Political News: 11/27-12/3

[mreye]

Sorry, but I think this is a weak idea. What's next, put all the jokes in one thread? All the news links from SS2K5 in one thread? I can't tell someone how to run a forum that I'm a guest of, but this is unreal. I don't post on the weekends, so now I'll be replying to 4 day old post in the "Political Thread!"

 

Shouldn't we change the name of the forum now?

[Soxy]

Sorry, but I think this is a weak idea. What's next, put all the jokes in one thread? All the news links from SS2K5 in one thread? I can't tell someone how to run a forum that I'm a guest of, but this is unreal. I don't post on the weekends, so now I'll be replying to 4 day old post in the "Political Thread!"

 

Shouldn't we change the name of the forum now?

Like Wino said, we can revisit the idea of separate threads when people manage to show respect and have a dialogue instead of a pissing contest.

[Soxy]

Whoa I just noticed this thread when I was looking for my post. 

What's the deal?  Are we gonna try lumping all topics in one thread?  Won't there be like 10 conversations going at once?

CC, there was also an identical thread to yours started by sec159 yesterday, so it would have been merged anyway.

[kapkomet]

eye,

 

you have to admit that basically, when someone posts their two cents worth, it was like flies migrating to poopy to refute and post 85 "one-upsmanship" links as to why the other guy is WRONG. It's just better to have one thread of pissing contests for a while instead of a whole forum of it.

[Controlled Chaos]

Hey, I'm all for trying new things....like those 2 chicks from Milwaukee in 94. It was an experience, but not practical for the long term.

 

Kinda like reading through this whole thread to see if something has been said or an article has been posted before posting your own.

 

A sub forum, like the tradewinds, might work, but putting up with both of those chicks for more than a day was just going to be too much...

 

Wait...ugh....er...ah you know what I mean... I Vote Nay. Not that my opinion matters in this case...nor did it in my 94 encounter since I gave in and saw those girls the next night as well.

 

That was the end of the experiment though....this thread orgy should end as well.

 

Thank you and good night...or morning....ahhh Milwaukee

[mreye]

eye,

 

you have to admit that basically, when someone posts their two cents worth, it was like flies migrating to poopy to refute and post 85 "one-upsmanship" links as to why the other guy is WRONG.  It's just better to have one thread of pissing contests for a while instead of a whole forum of it.

Sure, but the forum is "Sex, Lies, and Politics" (Even though there shouldn't be a comma after Lies )

 

I stopped getting involved in the pissing contests long ago and if one started I would stay away from the thread. If it didn't, I'd join the debate. Debates get heated, but we still all get along for the most part. I'd like to think nobody here has any major issues with me here over my political views.

 

SLaP has always been like this. I thought that's what made it great. I'm sure going to miss it.

[kapkomet]

Well, then, we need to change the title.

 

Cookie Recipes, Iraq Pissing Contest, and Other Non-essentials work for you?

 

[mreye]

Well, then, we need to change the title.

 

Cookie Recipes, Iraq Pissing Contest, and Other Non-essentials work for you?

 

That would make me feel better.

[kapkomet]

Personally, we should just make the forum title Catch-All Anything Forum. But then, what would we do with the best thread in Soxtalk's SLaP forum?

[Balta1701]

Imagine that...some good news from the front!

 

Our Troops Must Stay

By JOE LIEBERMAN

Time magazine Baghdad bureau chief Michael Ware on Morning Sedition yesterday morning:

 

 

I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting.

[Balta1701]

George Bush is set to give an important speech tomorrow. A couple things are probably going to happen. He's going to declare mission basically accomplished and he's going to announce plans for a drawdown of forces in Iraq.

 

Both are good for one reason. As much as he says he's doing what's right, he's finally listening to people that are offering a dissenting point of view. That's encouraging.

 

What worries me is that this is purely a political solution. One that "gets us out" without actually fixing the problem. And that will lead to a bigger problem down the road.

I believe he did neither of those.

 

Furthermore, I believe that the resolution passed by the Senate 2 weeks ago or so calls on the President to provide:

 

A schedule for meeting such conditions, an assessment of the extent to which such conditions have been met, information regarding variables that could alter that schedule, and the reasons for any subsequent changes to that schedule.

 

President Bush and the document released this morning simply refuse to follow that resolution passed overwhelmingly by the Senate.

 

we will not put a date certain on when each stage of success will be reached -- because the timing of success depends upon meeting certain conditions, not arbitrary timetables.

You'll note that the Senate resolution left an out - they could give reasons why they would be unable to meet whatever schedule they gave, but the WH refused the demand entirely.

[kapkomet]

Why is everyone so fixated on TIMETABLES?

 

Let's just put across our foreheads, INSURGENCY, SIT ON YOUR ASS UNTIL XXX DATE AND THEN WE'LL LEAVE AND YOU CAN KILL EVERYONE!

[Rex Kickass]

Kap,

 

It's not really about specific timetables for XXX number of troops to leave by a specific date.

 

More like - we want this to have happened by this date.

At that point we may move XXX number of troops.

 

The problem is that we don't have a benchmark for success that has been clearly identified.

 

Freedom means what?

Victory means what?

 

Our goals in Iraq are nebulous at best, at this point. Our government needs to establish some specific goals and metrics for success. Only when that's been established should be talking about timetables for withdrawal.

 

We haven't identified clearly a step one, let alone a step two or three (drawback of troops, extracting ourselves from the situation)

[kapkomet]

Kap,

 

It's not really about specific timetables for XXX number of troops to leave by a specific date.

 

More like - we want this to have happened by this date.

At that point we may move XXX number of troops.

 

The problem is that we don't have a benchmark for success that has been clearly identified.

 

Freedom means what?

Victory means what?

 

Our goals in Iraq are nebulous at best, at this point. Our government needs to establish some specific goals and metrics  for success. Only when that's been established should be talking about timetables for withdrawal.

 

We haven't identified clearly a step one, let alone a step two or three (drawback of troops, extracting ourselves from the situation)

I can respect that viewpoint.

[Rex Kickass]

I can respect your respect in regards to respecting my viewpoint.

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T Find out what it means to me.

[Balta1701]

I can respect that viewpoint.

Do I get respect if I say that I would have said something very similar, but was at 5 hours worth of lectures/seminars?

 

I think one thing you can actually find within the resolution the Senate passed is something very similar to what Rex said...the Senate asked for timetables, but also gave the White House an out - it also let them give reasons why those timetables could be missed. In other words, the White House could have said "500,000 Iraqi police on duty by such and such a date, but we could miss this if insurgent operations cause such and such or if there is some political shift." Take your pick - you could construct those however you wanted, and as long as you gave them, you'd be able to meet the request of the Senate.

 

However, this is something the White House ardently refuses to do. When they are asked to do this, even by the Senate, they respond with the president is “determined to stay his course.”

 

Furthermore, they've gone and done something else which is basically slight of hand in this document...in September, General Casey testified before the Senate that the number of Iraqi battalions who were ready for combat had dropped from 3 to 1 over the last year, without giving any real explanation (that's about 700 men per battalion). That is based on a 4 point chassification scheme drawn up by the military. On the other hand, the document released today says, several times I might add, that over 100,000 Iraqi troops are now "In the fight" without ever defining what "In the fight" actually means.

 

In other words, the Senate asked for specific metrics or timetables or something by which they could evaluate the progress of the war. The White House responded by saying that they don't do timetables, and then went on to give statistics without telling us what they mean.

 

Right now, I see the reality as this; the President refuses to retreat or cut and run from Iraq in defeat. However, he has defined the U.S. pulling out of Iraq without "Defeating" the terrorists and establishing democracy as a defeat...without ever telling us what "Defeating" the terrorists actually means. Therefore, any pullback of U.S. forces would constitute a victory for the terrorists based on what he's told us, and consequently, we have to keep U.S. forces there until "victory" is achieved or we lose.

 

What the Senate I believe is asking for is some definition of "victory", when the President hopes we could have "victory", and a few guesses as to what would constitute victory. Something measureable that they can take back to people like me so that they can say "Here, shut up Balta, we've accomplished x and y and if z happens we can begin to withdraw q number of troops."

 

If something like that was actually given to the public, it would shut a lot of this criticism up, and it would give proponents of "Staying the course" something to challenge Representative Murtha with. Without that, however, the plan looks to be "Just keep doing what we're doing until victory is in hand", and given that what we're doing keeps costing lives without seemingly moving us closer to "defeating the terrorists", it makes pulling out look like a much more appealing option.

 

If you give me the 2 options of "Stay the course until "Victory"" and "Pull out immediately", I'd have to choose the latter since I don't have a huge amount of confidence in the magical appearance of Victory. But if you gave me a defined plan for victory combined with gradual pullouts associated with that victory...if the plan was well done and actually made sense, then it would immediately be the preferred option.

[kapkomet]

Yea, that makes sense. I just think the way the media is portraying this (TIME TABLE TIME TABLE TIME TABLE TIME TABLE TIME TABLE) sets the table for the "insurgency" to just sit and wait for those dates, and then raise hell to cause a civil war.

[Texsox]

From my new bestest buddy Gary Hart

 

Dear Tex, ( I thought only John Kerry would call me Tex)

 

"The public trust must be earned, and speaking clearly, candidly and forcefully now about the mess in Iraq is the place to begin."

 

I wrote those words in August in The Washington Post to call on Democratic Party leaders to step forward on Iraq. My years in the Senate and as co-chair of the Bipartisan Commission on National Security had convinced me that, unless Democrats provided real leadership, Americans would never receive the honest and open debate about Iraq that our country deserves.

 

When I first read John Kerry's October speech on Iraq, I knew it was a turning point. He spoke with the same unwavering voice - truth speaking to power - as he did when I first heard him speak out about the war in Vietnam in 1971. John Kerry got it right last month when he said, "Asking tough questions isn't pessimism; it's patriotism" and then answered those questions by offering a detailed plan to get the troops home.

 

In recent weeks, Democratic leaders across America - Jack Murtha, Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Pat Leahy, John Edwards and Barack Obama - have questioned the Bush Administration's unfocused "stay as long as it takes" approach. Democrats have joined together to offer substantive alternatives to get it right in Iraq and made it clear that our conscience and conviction lie with taking care of our troops.

 

The grassroots community at johnkerry.com has played a critical role making sure these ideas are heard and that brave Democrats are protected against the inevitable Republican attacks.

 

When John Kerry called for the withdrawal of 20,000 troops over the holidays, and the majority of remaining combat troops by the end of 2006, linking bringing troops home to clear benchmarks, you added energy and passion to that initiative.

 

When John Kerry called for accelerated training of Iraqi troops, greater international involvement, and improved reconstruction efforts, you amplified his voice.

 

Now, because of your efforts and those of all these Democratic leaders, make no mistake: the wheel has turned in the national debate over the war in Iraq. The American people have responded to the tough questions we've been asking because they had the same ones. The result is that the Bush Administration is being forced to engage in something they've gone to great lengths to avoid: an open debate about the war in Iraq.

 

We should all be proud of what has been accomplished, but never complacent. Asking questions and debating the issues alone will not rectify this disastrous situation exacerbated by the endless stream of Administration failures. You have to demand answers. You have to demand results for our troops.

 

That means making sure the intensity of your grassroots effort doesn't fade over the holidays. Our troops don't have the luxury of taking it easy over the holidays, and neither do we.

 

We have to continue to speak out - on talk radio, in letters to the editor, and to our neighbors - to demand an Administration strategy to get our troops home.

 

This fight isn't just about the future of the Democratic Party - whether we're going to have a strong Democratic Party that speaks its mind or settles for being a second Republican Party. This fight, at its core, is about restoring the strength and honor of America.

 

America needs your continued leadership, courage and passion on the grassroots level. I can't thank you enough for everything you have already done, and I am confident about what the johnkerry.com community is sure to accomplish in the future.

 

Sincerely,

 

Gary Hart

 

The more I think about it the more I like Bush's plan of keeping them there until politically it will score more GOPer points bringing them home.

[kapkomet]

The johnkerry.com community?

[Balta1701]

From my new bestest buddy Gary Hart

The more I think about it the more I like Bush's plan of keeping them there until politically it will score more GOPer points bringing them home.

Yeah, um, because it's done a dynamite job of keeping Bush's poll numbers strong this year.

[Balta1701]

It appears that last night, Connecticut became the first state in the union to create a fully publically funded system of financing political campaigns.

[Rex Kickass]

South Africa's Supreme Court that same sex couples are due the same marriage rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples yesterday. When the marriage laws are reconfigured within the next year, they will join the ranks of Canada, Spain, The Netherlands and Belgium as allowing same sex marriage.

[sec159row2]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47680

[sec159row2]

can't remember where i got this link, hugh hewitt or wmca... but someone is trying to start a campaign to send the ACLU a christmas card...

here's their address: ACLU 125 Broad Street, 18th floor, New York , NY 10004

 

here's the link... it's a christian radio station in new york... http://www.wmca.com/weblogs/kmc/date11302005.aspx

 

i was hoping this would have it's own thread... but i don't make the rules.. i just try to break 'em..

Edited December 2, 2005 by sec159row2

[Balta1701]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47680

# of U.S. troops in Iraq: 160,000

 

Population of California: 35,893,799

 

:banghead

Edited December 2, 2005 by Balta1701