Sens Levin & Warner on Iraq !

[Murffieus]

[Senator Levin issued a statement Monday on Iraq with Sen. John Warner, R-Va., a former Armed Services Committee chairman and influential voice on military affairs. The lawmakers said Bush's military buildup in Iraq had "produced some credible and positive results," but that the political outlook was darker.]

By all accounts the "surge" is working----but political progress is non existant. If I'm Malicky, my cards are going to be played toward what i feel is the ultimate outcome in Iraq. There are two main possibilites here-----#1 real democracy per the Iraqi constitution or #2 Iran influence takes over after we leave by supplying the shia with huge amounts of guns and money as they have with Hezbullah.

IMO Malicky is betting on #2 in large part because the Dem congress is pressuring for a complete withdrawl and they will ultimately get their way. Consequently he is dragging his feet when it comes to reconciliation with the Sunnies because he wants to favor the winner so he retains power under Iran's influence and to put it bluntly----stays alive.

So not only is the Dem congress undermining our military and giving aid and comfort to our enemies (Al Quida included)----but the Dems are also preventing political progress as well by sending the wrong message to Malicky.

How can we work for political reconciliation in Iraq-----when we don't have a bipartisan approach to the situation ourselves----the Dems talk about Malicky reconciling----how about the Dems getting behind the war effort and present a unified front which will give Malicky reason to work toward reconciliation!

Maybe after Gen Petraeus's report on 9/11/07----the Dem's will see the light!

[tower912]

Petraeus' report is being written by the White House.   He is also making plans for a troop drawdown, as we cannot possibly maintain this troop presence in Iraq.   So, progress will be claimed, and some sort of drawdown will happen.   As sure as death taxes and your calls for Dwight Burke in the wide post.

[Murffieus]

That's  poor assumption on your part that "Gen Petraeus's speech is being written by the White House"----do you think a guy with the integrity of the General would allow that to happen?

Progress will be claimed alright but what you fail to say is that everyone who has been over there recently have (liberals & conservatives) have said the same-----will be awhile before a significant troop reduction takes place-----and that will be when the Iraqi army is able to replace the manpower withdrawn.

BTW----I never called for Burke in the wide post (where do you get that?)----he's a one dimensional low post guy with his back to the hoop -----period!

[tower912]

I know you have never advocated Burke in the wide post.  I was messing with you.   The White House as author/co-author/ editor is all over the media and internet, with the left outraged and the right saying 'what's the big deal?   The White house is supposed to write it.'    So, google 'White House to write Petraeus report', find the site that most closely matches your politics and check it out.   I believe the LA times originated the story.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hillary is now saying the surge is working too.  She's moving back to the center which she now will start to do as the nomination is all hers.

I don't know who is writing the report, but according to the military blogs and the open minded press, they are saying the same thing.

It's Harry Reid who declared the war was lost months ago before the surge even started.  Sigh.

But I do agree, the political situation over there has a long way to go....it should improve with a more stable base to operate from, if they can get that done.

[Murffieus]

Hillary is all over the map on Iraq----she votes for the war----then a few weeks ago she votes for immediate withdrawl----now she tempers that position by acknowledging that the surge is working. She constantly reads the polls (Clinton formula) and tells people what they want to hear------trouble is that the polls are often behind the curve.

No wonder Rove want's Hillary as the candidate----she'll be on the defnesive the whole campaign!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Democrat Brian Baird, voted against the war, just got back and opined an Op-Ed in the Seattle PI.  Says despite his stance on the war, troops should stay.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003850954_bairdop24.html

[77ncaachamps]

Hillary is all over the map on Iraq----she votes for the war----then a few weeks ago she votes for immediate withdrawl----now she tempers that position by acknowledging that the surge is working. She constantly reads the polls (Clinton formula) and tells people what they want to hear------trouble is that the polls are often behind the curve.

No wonder Rove want's Hillary as the candidate----she'll be on the defnesive the whole campaign!

I know she's waffling - never a good thing as a politician on a campaign.

But conversely, you don't see any Republican candidates sticking their neck out with pro-war speech because they'll know they'll get their necks cut off.

[Murffieus]

Well Hillary is in the unenvious postion of being behind the curve on Iraq----She was for the war initially when public opinion was for it----then she's against the war and for an IMMEDIATE withdrawal when the public turns against the war----now the surge is working and sh'e becoming less adamant on a pullout----now says the pullout should be done over a period of time.

This is leadership? Looks to me like the tail wagging the dog!