Wally Wonders Why

No editor, no publisher, you get what you get

Democrats have a plan for Iraq

It’s not a plan to win, it’s not a plan to bring peace, it’s not a plan to rebuild, and it’s not a plan to fight terrorism. It is a plan to fight President Bush and not terrorists. It is a plan that will lead to failure by forcing troop reductions which will lessen our chances of success in Iraq. It will also embolden Iran, other Middle East Nations, and Muslims worldwide against non-Islamic nations. And the beauty of it in the Democrats eyes is that it can be done while claiming they are funding the war.

The Politico
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration’s options.

How is this possible? There plan proposed by Congressmen Jack Murtha, is to accept the added funds the President has requested, but with some additional requirements riding the bill. According to Win without War, the before mentioned anti-war group, this is how it will be done.

Key to Murtha’s strategy will be establishing a set of strict requirements that the administration will need to meet to deploy troops into Iraq:

  • Troops will need to be certified as “fully combat ready” with the training and equipment that they need;
  • Deployments cannot be extended beyond one year;
  • Troops must have at least one-year at home between deployments;
  • The “stop-loss” program where soldiers are forced to extend their agreed upon enlistment period will be prohibited.

Chairman Murtha described other measures the committee is considering for inclusion in the legislation:

  • Prohibit an attack on Iran without Congressional authorization;
  • Prohibit the construction of permanent military bases in Iraq;
  • Close the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba;
  • Bulldoze the Abu Ghraib prison into rubble;
  • Substantially reduce private security contractors and establish greater accountability for those who remain.

I can see so many ways that this will cripple our troops. President Bush will have the choice between no funding for the additional troops needed in Iraq or this plan, which will force the most experienced soldiers home early and leave the fighting to be done by less experienced soldiers. We lose either way. It’s ashame that the President has to wage a war on two fronts, here and abroad. If the Democrats want to kill our soldiers and citizens so badly, I wish they would just pick up a gun, instead of this “Slow-Bleed”

In a nutshell the Democrats finally have a plan, but it isn’t a plan to defeat terrorism.

We are all still waiting for that one.

And for you conspiracy buffs, or those who really wonder where the Democratic Party gets their agenda, realize that Democrats are working directly with Win without War which is a member of United for Peace and Justice, an anti-US socialist organization that has Whatcom Peace and Justice Center as its local members. You know the guys who stand on the street corner downtown with the signs.

3 Comments

  1. Today is a very sad day for our country.
    Do not think for a moment that our enemy in Iraq will put down their arms if we surrender. They will follow us home.
    Today’s vote undermines our troops and the commander-in-chief in a time of war.
    We must never forgive the Democrats for this.

  2. Well Wally, you’ve missed the target because you’re all turned around and facing the wrong direction. Your ‘Dear Leader’ Bush is a failure; Iraq has descended into civil war (or if you don’t like the term ‘civil war’, we can just call it chaos) while he’s been busy cutting brush and riding his bike. One more round of bombing neighborhoods to rubble is only going to get more of our troops killed and radicalize more Iraqi’s. This ‘troop surge’ isn’t really a strategy, it’s political posturing.

    And the latest “fair and balanced” Fox News poll says that 54% of the American people would vote to cut off funding for President Bush’s escalation plan. (question 43)

    Maybe you should take the time to really read what the Speaker of the House has to say:

    House Rejects Escalation

    This afternoon, after four days and three nights of debate, the House of Representatives voted 246 to 182 to approve a resolution expressing support for our brave men and women serving in Iraq, and rejecting the President’s escalation proposal. Today’s vote signaled a change in direction in Iraq that will end the fighting and bring our troops home safely and soon. Democrats are urging the President to adopt a strategy for success that changes the mission from combat to training, counter terrorism activities, and force protection and logistics; redeploys our troops; builds political consensus; engages in diplomacy; reforms reconstruction; and refocuses on the war on terror.

    Success in Iraq requires more than military force. It requires a political and diplomatic solution that engages Iraq’s neighbors and produces an inclusive political system in Iraq. By placing so much emphasis on dealing with the problems in Iraq militarily and not enough emphasis on sustained political and diplomatic engagement, the President’s escalation plan repeats past mistakes. The stakes in Iraq are too high to recycle proposals that have little prospect for success.

    The longer it takes us to resolve the situation in Iraq, the longer resources and attention will continue to be diverted from the war on terrorism. Our ability to respond to the escalating conflict in Afghanistan and other potential crises in the world is constrained severely by the deterioration in military readiness to levels not seen since the Vietnam era.

    According to recent news reports, the Army lacks thousands of advanced armor kits for Humvees that could protect against roadside bombs, the cause of 70% of American casualties in Iraq. In addition, existing shortages of trucks and other crucial equipment such as jamming devices, radios and other gear will only be exacerbated by the troop surge. Lodging and logistical support is also reportedly in short supply for the newly deployed forces. It is wrong to deploy troops until they have the up-armored Humvees, equipment, lodging, training and other support required to carry out their mission. Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid wrote to President Bush this week, urging him to take the necessary steps to ensure that the tens of thousands of soldiers being sent to escalate the war in Iraq have the armor and equipment needed to perform their mission and protect their lives.

    We owe our troops a course of action in Iraq that is worthy of their sacrifice. Today’s vote sets the stage for additional Iraq legislation, which will be coming to the House floor.

    Speaker Nancy Pelosi (speaker.gov)

Comments are closed.

Wally Wonders Why © 2014 Frontier Theme