The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) - Page 245

sleepyjeff · 10-11-2007, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Yes, I godwined this thread. Sue Me.

Don't worry....

When the actual subject is genocide I think exceptions should be made.

innerSpaceman · 10-11-2007, 02:45 PM

This resolution, as sleepyjeff pointed out, has been in the works for years. If the democrats have, only since the last election, come into enough of a majority to pass it ... that can only most cynically be called politically expedient timing to damage the opposing party.

A resolution about a 60-year-old genocide could hardly be expected to be at the top of the Dems legislative agenda, and it could - mind you, could be an innocent matter of timing.

That said, I'll concede that nothing in politics is an innocent matter of timing. It could be timed with electoral politics in mind. But to suggest that the timing is treasonous, and designed specifically to cut off supply lines to our own troops in wartime, is a scurolous accusation of dispicable political intent.

scaeagles · 10-11-2007, 05:30 PM

The only reason it is politically timed now is because it is widely believed in both parties that the surge is working very well. The dems need to make the surge not work. What possible other explanation could there be? The best way to damage the republicans politically is to make the war go as poorly as possible without making it look like they want the war to go as poorly as possible. Perhaps it is more that their own opposition to the surge and continuous rhetoric about failure and how it is unwinnable makes them look for ways to have the war go more poorly.

But make no mistake. If the dems win the Presidency, nothihng is going to change except they will find a way to support doing whatever is necessary to win in Iraq. Troops will not be withdrawn (in any less than a small symbolic way).

€uroMeinke · 10-11-2007, 05:33 PM

As one pundit I heard on NPR asked - "so when are we going to get around to apologizing for what we did to the Indians?"

I'd be happier if this actually had some action behind it

JWBear · 10-11-2007, 07:02 PM

I have yet to hear of one Democrat who thinks the surge is working. Can you kindly name your sources?

sleepyjeff · 10-11-2007, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWBear

I have yet to hear of one Democrat who thinks the surge is working. Can you kindly name your sources?

Type in a google search with the words hillary clinton dick durbin admit surge is working.

You'll get scores of sources

scaeagles · 10-11-2007, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Type in a google search with the words hillary clinton dick durbin admit surge is working.

You'll get scores of sources

Yeah, I'll post this juicy one from Clinton, too (note it is from August as well)-

Quote:

"It’s working. We’re just years too late in changing our tactics,” she said.

Moonliner · 10-18-2007, 07:41 AM

Good news!

Pelosi has apparently come to her senses and figured out that putting troops in danger is not the way to go about troop withdrawals. She has tabled her Turkish genocide resolution.

Not so good news.

Of course Turkey has already taken advantage of the rift in relations to approve action against the Kurds in northern Iraq. So we can look forward to more war in that part of the world soon.

BDBopper · 10-22-2007, 12:17 PM

Mark my words and the day I said them....

Mike Huckabee will win the GOP nomination for President.

You are now free to laugh at me.

scaeagles · 10-11-2007, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWBear

I have yet to hear of one Democrat who thinks the surge is working. Can you kindly name your sources?

Let's see...there's Levin, D - Mich....

Quote:

We have seen indications that the surge of additional brigades to Baghdad and its immediate vicinity and the revitalized counter-insurgency strategy being employed have produced tangible results in making several areas of the capital more secure. We are also encouraged by continuing positive results — in al-Anbar Province, from the recent decisions of some of the Sunni tribes to turn against Al Qaeda and cooperate with coalition force efforts to kill or capture its adherents.

There's Durbin D - Ill and Casey D - Penn

Quote:

Mr. Durbin and Senator Casey, a Democrat of Pennsylvania, have acknowledged recent military progress

There are others, and there are various democrat advisors who acknowledge it is working as well. You'll note the link above are from August. I have no doubt there is a strategy party wide for the dems since then that says they are not allowed to publically acknowledge progress.

10-11-2007, 02:45 PM	#2
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	This resolution, as sleepyjeff pointed out, has been in the works for years. If the democrats have, only since the last election, come into enough of a majority to pass it ... that can only most cynically be called politically expedient timing to damage the opposing party. A resolution about a 60-year-old genocide could hardly be expected to be at the top of the Dems legislative agenda, and it could - mind you, could be an innocent matter of timing. That said, I'll concede that nothing in politics is an innocent matter of timing. It could be timed with electoral politics in mind. But to suggest that the timing is treasonous, and designed specifically to cut off supply lines to our own troops in wartime, is a scurolous accusation of dispicable political intent.
	Submit to Quotes

10-11-2007, 05:30 PM	#3
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	The only reason it is politically timed now is because it is widely believed in both parties that the surge is working very well. The dems need to make the surge not work. What possible other explanation could there be? The best way to damage the republicans politically is to make the war go as poorly as possible without making it look like they want the war to go as poorly as possible. Perhaps it is more that their own opposition to the surge and continuous rhetoric about failure and how it is unwinnable makes them look for ways to have the war go more poorly. But make no mistake. If the dems win the Presidency, nothihng is going to change except they will find a way to support doing whatever is necessary to win in Iraq. Troops will not be withdrawn (in any less than a small symbolic way).
	Submit to Quotes

10-11-2007, 05:33 PM	#4
€uroMeinke L'Hédoniste Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: A.S.C.O.T. Posts: 8,671	As one pundit I heard on NPR asked - "so when are we going to get around to apologizing for what we did to the Indians?" I'd be happier if this actually had some action behind it __________________ I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance. Friedrich Nietzsche
	Submit to Quotes

10-11-2007, 07:02 PM	#5
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	I have yet to hear of one Democrat who thinks the surge is working. Can you kindly name your sources? __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

10-18-2007, 07:41 AM	#8
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	Good news! Pelosi has apparently come to her senses and figured out that putting troops in danger is not the way to go about troop withdrawals. She has tabled her Turkish genocide resolution. Not so good news. Of course Turkey has already taken advantage of the rift in relations to approve action against the Kurds in northern Iraq. So we can look forward to more war in that part of the world soon. __________________ - Taking it one step at a time.
	Submit to Quotes

10-22-2007, 12:17 PM	#9
BDBopper Not Taking Any Crap! Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Cleaning Up America, One Step At A Time! Posts: 1,694	Mark my words and the day I said them.... Mike Huckabee will win the GOP nomination for President. You are now free to laugh at me.
	Submit to Quotes