Surge or Not, We Still Have to Win

10 01 2007

Filed under: Surge, War on Terror, Politics, George Bush

UPDATE 11:45 pm – House Dem’s Seek to Block Surge Funds.
UPDATE 1/11 – Dem’s Blast ‘Escalation’ of War in Bush’s New Iraq Strategy. Scroll for updates.

President Bush’s speech on the War in Iraq on Wednesday night saw him vow to send more than 20,000 troops to Iraq to help the country “break the current cycle of violence” and “hasten the day our troops begin coming home.”

Full transcript here.

Regardless of how well the speech was delivered, we must win in Iraq. Democrats, in their reactions, have made it clear that they are not concerned with national unity, political unity, or even our national safety. The only concern they have is concerning their power.

Blogosphere sound off’s:

Hot Air:

Durbin’s rebuttal was more of the same pitiful tough-love garbage about Iraqis needing to “step up,” as if the problems in the country were due to laziness or too much happy-go-luckiness. They sound like a woman telling her unemployed college-dropout son to get a job.

Jay Stephenson:

Of course we don’t know how the enemy will react to this. The bottomline question…the only one that really matters…is will it work? The option of retreat and defeat that the Dems are begging for is unacceptable with many more negative consequences in the long run.

Wizbang:

I am sure there will be much debate over various components of the plan and the bi-partisan advisory group he mentioned, which will include Joe Lieberman, will most likely be attacked vigorously by many Democrats.

Captain Ed:

His assumption of responsibility for the failure to quell the violence in Baghdad is the one element that had been missing until now, and it may help take the edge off of some of the criticism.

UPDATE 11:45 pm – House Dem’s seek to block surge funds.

Go ahead. Make my day.

UPDATE 1/11 – Dem’s blast ‘Escalation’ of War in Bush’s new Iraq strategy.

Saying they oppose any escalation of U.S. military involvement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin called for the beginning of “phased redeployment” of U.S. forces in the next four to six months and implementation of an aggressive diplomatic strategy that “reflects the continuing obligation of the international community to help stabilize Iraq and which assists the Iraqis in achieving a sustainable political settlement, including by amending their constitution.”

Democrats rode into congressional majorities in the House and Senate during November’s midterm election largely on the pledge to get out of Iraq. But by rejecting the president outright, they must walk a fine line so as not to appear as obstructionists or unsupportive of the troops.

In other words, sacrifice future security in order to keep political power. Adda boy, Dem’s. That line is getting smaller by the day. Again, make my day. For some Democrats, that line has already been snapped (John Kerry, John Murtha, Russ Feingold)

Iowa Voice trackbacked with: My Thoughts On The Bush Speech

Advertisements

Actions

Information

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: