| Author | Message | ||
     Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 629 Registered: 2-2003 |
Call New Jersey's Senators to Vote for John Kerry's Amendment S.2766 to withdraw US forces from Iraq by end of 2006. Sen. Robert Menendez 202-224-4744 Sen. Frank Lautenberg 202-224-3224 Kerry expects the amendment to be voted within 24 hours (see letter below)
Letter from Senator John Kerry urging citizens to call their Senators to support his amendment
| ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5715 Registered: 8-2003 |
It will be defeated, and only a handful of Democrats will vote for it so they don't look like they're calling for retreat. I know. Kerry calls it redeployment. "Over the horizon." We redeploy over the horizon and if some big-time attacks and town infestations take place then we redeploy back into the theater. But the key is, we wait for things to go to hell first and then redeploy back in there. Then, we redeploy out again. You could argue that this is the perfect time to withdraw, as we've just off'ed Zarqawi. Except the latest spin on that is that sure -- Zarqawi was the face of terror in Iraq, but in reality he wasn't that big a deal. Bin Laden wasn't thrilled with his brand of terror. Kerry's plan is kind of like being for the war and against it at the same time. At least he's consistent. | ||
| Montagnard Citizen Username: Montagnard Post Number: 1959 Registered: 6-2003  |
I rarely agree with CJC, but this idea is typical of the stupidity we've come to expect from Kerry. "Coordination" with the Iraq puppet government is pointless since it will fall shortly after its paymasters leave. The only effective withdrawal is unilateral, like the British withdrawal from India in 1947. Announce the date of departure and depart. Come to terms later with whoever emerges from the fighting. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5211 Registered: 9-2001  |
...I called, and I request that everyone reading this also call your New Jersey Senators and demand they vote against John Kerry's Amendment S.2766 to withdraw US forces from Iraq by end of 2006. Sorry Paul, Kerry is out of his mind. Bush won the election and the decision to withdraw US Forces is his. Kerry is a loser and a disgrace to our country! | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4372 Registered: 12-2001  |
That's absurd. Regardless of whether or not the amendment is a good idea, it is perfectly OK for the Senate to pass such a resolution. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5213 Registered: 9-2001 |
...perfectly OK for who? You? Them? The troops? Our Nation? Iraq? The world? Sure, another try for a "Cut and Run" solution! Kerry is a loser and a disgrace to this country, and so is anyone who goes along with S.2766! | ||
| S.L.K. 2.0 Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 1690 Registered: 10-2005  |
Call New Jersey's Senators to Vote for John Kerry's Amendment S.2766 to withdraw US forces from Iraq by end of 2006. SLK's response: no. | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3428 Registered: 9-2001  |
Even Bush and his cabal admit that mistakes were made. Even conservatives to the far right of Bush are questioning the purpose and prosecution of this war. It is clear we need to find a way out--if not by this year, then sometime soon. It feels more and more like Viet Nam, which swallowed up three Admins before we were airlifted off the embassy roof. On the other hand, America has created an enormous mess in Iraq that could threaten the stability of the whole region, and we cannot simply pull out and go home saying "oops, our bad." It would be just as negligent to leave with no plan as it was to invade with no plan in the first place. Kerry calls for an international conference, but I do not feel comfortable with the US scaling back significantly until there is a firm, committed plan in place with UN troops in place that included a significant Muslim presence. The Dems should take the approach that while it was not their mess to create, it is America's mess to clean up--at least in terms of starting a new approach and a better way to transition Iraq to a sovereign state. Our almost unilateral presence ("coalition of the committed" is a joke) means that we cannot solve it alone--we are as much an irritant and catalyst for violence as anyone. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5722 Registered: 8-2003 |
Ah yes. When UN Troops are in place, we'll know all is well. | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3429 Registered: 9-2001 |
Ah, yes, CJC, and what do you recommend to get us out of this situation, then? Surely not more US troop deployments, as that is not working. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5216 Registered: 9-2001 |
"It feels more and more like Viet Nam..." No comparison what-so-ever... However, being that the Dems also voted for this war, they damn well better understand America is in it for the long haul. And, if all you peace activists are so bent on saving American lives, maybe you should concentrate on the 40,000 plus murders committed in this country every year. As for the UN, we can forget about those money grabbing meatheads. BTW, Iraq "IS" a sovereign state... and the plan for our troops to leave is and has been in place for some time, and confirmed in person by the President yesterday! Hello, hello, where's the joke? | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4373 Registered: 12-2001 |
Were not in it for the long haul. As we speak, Bush & Co are searching for the fig leaf that will let them make a break for the exit doors. At this point, Iraq is a political albatross for everybody concerned and while the situation could certainly turn favorable, odds are that the best case will be an Iraq somewhat less worse off than they were under Hussein. And that, folks, is not worthy of the cost. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5218 Registered: 9-2001 |
"...while the situation could certainly turn favorable, odds are that the best case will be an Iraq somewhat less worse off than they were under Hussein." I see you are really full of optimism pal. First of all, I feel you need to re-think it again Tjohn... Make no mistake, we are in this war for the long haul, and the things in Iraq have turned favorable. And, this folks, is a good thing! A Democracy and freedom in Iraq is worth the effort... | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 15144 Registered: 10-2001  |
Things have turned favorable? Step away from the bong please. | ||
| mjc Citizen Username: Mjc Post Number: 1190 Registered: 10-2004 |
ESL for king of the world. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1128 Registered: 2-2004 |
When will you guys learn. You keep saying Iraq is a political albatross, but you have no proof of this. What has happened to Bush and the Repub supporters? Nothing. Now here is something that has truly been a political albatross - having the word "Democrat" next to a candidate. Am I the only one who cares about results more than words? You Dems are doing your best to thwart Bush and company and nothing has worked. He has pushed through his budgets, had 2 SC nominees approved, and continues the war. All the rhetoric has meant nothing for the Democratic Party. And most of you are beginning to realize what I and others have been saying for a few years, and that is you won't regain Congress. Where is the albatross? Us conservatives are laughing at you and I will personally enjoy all the scapegoating after the elections. Where will the blame lay the most? Dean? Pelosi? Murtha? The Dems are in a sad state of affairs and if they can't take back something in 2006 then 2008 will be a very uneventful year. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4374 Registered: 12-2001 |
Southerner, The Democratic Party is enjoying fair winds but lacks both sail and rudder. This is not an endorsement of the competency of the Bush Administration. It is instead, an indictment of the Democratic Party. As far as Iraq is concerned, it most certainly is an political albatross. It is, however, an albatross that is hard to turn to political advantage because now that Bush has gotten us into Iraq, it is a bit hard to just leave. To you, it seems to be about elections. To me, it is about the destruction of the U.S. Army and our international standing the longer the Iraq War drags on. | ||
| Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7421 Registered: 10-2001 |
Saddam had to go and it's been a battle ground against terrorism. Iraq will work. The Iraqis are proving that Democracy can work even in the war torn middle east.. I'm proud of my President and proud of my country. That's why I'm a real American. I pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. | ||
| GOP Man Citizen Username: Headsup Post Number: 404 Registered: 5-2005  |
exactly. Saddam had to go, at any cost. and thank God it's become a battle ground against terrorists. because if the evildoers weren't there, they'd be here. I'm so proud of my president because he's like a good chess player, three or four moves ahead of everyone else. he alone foresaw that the terrorists would flock to Iraq and kill people there by the thousands each month. if we hadn't invaded, those thousands dead could have been right here in the U.S.A. | ||
| Montagnard Citizen Username: Montagnard Post Number: 1960 Registered: 6-2003 |
The U.S. has already lost in Iraq. | ||
| Strawberry Supporter Username: Strawberry Post Number: 7423 Registered: 10-2001 |
holy ignorance. | ||
| GOP Man Citizen Username: Headsup Post Number: 405 Registered: 5-2005 |
montagnard, you are typical of defeatist libs. you don't understand that sometimes victory looks like defeat and vice versa. and not only that, you aren't taking the long view. just like Vietnam, in 15 or 20 years, Iraq will be a valuable ally. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5219 Registered: 9-2001 |
