oh boy, dont democrats realize we will actually take more casualties in a withdraw, and thousands of iraq deaths will become millions. an oil rich, educated, and regionally critical nation, and the libs want to hand it over to terrorists and insurgents, allowing the democratically elected gov’t collapse and its leaders slaughtered, good old democrats. providing security long enough for iraq to solve its political differences is not escalation, it is the only intelligent strategy put forth, including a recomended surge in the iraq study group, which also said time tables are a disaterous idea. funny, when james baker came out for the surge, liberals stopped quoting him. time for the liberals to do whats right for the country for a change and not whats right for their careers.

“reengaging Iraqs neighbors to working on partitioning the country”

ah, the great diplomatic solution that we keep hearing about. well if our great democrat leaders have this sought after solution, why not tell us what it is, minus the rhetoric. the “diplomatic” solution, is in reality, us sending an ambassador to syria and iran and begging them to stop killing our soldiers, offering them money and goods and technology as incentive to stop shooting at us. maybe the libs should pitch it that way, pay the bad guys so they dont shoot at us, way better then actaully defending ourselves, good going libs!!!

long live barrack hussein!

as for the extended tours, the soldiers actually all support it, 1., so they can see the surge work and not surrender, and 2., so they are guarenteed an uninterupted year off after their tour ends.
Prove it. Find me one quote in an article to support that statement.

And if the whole virtue of 15 months is that they get 12 months, why don’t you recognize that this is a change in official policy, which previously said that troops get an uninterrupted year off after their tour ends. This policy change demands that our military serve more to get what they were already promised by our government.

public opinion is formed only through the slanted eyes of an openly liberal media, whose mission is to undercut the war to distract the public from their own hypocritical support for the war in 2003.

why does mccain lack of a solution matter more the democrats clear division and lack of solutions? the dems were elected because they said they would have a solution, only to turn that around as soon as they got elected. the dems realized years ago they could use the realities of warfare to get elected, and they did so again. hey dems, cut the funds, no one is stopping you from ending this war tomorrow. cut the funds. you were elected by the far left contingent to cut the funds, so do it. nah, instead they put together pork and slap a withdraw in a spending bill, what a joke.

“and there’s ample evidence already that it is not working”

there is ample evidence that says it is working- coalition forces control sadyr city, overall decrease in violence across the country, etc.- even thought everyone who supports the plan say it would take months to show signs, and dems obviously dont want to wait and see if it works because if it does it is their political demise.

the true facts are that the democrats have positioned themselves in such a way that a u.s. defeat and withdraw is essential to their own political fortunes. they need us to lose, they needs deaths to rise, and so they send their speaker to conduct a shadow foreign policy aimed at encouraging the violence in a “just hang on, we’ll take over soon” message. the kurish section of iraq is a prime example of how the rest of the country could look if given the time to succeed under this new strategy.

“even more Americans to die there or keep the ones already serving in Iraq there 25% longer.”

for a war of this scope, these are the lowest casualty numbers in history. still not good enough? oh thats right, i forgot liberals insist on the sacrafice-less war. its amazing how a country went from fighting wars on mutiple fronts, willing to sacrafice a half-million drafted soldiers to a democrat president, can handle the sacrafice for this far more important conflict.

as for the extended tours, the soldiers actually all support it, 1., so they can see the surge work and not surrender, and 2., so they are guarenteed an uninterupted year off after their tour ends. they are soldiers, soldiers fight, they are not kids, or babies , or any other sappy reference that liberals try to use to cast a morbid light on the reality. they are trained killers, they are not children. they are doing a job, and either this congress should cut their funds or support their mission, they cannot have it both ways.

the desperation on the democrats part to get out now is 1., they want the rhwanda-esque massacre that follows to be blamed on bush and not a democrat, 2., want to stop any chance of bush having a success that will hurt them politically.

notice you ignored the fact that mccain has more credibility on this issue then all the democrat field combined, good for you.

“hey barrack hussein, we just got attacked sir, what do we do?”

BHO:”uhhh pray to allah?..no dammmit they told me to ignore that part of my past!!!”

i feel safer already

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Look, public opinion is about common sense and the ability to recognize realities of a situation that even McCain is saying he has no solutions for. If the current “solution” doesn’t work — and there’s ample evidence already that it is not working — then a new solution is needed. Tell me what that solution is. Tell me what solution there is that does not involve sending even more Americans to die there or keep the ones already serving in Iraq there 25% longer.

After a certain point the only thing to do is to recognize that the only Plan B left is to end the war and bring our troops home.

And wrt genocide, it’s already happening. We haven’t been able to stop it. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people are being murdered by Sunni or Shia militias every week because of their religious affiliation. Our presence has not stopped genocide from happening; our continued presence has no greater guarantee of success in that regard than leaving.

public opinion is meaningless, is the public a bunch of military experts? do they know the strategic importance of iraq? for that matter do you? we need to fight until we win, no other option is worth considering. we havent sustained casualties worthy of surrender, we havent been pushed back by an army, we havent surrendered territory.

the only way withdraw should be allowed is if it is made clear that what happens after we leave is owned completely by the democrats. they want to leave, so the ensuing genocide is on their hands. but they dont want to claim the withdraw, thats why they wont cut the funds, instead trying to undercut the effort from congress.

if it is such a moral issue, and leaving is right thing to do, hold a straight up or down vote on cutting funds or withdraw.