributor barrowaj's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Aug 04
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    706
    I think its a gross mischaracterization to say that democrats want to pull out of Iraq immediately. I think that most democrats realize that it is important to try to have a peaceful and stable Iraq before we pull out. That being said, its crucial to have a plan on how the pullout should happen and how it should progress. We clearly don't want to have to be in Iraq in 2010.

  14. #14
    WAB Bartender Defense Professional
    Military Professional
    Bluesman's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    8,518
    Country: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by barrowaj
    I think its a gross mischaracterization to say that democrats want to pull out of Iraq immediately. I think that most democrats realize that it is important to try to have a peaceful and stable Iraq before we pull out. That being said, its crucial to have a plan on how the pullout should happen and how it should progress. We clearly don't want to have to be in Iraq in 2010.
    And I think it's a mis-characterization that Democrats give a dam' WHAT happens if we pull out. Because this is the truth: every time they start their interminable squawking about exit strategies (which is just a codeword for 'defeat'), drawdown timelines (which is a codeword for 'retreat'), and YES, IMMEDIATE withdrawals (which is the exact same thing as surrender), they absolutely guarantee that we're weaker, and the terrorists are stronger. It helps the terrorists. It hurts our own troops. (If you want cites that Democrats have been calling for IMMEDIATE withdrawal, I can get 'em, including from Jack Murtha),

    My conclusion: they want us to lose, as long as they can pin the blame on Bush.

    We bring the troops home when we WIN, not before. I swear, if this crew of crybabies had been in charge after Guadalcanal and Kasserine, we'd have sued Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan for peace before the end of '42. WHO SCREWED UP THE DOOLITTLE RAID PLANNING? PLOESTI RAID WAS INCOMPETENT. WE LOST SIXTY HEAVY BOMBERS IN ONE RAID.

    It's a quagmire, I tell you! No hope of victory. Gotta get out NOWNOWNOW!!! I know we promised the Brits and the Chinese and all the other Allies we'd hang in there, but it's all about US now, and they're on their own. If all of 'em end up in the camps, well, as long as we get a few more carefree years to cower before the Axis gets to US, well, it's better than sticking to a promise that has actual COSTS to stay faithful to.

    RIGHT, Dems?

    The Democrats have no guts, and as long as we have Democrats in Congress - or God forbid, a Democrat President - we are CERTAIN to go through this every single time American troops are committed to battle. Look back through the last 40 years...
    "The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
    - George Orwell

  15. #15
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    9,165
    Country: United States
    you mean like the way that democrat nixon wanted "peace with honor" in vietnam?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. cut and run boomerang
    By astralis in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07 Oct 06,, 22:08
  2. So Murtha wants to cut and run to Okinawa.
    By Bluesman in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04 Jul 06,, 11:58

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts