Wednesday, December 27, 2006

And Now For Something Completely Different ...

"In any event, we find widespread agreement among Republicans that U.S. troops must be leaving Iraq at the end of 2007 to avoid catastrophe in 2008."

-- Evans-Novak Political Report, Dec. 27

If this prediction came true, that would certainly be "good news" for the country, even if it provided a short-term boost in the polls for the GOP. But it's hard to envision the neocons that have President Bush's ear advocating troop redeployment under Bush's watch.

More likely, Bush will propose redeploying the additional troops brought to Iraq -- the so-called short-term "surge" -- and try to spin this as the first step in the road to victory there, whatever "victory" means.

11 Comments:

Anonymous Gloria said...

There could still be a disaster for the GOP if the redeployment is poorly executed and a lot of soldiers die in the process...

11:39 PM  
Anonymous calimary said...

Hey, I really don't care. ANYTHING that means disaster for the GOP is MORE than alright by me. And undoubtedly also, VERY good for the country.

11:39 PM  
Anonymous Jackpine Radical said...

Really? YOu don't care if a lot of troops die as long as the GOP ends up looking bad?

I can't go there. I don't want any more dead Iraqis or Americans--or Brits, Poles, Danes or whoever is left.

11:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree

I'd rather see the GOP get some short-term political gain, and have a sensible plan for Iraq, than have the GOP continue to look bad, and the casualties mount with no end in sight.

11:40 PM  
Anonymous ninkasi said...

The deaths and injuries are more important than politics. Let's get our troops out now, right away. This carnage does not help the U.S., or Iraq. I hear you, when you say "I'd rather see the GOP get some short-term political gain, and have a sensible plan for Iraq, than have the GOP continue to look bad, and the casualties mount with no end in sight."

As much as I loathe the Republics, I can't be happy that our troops are being ground into Iraq's sand. We should be able to win elections with the issues of raising minimum wage, rolling back the tax breaks for the super-wealthy, and the flood of jobs leaving America.

1:11 AM  
Anonymous calimary said...

Oh, for Pete's sakes, Of course I do.

However, it would appear as though when the GOP gets its way, gains power, takes the helm, then the chances are greater that more of our troops will be misused, their lives squandered, their sacrifice trivialized. So, the better to nip that in the bud and prevent MORE occasion to screw our troops if the GOP is short-circuited. And if they look bad, FINE. Less of a chance they'll regain power, then. Which means the misdeeds and warmongering and shaking our collective dicks around at the rest of the world and launching wars of aggression and religious crusades that are far MORE likely to be undertaken under GOP administrations than under Dem administrations, have far less of a chance of happening. Seems to me THAT's caring about the troops, too.

1:11 AM  
Anonymous wryter2000 said...

So...
Hundreds of American deaths per year and thousands of Iraqi deaths per year mean nothing, but the Republicans losing another election matters. These "people" are disgusting.

3:23 PM  
Anonymous Beelzebud said...

Yeah forget the American catastrophe, or the Iraqi catastrophe, just protect the party!!!!

Republicans - Party ALWAYS comes first over country.

3:23 PM  
Anonymous Tom Joad said...

the warlords of the republican party only hope is that if Dems support keeping troops in Iraq.

Dem Congresspeople... do NOT give your consent!

3:24 PM  
Anonymous Nickster said...

I don't buy it for a second. Every credible source that I've read said that any surge would have to be 18 months for it to be worth the effort. This, at least to me, seems like another smoke screen by the right wing echo chamber. They want to downplay the escalation and reassure the masses that any surge in troop strengh is only temporary because they are going to start redeploying soon. Yet they've been floating that redeployment is just a few months away trial balloon for a few years now. Why the heck should I start believing them now? This war isn't going to end while Dubya is still in the WH.

3:26 PM  
Anonymous SoCalDem said...

I have a problem with the word "redeploying". the proper word is WITHDRAWING.

Even in defeat, these weasels will not speak the truth.

"redeploying" allows for too much latitude.

What has to happen is for ALL the reservists and National Guard to be returned to their former status...in the USA.

The reserve posts and National Guard units need to have their equipment replaced..

and the "regular military" should be returned to their posts as well.

3:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares