Bush: Iraqis must step up, U.S. role 'not open-ended'

Non-lacrosse specific topics.

Postby Campbell on Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:53 pm

Sonny wrote:
Adam Gamradt wrote:Please show me where I stated that Iraq War equals the Vietnam War.


Do you agree or disagree with this statement you made earlier in this thread?

Adam Gamradt wrote:The best thing I can think of from last nights speech, is that we are one day closer to getting a competent leader in the White House. Even Republicans, the reasonable ones at least, are aware the Iraq war is a failure of foreign policy unseen since the Vietnam War.


I don't think he is saying that Iraq=Vietnam. You can compare them without them being equal since they are both unpopular wars.
User avatar
Campbell
All-Conference
All-Conference
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Austin, TX


Postby Rob Graff on Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:02 pm

I presume Adam was referring to Rep. Sen. Chuck Hagel:

WASHINGTON - President Bush’s decision to deploy 21,500 additional troops to Iraq drew fierce opposition Thursday from congressional Democrats and some Republicans — among them Sen. Chuck Hagel, who called it “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.”



from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16579285/
Rob Graff
EX - UMD Head Coach
UMLL League Director
Director - Team Minnesota - http://www.teammnlax.net
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." B. Franklin.
User avatar
Rob Graff
Premium
Premium
 
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:26 pm

Postby Woda on Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:29 pm

Adam Gamradt wrote: Or are you just being obtuse?


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Woda
Rookie
Rookie
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:10 pm

Postby Adam Gamradt on Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:05 pm

It seems I've borrowed heavily from Hagels statement.

Republicans would be wise to run someone like Hagel in 2008, and attempt to regain public trust.

He stands better chance of reigning in the Neo-Conservative radicals, than would McCain or Giuliani.

Here's another good quote from Senator Hagel.

"To question your government is not unpatriotic -- to not question your government is unpatriotic."

As far as your churlish dare to the democrats to cut off funding, I'd ask what you thought of the bills introduced in 1993. Please also keep in mind that the Democrats have only cut off funding in your imagination.

I am too lazy and hungry to look up further details, but Section 8151 of Public Law 103-139. Sec. 8151 was taken up as a means to cut off funding for the action in Somalia.

Pot, meet the Kettle, Kettle, this is the Pot.


-----------------------------------------------

101. H.RES.239 : Urging the President to withdraw all United States Armed Forces from Somalia.
Sponsor: Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] (introduced 8/4/1993) Cosponsors
Committees: House Foreign Affairs
Latest Major Action: 8/10/1993 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights.
——————————————————————————–

102. H.RES.271 : Urging the President to initiate the immediate orderly withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Somalia, to ensure the safe return of all members of the Armed Forces being held prisoner by Somali warlords, and recover the remains of members of the Armed Forces killed in Somalia.
Sponsor: Rep Weldon, Curt [PA-7] (introduced 10/6/1993) Cosponsors (5)
Committees: House Foreign Affairs
Latest Major Action: 10/19/1993 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights.

-----------------------------------------------------------

98. H.RES.227 : Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that United States Armed Forces should be withdrawn from Somalia as expeditiously as possible.
Sponsor: Rep Brown, Sherrod [OH-13] (introduced 7/27/1993) Cosponsors (8)
Committees: House Foreign Affairs
Latest Major Action: 10/19/1993 Motion to Discharge Committee filed by Mr. Weldon. Petition No: 103-9.
Adam Gamradt | www.minnesotalacrosse.org | "It's better to have a part interest in the Hope Diamond than to own all of a rhinestone." -Warren Buffet
User avatar
Adam Gamradt
All-Conference
All-Conference
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:25 am

Postby Sonny on Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:03 pm

Adam Gamradt wrote:Both wars were failures of foreign policy.


So if Iraq was (note the past tense) a "failure of foreign policy," why aren't you advocating for a complete & immediate pullout of US Troops right now? Let's let Saigon (I mean Baghdad) fall and get our troops home in time for the Super Bowl. Iran, among others, will be happy. I'm sure that will help our security (and the security of our allies) down the road. :roll:

Talking again about winning or losing - Many from the left were trashing Bush's plan before he even made his speech the other night. Yesterday, Sen. Barbara Boxer was particularly vicious when she cut down Condi Rice in the "debate" over Iraq.

Rice appeared before the Senate in defense of President Bush's tactical change in Iraq, and quickly encountered Boxer.

"Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price," Boxer said. "My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young."

Then, to Rice: "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family."


Could you even imagine the uproar if a GOP member had sad something remotely similar to a Democrat? (Meanwhile it gets buried in the back of the newspaper. I missed the front page story on the NY Times.)

Back to another honest question - Do you think al Qaeda or Iran would like to see the US leave Iraq today? If you answer yes, then why is the vast majority of the Democratic party (with the exception of Joe Lieberman) advocating the same thing?

