Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: JBA on November 18, 2005, 03:13:08 PM
-
GOP to Dems: Pull Troops Now? Okay, then let's vote...
Troop resolution Tonight; hitting the House floor between 5:45 and 7:45...
Ultimate showdown...
reports Drudge.
-
that is the proverbial 'line in the sand'
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20051118/D8DV51A80.html
-
Heard this on the car radio just a little while ago. Sure is a balsy move and I can't wait to see what happens and what the dems will do/say.
Put up or shut up is right.
-
a litle history, why so many are so pissed off at the "bring them home crowed/anti war group"
How North Vietnam Won The War
Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995
What did the North Vietnamese leadership think of the American antiwar movement? What was the purpose of the Tet Offensive? How could the U.S. have been more successful in fighting the Vietnam War? Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. He later became editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of Vietnam. He now lives in Paris, where he immigrated after becoming disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism.
Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly.
Q: Why?
A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.
Q: How could the Americans have won the war?
A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.
Q: Anything else?
A: Train South Vietnam's generals. The junior South Vietnamese officers were good, competent and courageous, but the commanding general officers were inept.
Q: Did Hanoi expect that the National Liberation Front would win power in South Vietnam?
A: No. Gen. [Vo Nguyen] Giap [commander of the North Vietnamese army] believed that guerrilla warfare was important but not sufficient for victory. Regular military divisions with artillery and armor would be needed. The Chinese believed in fighting only with guerrillas, but we had a different approach. The Chinese were reluctant to help us. Soviet aid made the war possible. Le Duan [secretary general of the Vietnamese Communist Party] once told Mao Tse-tung that if you help us, we are sure to win; if you don't, we will still win, but we will have to sacrifice one or two million more soldiers to do so.
Q: Was the National Liberation Front an independent political movement of South Vietnamese?
A: No. It was set up by our Communist Party to implement a decision of the Third Party Congress of September 1960. We always said there was only one party, only one army in the war to liberate the South and unify the nation. At all times there was only one party commissar in command of the South.
Q: Why was the Ho Chi Minh trail so important?
A: It was the only way to bring sufficient military power to bear on the fighting in the South. Building and maintaining the trail was a huge effort, involving tens of thousands of soldiers, drivers, repair teams, medical stations, communication units.
Q: What of American bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail?
A: Not very effective. Our operations were never compromised by attacks on the trail. At times, accurate B-52 strikes would cause real damage, but we put so much in at the top of the trail that enough men and weapons to prolong the war always came out the bottom. Bombing by smaller planes rarely hit significant targets.
Q: What of American bombing of North Vietnam?
A: If all the bombing had been concentrated at one time, it would have hurt our efforts. But the bombing was expanded in slow stages under Johnson and it didn't worry us. We had plenty of times to prepare alternative routes and facilities. We always had stockpiles of rice ready to feed the people for months if a harvest were damaged. The Soviets bought rice from Thailand for us.
Q: What was the purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?
A: To relieve the pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken American resolve during a presidential election year.
Q: What about Gen. Westmoreland's strategy and tactics caused you concern?
A: Our senior commander in the South, Gen. Nguyen Chi Thanh, knew that we were losing base areas, control of the rural population and that his main forces were being pushed out to the borders of South Vietnam. He also worried that Westmoreland might receive permission to enter Laos and cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail. In January 1967, after discussions with Le Duan, Thanh proposed the Tet Offensive. Thanh was the senior member of the Politburo in South Vietnam. He supervised the entire war effort. Thanh's struggle philosophy was that "America is wealthy but not resolute," and "squeeze tight to the American chest and attack." He was invited up to Hanoi for further discussions. He went on commercial flights with a false passport from Cambodia to Hong Kong and then to Hanoi. Only in July was his plan adopted by the leadership. Then Johnson had rejected Westmoreland's request for 200,000 more troops. We realized that America had made its maximum military commitment to the war. Vietnam was not sufficiently important for the United States to call up its reserves. We had stretched American power to a breaking point. When more frustration set in, all the Americans could do would be to withdraw; they had no more troops to send over. Tet was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids.
Q: What about the results?
A: Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise;. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until 1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and 1970 as it was.
Q: What of Nixon?
A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.
Q: What else?
A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
-
This is way overdue. No more cheap shots from the cheap seats. Let em stand by their convictions, if they have any, or shut the hell up. Before we lose this war on TV. Instead of winning it in the Middle East.:furious
-
Originally posted by Shifty
This is way overdue. No more cheap shots from the cheap seats. Let em stand by their convictions, if they have any, or shut the hell up. Before we lose this war on TV. Instead of winning it in the Middle East.:furious
Yep.
-
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2005/11/gop_to_call_mur_1.html
GOP Tries To Call Murtha's "Bluff"
We can now confirm that there will be a "Murtha Vote" later this p.m. Speaker Dennis Hastert's spokesperson Ron Bonjean tells The Hotline that it's a "vote to send a message to our American troops that we believe in their mission of fighting terrorists and we must not retreat and defeat."
