Chuck Hagel on Iraq: Run away Now
Senator Charles Hagel is incoherent: This reads like a rough draft, not something a US Senator submits to the Washington Post for national distribution.
>>There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq.
Like Vietnam?
>>The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis  not the Americans.
What about the Syrians, Iranians, and al Qaeda? Aren't they having a say? Why do they get a say but we don't? Back in the Good Old Days before we illegally overthrew the sovereign Iraqi government, the Iraqis had determined for themselves what their government and future would be: Nasty, brutish, and short. Especially if you had the bad sense to have a relative who criticized Saddam. You too could starina gang-rape film. I'm sure those movie stars appreciate your support for them, Senator.
>>Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq.
Unlike say, Europe in 1944? The future of Germany could only be determined by Germans? What about Italy? Didn't the Russians have some ideas about Polish self-determination-- a lot less benign than ours?
>>Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made this point recently.
The man who helped us lose in Vietnam says so. That is what Logic 101 calls The Argument from Authority. It is specious.
>>The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. America cannot impose a democracy on any nation regardless of our noble purpose.
Hegel: The Iraqis don't want democracy. They like having mass murdering, mass torturing, mass gang raping, imperialist fascist military dictators, and their children who run ppl thru plastic shredders feet first. All those purple fingers show that. It's their culture and we should respect that.
>> Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.
If that is true,then we HAVE won, Chuck. Five years ago Iraq did not belong to the Iraqis. It belonged to Saddam Hussein and his psychopath sons.
So which is it? Does Iraq belong to the Iraqis, or to someone else? You can't have it both ways. One or the other. Did you even have an intern proof read this?
>>There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq.
The old center did as well. Do you want the new center to be Islamist, and a satellite of Iran?
>>That process began in the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations ...What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years.
Senator, how long have you been smoking crack? Syria and Iran working for their own self interests in Iraq is ENCOURAGING?????? Do you WANT Iran to have an ally in Iraq? All our policy since the Iranian Revolution has been predicated on playing Iran and Iraq against each other, and for good reason. You think it is encouraging that they soon be friends and allies? Just how is this good for US?
>>The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.
He is smoking crack. Syria and Iran support Hizbollah, which is explicitly committed to the destruction is Israel and the Jews. As is Iran. The only peace process which has a chance is the utter defeat of either Hizbollah and it's masters, or the destruction of Israel.
>>We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace.
Have you considered slipping some daisies into their rifle barrels, Senator?
>>We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims.
That is because we are at war with Muslims. They aren't Buddhist, Jewish, Christian, Zoroastrian, Jain, Shinto, or anything else. They call themselves Muslims. I'll take their word on it. If he meant that we are perceived as at war with Islam, he should have said so, because that is the perception, correct or not. This is remarkably sloppy writing for publication from a so called leader.
>>This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center...
Centered on Iran, Iraq, & Syria?
>> The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating.
2500 dead is tragic for the families affected, but you can't find 2500 in 300,000,000. In 1915 the French lost 1,500,000 out of a population of 40 million. At the Battle of the Somme, the British lost 58,000 on the first day. And the battle cost 900,000 before it was over. What was that you said about devastating, Senator? Loss of American life is tragic, but 2500 is not devastating.
>> And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.
So, are you proposing to substantially increase American troop numbers in Afghanistan? I'd go along with that if you moved them there in a straight line.
>>We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.
Well, Senator, just whose reponsibility is that?
>> The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq.
"Peace with Honor" was properly translated as Run away Quick. "Honor" - and I use the quotes deliberately- is no substitute for Victory. Ask Harry Truman.
>>The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder  one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.
Whether we should have invaded Iraq is a moot question. We did. Now, since we smashed the place, don't we have an obligation to fix it?
So far as I can see, the major problem we have is our government is doing everything they can to pretend that we are not at war with Iran and Syria. We are, and have been for a long time. They are supplying weapons, men, training, and money to the Iraqi resistance and Hezbollah. They are building nuclear weapons and calling for the destruction of America and the only functioning democracy in the Middle East, Israel. There is at least some reasonable evidence, tho far from conclusive, that Saddam did move WMD to Syria before the invasion. Maybe so, maybe not. Does Chuck want to bet Baltimore on it? We are treating them like their rhetoric is overwrought poetry which they don't mean literally. Guess what? They do mean it.
>>To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months.
The next few months? That's long term to a US Senator these days. What about the next generation, after we have told Hizbollah, Hamas, al Qaeda, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and all the other Islamists thru-out the world that they won?
We should run away because killing the ppl who want to destroy us just isn't any fun any more.
>>There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq.
Like Vietnam?
>>The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis  not the Americans.
What about the Syrians, Iranians, and al Qaeda? Aren't they having a say? Why do they get a say but we don't? Back in the Good Old Days before we illegally overthrew the sovereign Iraqi government, the Iraqis had determined for themselves what their government and future would be: Nasty, brutish, and short. Especially if you had the bad sense to have a relative who criticized Saddam. You too could starina gang-rape film. I'm sure those movie stars appreciate your support for them, Senator.
>>Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq.
Unlike say, Europe in 1944? The future of Germany could only be determined by Germans? What about Italy? Didn't the Russians have some ideas about Polish self-determination-- a lot less benign than ours?
>>Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made this point recently.
The man who helped us lose in Vietnam says so. That is what Logic 101 calls The Argument from Authority. It is specious.
>>The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. America cannot impose a democracy on any nation regardless of our noble purpose.
Hegel: The Iraqis don't want democracy. They like having mass murdering, mass torturing, mass gang raping, imperialist fascist military dictators, and their children who run ppl thru plastic shredders feet first. All those purple fingers show that. It's their culture and we should respect that.
>> Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.
If that is true,then we HAVE won, Chuck. Five years ago Iraq did not belong to the Iraqis. It belonged to Saddam Hussein and his psychopath sons.
So which is it? Does Iraq belong to the Iraqis, or to someone else? You can't have it both ways. One or the other. Did you even have an intern proof read this?
>>There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq.
The old center did as well. Do you want the new center to be Islamist, and a satellite of Iran?
>>That process began in the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations ...What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years.
Senator, how long have you been smoking crack? Syria and Iran working for their own self interests in Iraq is ENCOURAGING?????? Do you WANT Iran to have an ally in Iraq? All our policy since the Iranian Revolution has been predicated on playing Iran and Iraq against each other, and for good reason. You think it is encouraging that they soon be friends and allies? Just how is this good for US?
>>The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.
He is smoking crack. Syria and Iran support Hizbollah, which is explicitly committed to the destruction is Israel and the Jews. As is Iran. The only peace process which has a chance is the utter defeat of either Hizbollah and it's masters, or the destruction of Israel.
>>We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace.
Have you considered slipping some daisies into their rifle barrels, Senator?
>>We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims.
That is because we are at war with Muslims. They aren't Buddhist, Jewish, Christian, Zoroastrian, Jain, Shinto, or anything else. They call themselves Muslims. I'll take their word on it. If he meant that we are perceived as at war with Islam, he should have said so, because that is the perception, correct or not. This is remarkably sloppy writing for publication from a so called leader.
>>This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center...
Centered on Iran, Iraq, & Syria?
>> The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating.
2500 dead is tragic for the families affected, but you can't find 2500 in 300,000,000. In 1915 the French lost 1,500,000 out of a population of 40 million. At the Battle of the Somme, the British lost 58,000 on the first day. And the battle cost 900,000 before it was over. What was that you said about devastating, Senator? Loss of American life is tragic, but 2500 is not devastating.
>> And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.
So, are you proposing to substantially increase American troop numbers in Afghanistan? I'd go along with that if you moved them there in a straight line.
>>We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.
Well, Senator, just whose reponsibility is that?
>> The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq.
"Peace with Honor" was properly translated as Run away Quick. "Honor" - and I use the quotes deliberately- is no substitute for Victory. Ask Harry Truman.
>>The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder  one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.
Whether we should have invaded Iraq is a moot question. We did. Now, since we smashed the place, don't we have an obligation to fix it?
So far as I can see, the major problem we have is our government is doing everything they can to pretend that we are not at war with Iran and Syria. We are, and have been for a long time. They are supplying weapons, men, training, and money to the Iraqi resistance and Hezbollah. They are building nuclear weapons and calling for the destruction of America and the only functioning democracy in the Middle East, Israel. There is at least some reasonable evidence, tho far from conclusive, that Saddam did move WMD to Syria before the invasion. Maybe so, maybe not. Does Chuck want to bet Baltimore on it? We are treating them like their rhetoric is overwrought poetry which they don't mean literally. Guess what? They do mean it.
>>To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months.
The next few months? That's long term to a US Senator these days. What about the next generation, after we have told Hizbollah, Hamas, al Qaeda, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and all the other Islamists thru-out the world that they won?
We should run away because killing the ppl who want to destroy us just isn't any fun any more.
posted by TTB at
9:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home