Link to Post editorial on Boxer's "low blow"
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01122007/postopinion/editorials/boxers_low_blow_editorials_.htm?page=0
Webmaster
Image
Image
User avatar
Sonny
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8183
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Beta on Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:29 pm

Sonny wrote:So if Iraq was (note the past tense) a "failure of foreign policy," why aren't you advocating for a complete & immediate pullout of US Troops right now?


I believe those who that applies to would argue that since we went in there and messed things up..it's our duty to fix it since the area would not be able to sustain itself.
Barry Badrinath: Oh man, that's the most disgusting thing I've ever drank.
Landfill: I doubt that very much, playboy
User avatar
Beta
Big Fan of Curves
 
Posts: 1581
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:00 pm
Location: A-Town Stay Down, GA

Postby sohotrightnow on Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:49 pm

Do you check the NY Times every day first thing in the morning? Do you have a subscription? You are aware that the NY Times probably updates every 5 minutes with stories, thus stories that were once front page news may get pushed back to other sections of the newspaper. Yeah, that must be the liberal bias.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-U ... ref=slogin

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/washi ... ondoleezza

Funny you don't mention the 8 Republicans who noted this plan is an unmitigated disaster.

Do you ever tire from being proven wrong time and time again?
Monica Lewinsky had more president in her than George Bush ever will.
sohotrightnow
All-America
All-America
 
Posts: 924
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:56 am

Postby Sonny on Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:36 pm

Where did the NY times put that on page one?

The AP buried the Boxer quote some 18 paragraphs into an article on the topic.
Webmaster
Image
Image
User avatar
Sonny
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8183
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby sohotrightnow on Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:44 pm

Go to:

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/world/index.html

Scroll down half a page and find the headline that reads:

"Devastating Criticism on Iraq by Both Parties"

In addition, please read this piece...

Of course it's not on the front page now...it happened yesterday:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-U ... ition.html

Please note that line 8 is where the AP article begins to describe Boxer's attack on Rice.
Monica Lewinsky had more president in her than George Bush ever will.
sohotrightnow
All-America
All-America
 
Posts: 924
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:56 am

Postby Adam Gamradt on Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:23 pm

I will try to answer your questions.

I am quoting myself here. "I for one, am for attempting to pacify Baghdad."

I would like to get our troops home quickly, and would also like the Iraqis to have the best chance possible to repair the damage we've done to their country.

I would have liked our troops to be used where they should have been in the first place, in Afganistan. I want a large man named Roy, from Oklahoma, to grab Osama Bin Laden by his filthy beard, drag him out of his hole, and to help him redefine the meaning of fear.

I'm not upset by Boxer's comments, seems like she was just trying to make a point. Maybe taken out of context, I'm not getting the full story, so I'll read that interview later. It's certainly not front page news.

I'm not sure that Iran wants Iraq to be left in a state of civil war. I might be wrong, and certain elements of Iranian society certainly want us gone. But I imagine that a stable Iraq is in Iran's best interest, a soon to be mutual hatred of America not withstanding.

I'm not advocating a complete pullout, as in Saigon. I do find it odd that now you're using Iraq = Vietnam to make your point, completely reversing your position from earlier. See, here's you "yet you make the very shortsighted & incorrect leap of faith that Iraq = Vietnam"

I fail to see how a few thousand more troops will solve this mess, and I do hope I am wrong. I have zero confidence in our Commander in Chief, and find it hard to fathom that 26% of the population still does. It's also obvious that the foreign policy that shaped this war is flawed beyond repair, and it's time to find new leaders, and attempt to clean up this mess.

Bush's plan isn't a meaningful change. Here's some evidence that leads me to think that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Forward_Together

I'm going to end once and for all, the idea that I somehow want America less safe and secure. Despite the logical inconsistencies in that argument that are obvious to all but the most fervent Neo-McCarthyist Republicans.

I love the United States of America. I certainly don't want to have another terrorist attack on our soil, or anyone else's soil for that matter.

I am proud to be a Democrat. Nothing you say can take away the pride I have in the only party to consistently advocate for the common good.

It's fairly obvious that we've made the world a more dangerous place Because our actions in Iraq, the continued failure of the Republican party to conduct marginally coherent and effective foreign policy, and the American peoples unwillingness to stand up and reject the fear, and the tired dogma that's still being used to stifle debate.

Frankly, it is time to end this unjust war, but I really don't know how to gracefully end an unjust war, while accounting for the needs of the Iraqi people. Or whether or if that's even possible, given the President's absolute failure as a leader. I'm also not in a position of leadership, so I do my part by engaging in debate, and trying to learn as much as I can about the world around me.

Hopefully, the new Democratic majority in congress will help to stabilize the ship until the time comes when we replace the incompetents that now walk the halls of the White House. At this pace, we'll have more meaningful legislation done in the first 100 hours, than the 109th "can we do less than nothing?" congress did in a couple of years worth of three day work weeks.

Hopefully, in 2007, we can rachet down the escalating civil war in Iraq, and prove to the Iraqi people that we are all the same. Kurds and Sunnis, Shi'ites and Iranians, Democrats and Republicans. At the end of the day, we as humans share more commonalities, than we do differences. It seems this is a profound difference between you and I, and how we view the world around us.

You ask me why I have a chip on my shoulder? Why I fight back, rather than swallow another insult. Because I do. Because I must.

It's clear you don't understand me, or the Democratic party, and how we must all work together to achieve more than the crap we've settled for over the past 6 years.

Perhaps, here's someone who can help you understand me a bit better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNCLomrqIN8
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief-I am my brother's keeper, I am my sisters' keeper-that makes this country work. It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family. "E pluribus unum." Out of many, one.

Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America-there's the United States of America.

There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America. The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and have gay friends in the Red States.

There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported it. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America."
Adam Gamradt | www.minnesotalacrosse.org | "It's better to have a part interest in the Hope Diamond than to own all of a rhinestone." -Warren Buffet
User avatar
Adam Gamradt
All-Conference
All-Conference
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:25 am

Postby Hackalicious on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:43 pm

Sonny wrote:Back to another honest question - Do you think al Qaeda or Iran would like to see the US leave Iraq today? If you answer yes, then why is the vast majority of the Democratic party (with the exception of Joe Lieberman) advocating the same thing?


Al Qaeda and Iran do want us bogged down as long as possible, since they've both been able to exploit the conflict to their benefit. We took out Iran's regional arch-rival and gave them the chance to greatly extend their influence amidst the chaos. If we left, we're no longer the foreign invaders to the Iraqis; the Iranians are.

Besides, if you want to play that game, 90% of the world would like the US to leave Iraq. You could have easily said "the majority of American people" or "the vast majority of Iraqis" want us to leave Iraq. So, yeah. You caught them red-handed. The vast majority of Democrats do agree with the majority of the American people.
User avatar
Hackalicious
Veteran
Veteran
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:20 pm

Postby Zeuslax on Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:18 pm

Adam, great post.......
Anthony
Zeuslax
Premium
Premium
 
Posts: 1144
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:36 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Postby Sonny on Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:49 pm

Adam - If we have settled for crap over the last 6 years, how do you define 8 years of non-action to defuse Radical Islam or capture OBL under 2 terms of Bill Clinton. (OBL admitted that he thought the US acted cowardly when we pulled out of Somalia.)

I'm sure you will argue differently, but at least Bush is attempting to do something about the problem in the post 9/11 environment. So many from the left refuse to even admit there is a problem, but that is a different discussion all together.
Webmaster
Image
Image
User avatar
Sonny
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8183
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Campbell on Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:38 am

Sonny wrote:Adam - If we have settled for crap over the last 6 years, how do you define 8 years of non-action to defuse Radical Islam or capture OBL under 2 terms of Bill Clinton. (OBL admitted that he thought the US acted cowardly when we pulled out of Somalia.)

I'm sure you will argue differently, but at least Bush is attempting to do something about the problem in the post 9/11 environment. So many from the left refuse to even admit there is a problem, but that is a different discussion all together.


Not that I disagree with you Sonny, but how much do you think Bush would have done about Al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden if there had been no attacks on the WTC. Comparing Clinton's policies on terrorism and Bush's policies on terrorism is a little difficult since the circumstances are vastly different. As far as Somalia, I think Clinton was just continuing our US policy of not doing anything really positive in Africa. :wink:
User avatar
Campbell
All-Conference
All-Conference
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby Tim Whitehead on Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:21 am

Sonny wrote:Adam - If we have settled for crap over the last 6 years, how do you define 8 years of non-action to defuse Radical Islam or capture OBL under 2 terms of Bill Clinton. (OBL admitted that he thought the US acted cowardly when we pulled out of Somalia.)

I'm sure you will argue differently, but at least Bush is attempting to do something about the problem in the post 9/11 environment. So many from the left refuse to even admit there is a problem, but that is a different discussion all together.


Nice deflection. Whether or not Clinton did a good job fighting terrorism has nothing to do with the fact that GWB is doing a crappy job at it.

Clinton hasn't been in power in 6 years. Its time for the GOP to stop blaming him for everything.
Tim Whitehead
Simon Fraser Lacrosse
1997 - 2000
User avatar
Tim Whitehead
All-America
All-America
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:05 pm
Location: Coquitlam, BC

PreviousNext

Return to Water Cooler

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests


cron