The dems need a watergate scandal and they're trying as hard as they can to manufacture one. Why do they need one? Because the "surge" strategy is working, we're making real progress again in Iraq and that spells political defeat for the anti-war, anti-American dems.
This one is long but well worth the time.
Generally, when someone repeats a formula, it's because they want to repeat a result. And that's what the American left wants in this case.
During the mid-'70s, American liberals held political control to an extent they had not experienced since the heyday of FDR. The GOP was disgraced and demoralized. The Democrats held the Senate, the House and the presidency. There was absolutely nothing standing in the way of their maintaining complete power for as long as anyone could foresee...
Continued
26 comments:
I have serious doubts about the program of arming the Sunnis insurgents. True, they are against al Qaeda--they are against all foreigners in Iraq, including us. We are now arming both sides in a civil war.
I have long argued in favor of focusing on al Qaeda, and the new policies could be said to be doing this, but I am afraid that Bush will screw it up. Never mind that al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq before we invaded--do we need 160,000 troops to fight 1200 al Qaeda? Meanwhile, al Qaeda in Afghanistan/Pakistan has a large impregnable safe zone.
What exactly is al Qaeda anyway? A creation of the CIA/ISI, of course. A convenient enemy for the Bush administration, obviously. Muslim extremists, yes I would say so, but is that the whole story?
We need a new investigation of 9/11; more and more it is becoming apparent that the official story is not the full story. Read Daniel Hopsicker and Peter Dale Scott.
Whether by accident or design 9/11 was the "new Pearl Harbor" of which the Project for a New American Century report spoke, to justify the "process of transformation" which they seek for America.
As for the Vietnam parallel the author draws, let me just say that by 1971 Nixon and Kissinger knew that they could not win in Vietnam. They went to the Russians and Chinese and said that we needed a "decent interval" between our withdrawal and the reunification of Vietnam. They asked for a year and a half and they got it. Thank God for the tapes.
"What exactly is al Qaeda anyway?"
The guys that flew planes into our buildings killings thousands of innocent Americans on 9/11. The same guys that as but one example bombed the USS Cole prior to Bush taking office just so you know.
The same al Qaeda that trained their pilots in spook connected flight schools in Florida?
Don't get me wrong, al Qaeda is our enemy and I wish we had destroyed them after 9/11, but Cheney had other priorities. I am beginning to doubt, though, that al Qaeda is the "lone gun" re 9/11.
Then you truly are a coward in every facet of the word. You blame ExxonMobil for global warming yet continue to drive a car, you blame your own country for collusion in the murder of thousands of innocents and yet you still live here. If you possessed one ounce of integrity you would pack your bags and leave.
i will never understand you conspiracy guys.
Anyway, your comments have nothing to do with the point of the post, which is that victory in Iraq would be politically devastating for the dems and they are working furiously to prevent that outcome.
I served up the conspiracy for you but you're ignoring it?
Don't you see how the dems are working with the enemy and the msm to work towards our defeat.
And you Donkey apparently believe every official fable that comes down from on high, from the Warren Commission to the 911 Commission.
And Rhino, we Democrats are not working furiously to prevent victory. Victory is not in the cards. We are working furiously to make the best of Bush's failed war.
Who's we? When did you get elected to congress?
Anyway gary, i'm sure that you are a military expert and there's no way you could be wrong or anything, but lets just say, you know just for arguments sake, and i know this could never happen or anything, but lets just sayt that the greatest military force in the world was able to actually win in Iraq. And again, i don't want to suggest that gary anonymous from the blogosphere could ever be wrong, but lets just pretend it happened, who would benefit and who would not? politically i mean?
It's no stretch to say that a victory in Iraq for the U.S. would be political DISASTER for hillary and co.
Now if you wanted to tell me that i'm too cynical, and that hillary and her party are American first and politicians second and therefore they would want to win the war no matter what happened to them personally, i would laugh at you and point to their track record on such matters, but at least i would only think you were an idealist instead of thinking you are a defeatist, and possibly a commie and a traitor, and certainly a pussy.
That doesnt even make sense, and another blatant attempt on your part to distract the issue. Blah blah blah Warren Commision.
"We are working furiously to make the best of Bush's failed war."
How fucking so?
Throwing a slumber party?
Raising the minimum wage?
Voting to cut off funding for troops?
What the fuck have the dems done to better this situation other than criticize and prey for defeat. To date only Joe Biden has offered any semblance of a plan and Im pretty sure he stole that from Neil Kinnick, so once again I ask you....
What the fuck have the dems done?
Exactly!
The democrats would be saddened if we win in Iraq and you damn well know it. If it doesnt shame you to be party to that than you are beyond hope.