"IMHO, the U.S. has already won in Iraq." It's all up to Iraq now. Listen guys, can’t you just read it in their posts and hear it in their conversations. Their arguments and empty old rhetoric about Iraq being a political albatross, and their claims of a lack of competency in the Bush Administration is weak as a fart. The Dems, not unlike our friend Zarqawi, are room temperature. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4375 Registered: 12-2001 |
Would we go to war to provide people with the government of Egypt? No, but it is that sort of government in Iraq that is now being cited as proof of success. And I notice that Bush has lowered the bar considerably by saying that the government can be successful even if it is fighting an ongoing insurgency. Did we find the weapons that were our casus belli? No. Are we going to have permanent bases in Iraq? Probably not. Will the removal of Saddam Hussein advance our policy interests in the region? Maybe/probably. But we have always been more concerned with regional conflicts such as the Shia versus the Sunnis and the potential dominance of Iraq. That is why Hussein was once our ally. I suppose that Iraq will again be our ally versus Iran no matter what government Iraq has. Will the establishment of democracy in the Middle East advance be in our interests? Why would it? The Arabs will still resent US/Western interference and the colony of Israel. I would think that the estblishment of democracy in the region would unleash new energies in the people, some of which would be directed against Israel. Are democracies naturally peace-loving? All peoples are peace-loving. It's the governments you have to watch. Democratic governments don't seem to be all that peace-loving. Would Bush invade Iraq again knowing what he knows now? No, he would not. So, given likely outcomes, I don't understand how anybody can say Iraq was worth the cost - a cost we will be paying for the next fifty years unless the Bush Administration does a cut and run on veteran's benefits. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1471 Registered: 10-2004  |
tjohn, I agree with you with one exception. Iraq is not a democracy. It is a theocracy. Their constitution states that there can be no law that contradicts the Koran. Giving that there can be no freedom of choice there. No freedom of religion. Of course if we do leave and the civil war there is fought to its conclusion, everything could change. Maybe they get an Iranian theocracy or maybe they get something else. | ||
| S.L.K. 2.0 Citizen Username: Scrotisloknows Post Number: 1697 Registered: 10-2005 |
I am really curious to know Montagnard's definition of victory. But as his picture and past posts have suggest, he is truly from another planet. -SLK | ||
| GOP Man Citizen Username: Headsup Post Number: 406 Registered: 5-2005 |
right you are. only someone who is completely out of touch with reality would deny the great success we're having in Iraq. typical lib. a few dozen people get blown up each day, and they're ready to declare defeat. what about the 25 million people every day who don't get blown up? libs. | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3430 Registered: 9-2001 |
GOP Man--you are my beacon of sanity in this lonely wasteland. When, oh when, will you come out from behind your avatar and run for elective office? Not since Pat Paulsen has there been a politician with the same trenchant sense of righteous indignation. | ||
| GOP Man Citizen Username: Headsup Post Number: 407 Registered: 5-2005 |
thank you ESL, but there are 2 reasons I don't do as you suggest. As a successful entrepreneur, I really can't afford the pay cut I would take if I became an office-holder. When you're pulling in mid-six figures every year in business, it's a pretty big step down to be a member of the House, for example. the second reason I don't come out from behind my avatar is that we live, as you know, in a bastion of empty-headed liberalism here in Maplewood. While I have more than the necessary amount of guts to stand up to the libs' abuse, I have to think of my family. I don't want my wife and any children we may have in the future to be ostracized because I make the libs face uncomfortable truths on this message board. but I appreciate your kind thoughts.  | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5221 Registered: 9-2001 |
"Would Bush invade Iraq again knowing what he knows now?" You're wrong Tjohn, yes he would! I don't know where you come up with these crazy ideas? The only difference is I'm sure Bush wouldn't have waited so long to do it... Listen, the Democrats have never been willing or able to take an honorable stand on the war. And, no matter how you look at it, they basically have no one who can successfully take on the war on terror. IMHO, at this point in time the Democrats are dead in the water... I can say with relative confidence that war in Iraq is worth it - hopefully, the cost of time, money, and life will pay substantial dividends for millions of people for hundreds of years come... | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1476 Registered: 10-2004 |
