View Single Post
  #2  
Old 10-05-2004, 10:50 AM
SuperScout's Avatar
SuperScout SuperScout is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Out in the country, near Dripping Springs TX
Posts: 5,734
Distinctions
VOM Contributor 
Default Part 2

ISSUE:
Iraq War - Republican Party: The US must persevere in our mission there - not cut and run but finish the task. This message must be sent loud and clear, especially to the troops in the field. Sustain a consistent and unambiguous policy to assure Iraq's sovereignty.

Iraq War - Democrat Party: Internationalize efforts both politically and militarily; engage the world's major political powers in this mission; create an international high commissioner; and provide a massive training effort to build Iraqi security forces.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those of us of the Vietnam war generation, how we could have benefited by a consistent message, an unambiguous policy! It's a wonder we did as well as we did, considering the lack of focus, the ambiguity spawned by the liberals and leftists (am I being redundant here?). Now let's dissect the Democrat's milk-toast words:

Internationalize efforts? Are 30+ countries not international enough for you, or do you want to include the French, Germans and Russians, who were screwing us behind our backs with arms sales, and other transactions prohibited by the UN sanctions? And in case nobody has told Teddy Jane Kerry, the French have already stated that they're not sending any troops there period, irrespective of the groveling and suck-up that Kerry does, or has Monica do in his place.

And how to the Demos propose to 'engage the world's major political powers'? Didn't the world's major political powers have ample opportunity to engage in any process for the 10+ years of UN inaction, prior to our invasion? And what's holding them back now? Probably fear of exposure of being criminally involved in the Food for Oil scandal that has corrupted the UN beyond redemption.

Create in international high commissioner? To do what? If the Iraqis don't like us being there as temporary forces, why would they fall all over themselves to embrace an international high commissioner? And what's wrong with sovereignty, where the Iraqis govern themselves?

And finally, somebody get word over to those bozos at the DNC, and let them know that a massive training effort IS underway, and has been underway, for months. Psst: and a little hint here: NATO is also involved, you know, that international thingie you've been whining about?
__________________
One Big Ass Mistake, America

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote