Texas Congressional Republicans Fail To Show Leadership: Vote Against Our Troops...Again

"Will Texas' Republicans grow a pair and do what's right for Texans as opposed to tow their party's line?" (0.00 / 0)

And we're referring to voting for the Murtha "Slow Bleed" Doctrine, right?

Nice try on the masquerade effort.

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 16:44:53 PM UTC

Bleeding is right... (0.00 / 0)

No I think Vince is referring to the part where they dont think soldiers should have body armor that will actually stop a bullet. It's the soldier's blood that you will be seeing. Not Murtha or anyone else.

---

by: John McClelland @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 17:49:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I meant "slow bleed"... (0.00 / 0)

as the strategy to reduce the troops and make the present troops more vulnerable to insurgents (yes, I know that many BOR/DU bloggers hate that word, so let's use the word "minutemen")....

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 19:19:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Republican logic at work (5.00 / 1)

"...and make the present troops more vulnerable to insurgents..."

They wouldn't be vulnerable to insurgents if they weren't there. But of course
Republicans don't follow that sort of logic. They follow the logic that we are liberating the Iraqis by killing all the insurgents.

The same insurgents, some are finally beginning to realize, that Saddam Hussein was hanged for killing. 

No offense but I am beginning to wonder if being a Republican is a sign of mental illness.

---

by: Baby Snooks @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 19:51:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

As opposed to SociLib logic.... (0.00 / 0)

"a new direction, bring them home, civil war..."...over and over and over....

Lots of slogans from Soros/Pelosi/Kennedy/Turban Durbin/BOR/DU/CPUSA/al-Jazzerra, but no solutions except for the white flag.

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 21:19:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And besides... (0.00 / 0)

if the fringe left were in charge of our national defense, we'd be getting at least one attack on our homeland once a month. That's not scare tactics...it's just the result that would come, as much as they've 1) voted against the top aircraft we've used in our military efforts and 2) let our machinery go to crap in the Carter and Clinton administrations and 3) labeled our soldiers as torturers and 4) reminded the rest of us how "Iraq would've been better off with Saddam in power"

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 21:23:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, I forgot, Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 (0.00 / 0)

Every time a Republican talks about how Saddam Hussein was a threat to us, they always manage to imply that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 despite the fact that he was not. Saddam Hussein's real crime was not dealing with the big oil interests who are now in control of the Iraqi oil reserves.

Sorry but sacrificing human lives for big oil is not my idea of democracy.

---

by: Baby Snooks @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 21:36:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ummm, I never said.. (0.00 / 0)

that Saddam was behind 9/11...so no need for a straw man...

I am simply quoting what Rep. Jim "police scanner" McDermott said.

As for oil being the motivation of going to Iraq, nice try at the Michael Moore conspiracy theory. I'm sure the spray painters/effigy burners reading BOR/DU are excited that their picket idea list is being expanded.

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 21:52:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So why ARE we there? (0.00 / 0)

So why ARE we there, Mr. Republican apologist?

---

by: Baby Snooks @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 22:13:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Let's not forget that this man tried to kill my father.", GW Bush (0.00 / 0)

And let's not forget that Halliburton stock has more than tripled (accounting for last year's split) since receiving no-bid contracts in Iraq and record oil prices.

The Sunday NY Times had a great series of articles pointing out the absurdity of Bush's arguments leading up to the war.

Please refer to KT's signature.

---

by: colin @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 22:24:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I love how... (0.00 / 0)

hippiecrats try to relate Halliburton to this.

After all, Michael Moore was exposed as owning Halliburton stock, and he's been against the war from the get-go.

Nice try, though. You get a Dollar General Cookie.

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 22:38:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

First off... (1.00 / 1)

Saddam violated UN resolutions, and spurred the Iraq Liberation Act, signed into law by Clinton in 1998. In fact, in case revisionist history books don't fill your bookshelves, Democrats from Sandy Berger to Madeline Albright to Al Gore were speaking of Iraqi weapons stockpiles back then, so if anyone was wrong, it was a bipartisan miscalculation.

And this was back when Bush was running for re-election as Texas Governor. Back when Clinton was dealing with perjury charges before the House.

So if I'm speaking for anyone, it's both parties- those who called for Saddam's ouster as far back as 1998.

Those who have spoken against it to begin with were likely from the same breed that went to sit-ins in the 1960s and took a few Zippos to the Stars and Stripes.

www.completethewar.com

---

by: sfagrad02 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 22:36:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where do you come up with this bull-crap? (5.00 / 1)

I served 8 years in the USMC - 4 under Bush I, and 4 under Bill Clinton.

1.  Aircraft have as much to do with fighting terrorism, as taxicabs have to do with fighting alcoholism.
2.  Our machinery was crap the entire time I was in.  This is a result of big spending on wasteful stupid projects like long-range missile defense.  The military budget is not blown on paychecks, body armor, and humvees.  It's blown on contractors and pork projects that the generals tell Congress they don't want, but Congress tells them they're getting anyway.  Osprey anyone?  Marine Corps doesn't want the piece of shit.  Serves no operational purpose that isn't covered by other equipment. 
3.  Some of our soldiers have been torturers.  This happens in war sometimes.  Ever hear of the bezerker mentality.  War is hell.  Nevertheless, we're all trained not to do it.  It's against the Geneva conventions.  We support our troops, but the UCMJ applies to those who cross the line.
4.  I'm no friend of Saddam or his a-hole sons.  But the plan for "regime change" was neither planned well, nor advisable.

---

by: Whosplayin? @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 23:57:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What if, what is happeing in Iraq and with our Soldiers is exactly what the GOP wants... (0.00 / 0)

And, it may be since they have continued along this same line for so many years.

The goal better not be to reduce (cripple) the strength and effectiveness of our Public Military and Civic Soldiers in order to reduce the competition for a Private Partisan Praetorian Guard.

---

by: ProveOurDemocracy @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 20:18:40 PM UTC

Coalition of the Billing--Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army (5.00 / 1)

http://www.alternet....

Bush's Shadow Army

By Jeremy Scahill, The Nation. Posted March 20, 2007.

This article is adapted from Jeremy Scahill's new book, Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army (Nation Books).

On September 10, 2001, before most Americans had heard of Al Qaeda or imagined the possibility of a "war on terror," Donald Rumsfeld stepped to the podium at the Pentagon to deliver one of his first major addresses as Defense Secretary under President George W. Bush. Standing before the former corporate executives he had tapped as his top deputies overseeing the high-stakes business of military contracting -- many of them from firms like Enron, General Dynamics and Aerospace Corporation -- Rumsfeld issued a declaration of war.

"The topic today is an adversary that poses a threat, a serious threat, to the security of the United States of America," Rumsfeld thundered. "It disrupts the defense of the United States and places the lives of men and women in uniform at risk." He told his new staff, "You may think I'm describing one of the last decrepit dictators of the world.... [But] the adversary's closer to home," he said. "It's the Pentagon bureaucracy." Rumsfeld called for a wholesale shift in the running of the Pentagon, supplanting the old DoD bureaucracy with a new model, one based on the private sector. Announcing this major overhaul, Rumsfeld told his audience, "I have no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it. We need to save it from itself."

---

by: ProveOurDemocracy @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 22:48:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]