This article hit the nail on the head and that is why you are not addressing it.
it's not inconceivable that dems could be working against our interests in iraq; after all, wasn't it reagan & co who ensured the hostages in iran wouldn't be released before his election?
but we won't know the full scope of any alledgedly treasonous actions until well after a dem president has been elected in 2008.
Let's say you're right and the Democrats would be saddened by victory in Iraq. We'll never know, will we, because victory ain't happening. The greatest military force in the world, true enough and we defeated the military forces of the nation of Iraq in a few days.Occupying Iraq is a different thing. We won in Iraq. Saddam is gone. Bush didn't have an exit plan because he didn't plan to leave--ever. The Soviets were unable to "win" in Afghanistan, which is in their back yard.
Your plan: stay in Iraq permanently. My plan: leave. I leave the details to the next (Democratic) President.
Well Dsky since it seems you dont know... yes, it was Reagan that negotiated the release of American hostages under admittedly dubious circumstances just as Thomas Jefferson did years before with the Barbary pirates (moslem terrorists)to secure the release of imprisoned sailors. In both cases the argument can be made both for or against the ends justifying the means but what can not be disputed is that both men had the best interest of their country at heart.
Can the same be said of the modern day dems?
I say not.
What does Reagan have to do with this article? Lets stick to the matter at hand. The dems and their main stream media whores have both been working against victory for the U.S. in Iraq. This is not something that i'm making up, this is not one of gary's conspiracy theories. This is fact. It is the same gameplan from some of the same players as vietnam. In vietnam when we BEAT ASS during the TET offensive, the dems and the media called it a devastating loss. They used that to coast to victory and if it wasn't for a completely incompetent and idiotic president carter, they would probably have never lost the whitehouse. They know this, we know this, and they are trying to pull it off again.
Gary make up your mind. Either Bush is a genius who fooled EVERYONE in congress into voting to go to war, or he's an idiot who you don't trust to be able to fight al qaeda?
You can't have it both ways.
How can the ends justify the means in the Reagan's campaign to sabotage Carter's negotiations to free the hostages and to make sure they were not released before the election? The end there would be victory in the election, not the good of the country, or the welfare of the hostages. Nixon engaged in similar illegal and arguably treasonous activities before the 1968 election as well.
You criticize the Democrats for seeking political advantage but the Republicans have been far more ruthless, in the past as well as today.
The Bush administration is a threat to world peace as well as to domestic liberty. It is corrupt from top to bottom, and a far greater threat to our democratic traditions than al Qaeda.
Once again, lets stick to the matter at hand. Whatever you "think" you know about Reagan or Nixon doesn't really matter here.
Put your bias aside and look at the evidence.
The current crop of dems are working as hard as they can to find a scandal big enough to cripple the Bush administration so they can force the other republicans to turn on him and surrender in Iraq. Why else would they be going on and on about a few U.S. attorneys?
Regardless of whether you believe other parties, or individuals, or presidents, did the same or worse in the past, the fact remains that it's treasonous! How can you be in favor of that?
If you believe that ANYONE is rooting for defeat for your country how can you vote for them? How can you support them? How do you justify that to yourself?
Personally i can't do it. I can't speak to the motives of the republicans in congress who support our troops in Iraq, maybe they're all playing politics and think that's the winning position for them personally, but at least they're on the side of victory.
As much as you pussies want to call it "Bush's war" it's not. It's America's war. No matter if you think we should have gone over or not, or if you think it's a conspiracy to get oil, or whatever else, it's still unbelievable to me that anyone in the U.S.- after the lessons of vietnam--- would want to surrender! I find it to be disgusting.
No one is rooting for defeat. That is not true. It's a lie. Predicting defeat or disaster, based on the facts, is not to be in favor of it.
It is you and the rest of the right that have never learned the lessons of Vietnam, which is why we are in another one.
The Democrats do not need to invent scandals, only investigate the real ones.
I predicted after the last election that the Bush administration would crash and burn. It is happening now.
can it be more simple? perpetual war is good for the economy. we ("we" being The United States of America --- for those who need clarification) are the largest arms dealer on the face of the planet. when (and if) this conflict ends, goodbye to the Dow at 13000 and above.
thank you, anita! there are many good reasons for governments to make war, including benefits for the economy.
but you don't go far enough--the reason the govt pursues perpetual war is that it strengthens and perpetuates the apparatus of government itself!
it's the iron rule of bureaucracy, and it doesn't matter who's in the white house--we will bomb people.
the only victor of the current war in iraq will be the united states government, and it will be the victor regardless of the outcome on the ground.
in fact, one could say that our govt has already won by furthering compulsion to obey it and sucking up more of our wealth and resources.
Gary I can assure you that if we throw up the white flag tommorow Kennedy will be holding open bar in his office tommorow and the whole crew will be there cheering, but then again its Tuesday so what else is new, except maybe someone wouldnt get raped this time, then again they probably would.
Anita and Ben you both should go dust off your diplomas set them on fire and then wipe your asses with them because you both are idiots. When is the last time the market was this high? If I recall it was during peacetime, and for that matter if you look at everytime the market sets new highs the odds are that its during peacetime. Do companies make money during war, of course they do, as in most cases where money and bureaucracy is involved is there fraud of course there is. But you two numbskulls would have us never wage war again and protect our interests because you dont want some wall streeter smoking $500 cigars, well go fuck yourselves and your anti-American ways.
Heres the problem, you all cant differentiate your self perceived altruism in ending the war and the people you elect whose goals you may think are the same but the reasoning couldnt me more different, its a money and power grab and if you didnt think for one second that the dems would support this war if the polls told them to, then you are bigger idiots then I thought.
"When is the last time the market was this high? If I recall it was during peacetime"
it's never been this high.
Even if the Democrats are opposing this war for all the wrong reasons, as you say, they are still right to do so. The war is a bad idea, incompetently executed, and doomed to failure. Apart from that, the Bush administration and its neocon allies are the greatest domestic threat to democracy we have ever faced, worse by far than Watergate.
Actually and this is no shocker you are wrong again Anita, the market was pretty close to these levels a decade ago give or take a few hundo(miniscule percentage points), thats why it was all over the news the other week. You know to break new highs an old high had to be previously established. But you are wrong on all counts here so you try to catch me in a snafu, well snafu you... my point stands.
Gary enough with the even if and supposes, the democrat party wants this war to end badly but not as long as its before the next election, not end. They want it to end in the worse possible way to score political points and if you cant see that and if that doesnt digust you, well weve already established that you are a traitorous moron, so its staus quo for you.
Theres a reason the dems have not done anything of substance to end this war, they dont want it to end, they want body bags on the news every night until they get the WH and once again if all you dem supporters arent disgusted by this then you have no shame and I feel nothing but contempt for you and if I were religious would pray for your empty shattered soul.
The democrats do want the war to end. Some opposed it from the beginning, some came to oppose it later as it became obvious what a disastrous mistake it was. Not obvious to you, as you still think the surge is working and "victory" is possible. (And who's the moron?)
I reserve my disgust for the people responsible for the body bags in the news every night, and for their defenders.
(Oh Im sorry if I wasnt clear enough) You are the moron.
I never said this war wasnt a disaster, its a war by the very definition its a shitstorm as has every war we have ever fought but Im not a fair weather American Patriot. I support my Country even in the bad times, and certainly moreso when the bad times entail fighting an enemy who lacks the courage to put on a uniform and go toe to toe with us but rather would kill innocent civilians like the camel banging cowards that they are.
If the dems wanted the war to end they would end it. Isnt that what they promised if they took power? Use the powers they have and cut off the purse strings, very fucking simple really, but they lack the sack to do so, so they will bitch and moan like a woman on the rag until she gets a good dicking and since I dont bang ugly chicks the dems are out of luck.
But seriosuly I have to ask you again, if you really think that The US Gov't is as bad as you say it is..... why live here? How with a clear conscience could you live in a country that murders its own citizens as you imply? I certainly wouldnt as I would fear that I might be next and Im too god damn handsome and charming to die.
Oh yeah, I forgot... youre full of shit.
The Democrats would need 60 votes to do anything about the war, which they do not have.
Why do I stay here? Because I love my country. I do not equate the government with the country as you do. Protesting in the streets and on the blogs against the U.S. government is not in the least unpatriotic. If you can't see that then, sorry, you're the moron.
1-2-3-4 We don't want your fucking war.
Therein lies the problem with the liberal mind.
The GOP was the bully when they were the majority so the dems couldnt do anything.
The GOP is the bully as the minority so the dems cant do anything.
Procedure to you, policy to me.
Its pathetic.
Perhaps you misunderstood me as I am not talking bout blogging or protests on the street but rather your words, which I hope you would admit are admissable.
You stated that The United States of America was in cahoots with alqaeda on 9/11. You are more than free to have that opinion, I just find it odd that you would not leave such an evil country. I would.
Would you share an apartment with the guy you thought murdered your sister?
stand outside his room with a poster...
.....or would you call your sister a whore.
I never said the US government was in cahoots with al Qaeda. I did say it was a creation of the CIA and ISI but I was referring to actions against the Soviet Union decades ago. I did say thay I have doubts about the official story. I will say that we need a new investigation of the events of 9/11.
I will also admit that all too often the Democrats are pussies.
Post a Comment