Voters For Peace.org | ||
| GOP Man Citizen Username: Headsup Post Number: 409 Registered: 5-2005 |
so true ajc. our president is too steadfast to change his mind about something as important and necessary as this war, regardless of what he may now know about the situation over there. he would simply have to tweak the rationale a bit, knowing that we wouldn't find all the WMD that we know were really there, but we just can't find. he would have been stronger in talking about the spread of freedom and democracy, and the winds of change, and the Iraqi women going to school, and the rebuilt hospitals, and the elections with the purple fingers. all of that is important, and the president would have steadfastly said so. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5222 Registered: 9-2001 |
Hoops, that's sick pal! Ajc's pledge for peace, So_Help_Me_God.Org "I will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress, President, or anything who does not promise to continue our presence in Iraq until asked to leave, and who will not promise to continue the war on terror wherever it leads, as a public position in his or her campaign." | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro  Post Number: 3383 Registered: 5-2004  |
One really must wonder about the sanity of someone who calls "voters for peace", sick. Do you have any clothes that are not made out of an American flag? | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5223 Registered: 9-2001 |
...it's, Voters For Peace.org Rastro! Listen, don't try to imply I'm against voting for peace. IMHO, there can never be peace if all you Democrats keep running away from the fight for freedom. Do any of you have Al Qaeda's phone number? Maybe someone there will reveal their plan to deal with the •••-kicking they're getting from us all over the world? Hey, even Zarqawi admitted that President Bush’s strategy for the war is working. In his own words he has proved beyond a shadow of doubt that the angry and spineless Left is wrong... BTW, it's clear you guys don't know if you're coming or going. Your party is in a shambles. More proof today is how John Kerry's "Cut and Run" resolution went down 94 to 6... | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 3385 Registered: 5-2004 |
ajc, I'm quite capable of reading. I know it is votersforpeace.org. What about the web site is "sick"? And I am not a Democrat, nor am I a liberal. I simply do not like Bush, nor most of the policies that he has put in place. I believe he is doing untoward damae to the repuation and future of our country. Unlike many, I try not to state my opinion as fact. And I am more than willing to accept that many of my opinions are clouded by my dislike, bordering on hatred, for GWB. But that does not make the less valid, nor less correct that someone whose opinion is clouded by their blind support for him, | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5224 Registered: 9-2001 |
"...many of my opinions are clouded by my dislike, bordering on hatred, for GWB." It must be difficult to live with such strong negative feelings for someone. Was it something personal he did to you or your family, or is this just your opinion based on your concern for the repution and future of America? Listen, I agree that you're entitled to your opinion, therefore, I only have one question for you if you're willing... Q. If it turns out that GWB is successful in Iraq, are you willing to change you opinion about him? | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 15147 Registered: 10-2001 |
No. I already changed my opinion of him. It can't get any worse. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4376 Registered: 12-2001 |
If it turns out that GWB is successful in Iraq, are you willing to change you opinion about him? Let me phrase the question differently. If my daughter was blind-drunk yet somehow managed to drive home without incident, would I be OK with that (as opposed to her having a terrible accident)? No. With or without an accident, it was a stupid, irresponsible action. Similarly, invading Iraq was a stupid, irresponsible action. It violated certain rules such as: 1. Don't enter into a war except when there are no other options. 2. Don't enter into a war when you cannot guarantee a satisfactory outcome. I think the last time we entered into a war with a guaranteed outcome was 1898. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1484 Registered: 10-2004 |
ajc - this line is hilarious
I really do feel your pain there. Your not against it you just dont think there can ever be peace, unless of course we fight.  |
