kallend 2,147 #326 November 23, 2005 Quote>I see no reason to suppose he is trustworthy on anything at all. I agree, Senator Reid can't be trusted for shit. Oh my, that was so clever of you!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #327 November 23, 2005 ya, real clear"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #328 November 23, 2005 QuoteQuote>I see no reason to suppose he is trustworthy on anything at all. I agree, Senator Reid can't be trusted for shit. Oh my, that was so clever of you! See, I thought it was a sorry, trite and worn out attempt to turn the tables. I am suprised you didn't kallend. Oh wait...you were being sarcastic. My bad...carry on. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #329 November 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote>I see no reason to suppose he is trustworthy on anything at all. I agree, Senator Reid can't be trusted for shit. Oh my, that was so clever of you! See, I thought it was a sorry, trite and worn out attempt to turn the tables. I am suprised you didn't kallend. Oh wait...you were being sarcastic. My bad...carry on. Me sarcastic? You must be thinking of someone else.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #330 November 28, 2005 >The fact of the matter is that the US is currently IN Iraq and setting >a timetable for withdrawal would be utterly stupid. --------------------- White House lays foundation for US troop withdrawal Sun Nov 27, 2:25 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The White House for the first time has claimed possession of an Iraq withdrawal plan, arguing that a troop pullout blueprint unveiled this past week by a Democratic senator was "remarkably similar" to its own. It also signaled its acceptance of a recent US Senate amendment designed to pave the way for a phased US military withdrawal from the violence-torn country. The statement late Saturday by White House spokesman Scott McClellan came in response to a commentary published in The Washington Post by Joseph Biden, the top Democrat of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which he said US forces will begin leaving Iraq next year "in large numbers." According to Biden, the United States will move about 50,000 servicemen out of the country by the end of 2006, and "a significant number" of the remaining 100,000 the year after. . . . "Today, Senator Biden described a plan remarkably similar to the administration's plan to fight and win the war on terror," the spokesman went on to say. --------------------- Within a week, I predict that the right-winger talking points will include "we've been in favor of a timetable all along" and "the democrats don't have the answers - only OUR timetable is workable." Kudos to Bush for finally listening to someone else, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #331 November 28, 2005 I predict within a week, the Lefties will start to bash Bush about withdrawl. It will either be that we are withdrawing too quickly, not fast enough, or we shouldn't be withdrawing at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #332 November 28, 2005 Thier "time table" has always been to start leaving when Iraq's can take care of thier own security. Since you threw out the first "theory" how about another one. The Dems know that great progress is being made in Iraq. Hence, they figured that pull outs would begin in 06. So, they started bitching now about the pullout plan so they can say they pushed the administration into presenting a plan. Pick your poison"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #333 November 28, 2005 >the Lefties will start to bash Bush about withdrawl. Right wingers must make good video flyers. You need a strong and flexible neck to keep from getting whiplash. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #334 November 28, 2005 Quote>the Lefties will start to bash Bush about withdrawl. Right wingers must make good video flyers. You need a strong and flexible neck to keep from getting whiplash. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #335 November 28, 2005 QuoteThe Dems know that great progress is being made in Iraq. Hence, they figured that pull outs would begin in 06. So, they started bitching now about the pullout plan so they can say they pushed the administration into presenting a plan. I agree with that it's just political positioning by the Dems - but the Rep response to predict actual dates is not a good idea either. The Dems win on this, we weakened our practical position in the war by responding to a purely political tactic. I'm not particularly proud of either side on this one. I'd delete the first sentence if you want to get discussion rather than just reaction - "Great Progress"? - "progress" maybe. But "great" is pretty rosy, even for you. Still, I think that the withdrawal should be based on meeting defined goals, not tied to a calendar. It's risky both politically and practically to set dates in this type of situation. We can state the goals, without the timing - or even an estimate of the timing. Which is what was happening all along and greatly ignored by those that don't listen anyway. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #336 November 28, 2005 I listened to two comanders that are in Iraq. They labled the progress as great, not me. A few of the credits they listed were 1) 16 provinces are for the most part peaceful and secure. Free trade and businesses are growing at a rapid pace. (the last three are the ones the media concentrates on) 2) All of the children of Iraq have had imunisations 3)Over 3000 schools have been built. 4)The population is now starting to get the cleanest water they have ever had 5)Waste sites have been cleaned up. And he spoke of more that I now don't remember. Anyway, as for the debate about the time table. I have to agree with you. The left was allowed to frame the debate too long"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #337 November 28, 2005 >The left was allowed to frame the debate too long And we got a timetable as a result. A good thing for the Iraqis and for our troops. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #338 November 28, 2005 Quote>we got a timetable ...A good thing ... That's the debate, is it an overall good thing, or just temporary political gratification there's arguments for both, but we'll find out, it might be a great thing, but I think results are more important than schedule - both would be nice..... edit: My job is program management, so I do think goals without due dates is a crappy way to run a project, but my job is also very confidential and I also see that putting out too much info for the competition is even worse -things like commit dates especially sensitive ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #339 November 28, 2005 QuoteQuote>we got a timetable ...A good thing ... That's the debate, is it an overall good thing, or just temporary political gratification there's arguments for both, but we'll find out, it might be a great thing, but I think results are more important than schedule - both would be nice..... You may be right. This may be a way to apease the left. In a recent poll, 70% said the Dems criticism was hurting troop moral. I suspect the time frame will be "modified" to deal with changing conditions. If the insurgents reduce the attacks, the withdrawl will continue slowly. Should there be an increase, the withdrawl will either slow or stop. I seriously doubt anything will change because of a symbolic timetable, but if the lefties want to believe that, all th better. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #340 November 28, 2005 QuoteYou may be right. This may be a way to apease the left. This isn't "appeasing" the left, the left won on this one (politically). They forced what 'looks' like a concession when the withdrawal criteria was already established. And the timetable is symbolic to everyone, right, left, soldiers, the Iraqi people, the terrorists coming into Iraq, regular people. Best case, we work harder to stay on schedule and it spurs progress towards a clean exit. Bad case, we miss the deadlines because it's not right to leave on the timetable, and that give the left more ammo to moan. Worst case, it's not right to leave because the Iraqi people aren't in control yet, and we leave anyway to avoid the political abuse. Let's hope they can make a purse out of this sow's ear.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #341 November 28, 2005 >but I think results are more important than schedule - both would be nice..... Well, yes. But often results are meaningless without a schedule. For example, I can 100% guarantee that if we did absolutely nothing, both Saddam Hussein and his sons would have been removed from power eventually. And no US servicemen would die. So is my plan better? At the beginning of this war, when everyone was being told it would be over in days or weeks (probably not months; that's a long time!) schedule wasn't so important. Now that we're close to three years, it's becoming more important. Schedules allow you to plan troop rotations and equipment replacement/maintenance. It allows you to set goals for Iraqi military training. It gives people in Iraq hope that they will someday soon be able to run their own affairs. Will we be able to meet those schedule goals? Hopefully. If not, we can delay them a bit. But another ten years of losing 1000 US soldiers a year is not a good alternative to a schedule - even if it's annoying to have to meet such goals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #342 November 28, 2005 I think the terrorist attacks are going to begin to increase because of the timetable. AQ needs to claim a victory too and the best way is to make it appear they drove the US out of Iraq. Here the Dems and AQ have the same goal. In increase in attacks will only prove that an early withdrawl is a bad idea and once again the Dems will be proven wrong and lose the political battle around the time of the 2006 Elections. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #343 November 28, 2005 >This isn't "appeasing" the left, the left won on this one (politically). I'm getting a little tired of all the partisan bickering. BOTH sides won this one; a proposal was floated, discussed, and a compromise was agreed on. The troops will end up winning, too. That's how goverment is supposed to work. It's not a loss if "they" win. Sometimes everyone wins. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #344 November 28, 2005 >Here the Dems and AQ have the same goal. Apparently Bush does as well, since he has agreed with the substance of Biden's proposal. Cheer up - you can agree with AQ once in a while. Heck, maybe some of them like bickering on online forums as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #345 November 28, 2005 Quote>Here the Dems and AQ have the same goal. Apparently Bush does as well, since he has agreed with the substance of Biden's proposal. Cheer up - you can agree with AQ once in a while. Heck, maybe some of them like bickering on online forums as well. This makes absolutely no sense. How am I agreeing with AQ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #346 November 28, 2005 Quote>but I think results are more important than schedule - both would be nice..... Well, yes. But often results are meaningless without a schedule. For example, I can 100% guarantee that if we did absolutely nothing, both Saddam Hussein and his sons would have been removed from power eventually. And no US servicemen would die. So is my plan better? At the beginning of this war, when everyone was being told it would be over in days or weeks (probably not months; that's a long time!) schedule wasn't so important. Now that we're close to three years, it's becoming more important. Schedules allow you to plan troop rotations and equipment replacement/maintenance. It allows you to set goals for Iraqi military training. It gives people in Iraq hope that they will someday soon be able to run their own affairs. Will we be able to meet those schedule goals? Hopefully. If not, we can delay them a bit. But another ten years of losing 1000 US soldiers a year is not a good alternative to a schedule - even if it's annoying to have to meet such goals. - "annoying" to meet goals - what a pissy thing to say. It belittles the good intentions and efforts of everybody involved in this conflict - schedules for rotation and Iraqi miltary competence are likely already in place despite congress's little PR moves - the Iraqi people likely have more hope from voting in their elections than our Congress issuing some arbitrary schedule I like your viewpoint, it's the most optimistic view of what could result. But still, optimism and reality are not the same. It also give hope to the terrorists coming into Iraq, that soon they will be left alone to do damage to these people, hope to the Sunni's that they can try to return to the pre-war status quo, etc, etc. the stuff in red though - I always heard things in terms of "years", "very long term efforts" and the like. The short term stuff was tactical, not strategic. But this is an old one found in other strings. Let's hope your optimism is well placed. Frankly, I'd like to see the Iraqi government issue a schedule, not the US government - that would mean a LOT more in terms of what really happens. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #347 November 28, 2005 Quote>I'm getting a little tired of all the partisan bickering take a nap - it's all partisan bickering ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #348 November 28, 2005 >How am I agreeing with AQ? You support Bush; he supports Biden's plan which (according to you) agrees with Al Qaeda. Of course, none of the people above _really_ agrees with Al Qaeda. But it makes a really good incoherent slam, no? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #349 November 28, 2005 >"annoying" to meet goals - what a pissy thing to say. It belittles the >good intentions and efforts of everybody involved in this conflict. I've heard that sentiment echoed by several critics of a timetable. "Why should we have to meet meaningless and arbitrary dates? Why pay any attention to a stupid schedule?" Again, the lack of such a schedule has resulted in being in Iraq over two years longer than originally predicted. A schedule, despite being annoying, might help us get out before another two years goes by. >Frankly, I'd like to see the Iraqi government issue a schedule, not > the US government - that would mean a LOT more in terms of what > really happens. Iraqi leaders have already asked the US for one, a request that seems reasonable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #350 November 28, 2005 Quote>How am I agreeing with AQ? You support Bush; he supports Biden's plan which (according to you) agrees with Al Qaeda. Of course, none of the people above _really_ agrees with Al Qaeda. But it makes a really good incoherent slam, no? First of all, you are being presumptious by stating I agree with Bush on this, I don't. Second, I doubt Bush is going thru with this and if you read what I wrote, I said as much. But, hey don't let me stop you from making a presumptious, unintelligible slam. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