Angered by what he saw as House Dems "applauding but then backing off" Murtha's statement on 11/17, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) rose this a.m. at the House GOP Conference and suggested that they call for a vote to force Dems to show "where they stand to the American people," according to his spokesperson Larry VanHoose. Hayworth's call was met with what VanHoose described as "enthusiastic applause" from the rank-and-file GOP.
Pushing aside votes on extending the tax cuts, reauthorizing the Patriot Act and a long-awaited measure on federal flood insurance, the GOP leadership has turned Hayworth's idea into a resolution and will bring it to floor of the House for a vote by 7 pm, according to senior GOP leadership sources.
The question now is what Leader Pelosi and her caucus will do. After keeping her Dems in line on both major fiscal votes on 11/17, does she stick them all in cabs and push them off to DCA, IAD and BWI? Or will some Dems from conservative or military-heavy districts insist on staying and casting their "nays?"
CNN is reporting that Dems are planning on having just Murtha debate the resolution, but it remains to be seen how and if the rest of the caucus votes.
Here's a draft of the resolution:
Draft text of the expected resolution is attached and below.
H.Res. __
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately. [JONATHAN MARTIN AND MARC AMBINDER
-
The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.
"He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.
Ouch.
No holds barred Rochambeau.
-
How brave of those brave republicans. To bravely call for this vote for bravery.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
How brave of those brave republicans. To bravely call for this vote for bravery.
Thats the best rebuttal you have for your party? Hehe!
Brilliant move by Congress.
-
Stay the Course!!!
If we Cut and Run we loose all that we have hoped to achieve. It will take strong men, of strong will to harnish the root of Terror. Think back through all the history books in America... The Minute Men, The Green Mountain Boys, Rodgers Rangers...if they lived today what would they say? "Men pull yer arses up by the bootstraps, we have a job to do!"
The DemoCraps are doing anything possible to fail the mission... for what? To let Hillaery in? Ohhh PhaaaaLeeez!!!
If we cut and run then the battle will be again on OUR soil.
Mac
-
Cut and Run is what we did in Somolia while trying to provide a safe passage for humanitarian aid in the thick of Al Queda operations inside Somolia. This was the catylist that set forth more daring terrorist operations for the future, when we showed them fear....
-
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
Wonder if it bothers any of the dried up old hippy protestors that they were commy pawns?
Prolly not.
-
I've been watching Cspan. It's funny seeing the dems froth at the mouth and the repubs are basically put up or shut up, record your vote!
-
Originally posted by AWMac
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
Sorry you had to go through that Mac.
-
Personally I'm suprised they showed. I figured they would all walk out , then run to the first TV crew they could find to register their indignation. Complete with drama, and fake concern for the country. Sucks when the other side quits taking your BS and fights back.:lol
-
Originally posted by Shifty
Personally I'm suprised they showed. I figured they would all walk out , then run to the first TV crew they could find to register their indignation. Complete with drama, and fake concern for the country. Sucks when the other side quits taking your BS and fights back.:lol
Both sides fake concern for our country as far as I'm concerned. Politicians no longer work "for the people".
-
(http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/CutRun.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I've been watching Cspan. It's funny seeing the dems froth at the mouth and the repubs are basically put up or shut up, record your vote!
Thanks for the tip. Cspan has been hillarious. Those Dems are lying there too! One was just trying to say that this vote was an attempt to divide the country! LOL!!!!! Divide the nation?
Saying the President lied is so uniting! Why not just vote, dorks.
-
On another note, every republican so far has been even toned and rational. The Dems I have seen have been shrill and bitter.
-
Kucinich was scary...
:confused:
-
Originally posted by NUKE
On another note, every republican so far has been even toned and rational. The Dems I have seen have been shrill and bitter.
That's how somone acts when a bluff is called and they got nothing.
I read this earlier and it couldnt be more true:
an effort by the Republicans to show unity on the one issue that seems to transcend the party and provides the leadership with a much needed boost. Exposing the Dems as hypocrites is just added icing on the cake.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
That's how somone acts when a bluff is called and they got nothing.
I read this earlier and it couldnt be more true:
I also noted that no democrat so far ( that I have seen) has addressed the idea of removing our troops, they have just listed all the resasons why they think Iraq is a failure, but not one has said what they think about removing all the troops imediatly and not one has offered a solution regarding the issues they are complaining about.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Sorry you had to go through that Mac.
Rip that's the reason I Retired. I was on the E8 Promotion list and would have made it in Feb '95..I left in Jan'95 terminal leave until 1 Apr '95.
I promised myself if it wasn't fun anymore it was over.. hit that spot at the 17 year mark. Shaving in the mirror with a sharp edge razor and thinking is it all worth it anymore...NOT good. Tottally frustrated. Ended up in Huachuca,AZ in a frikken Sig Bn that had a short fat black female SGM that couldn't run, jump or be an NCO yet she thought she was the "Cream of the NCO Corp".
The day I put my Retirement paperwork in we argued.. she tried to convice me that there were no jobs out there for me and it was best for me to stay... I laffed are her dumb asss.
The day I left they had a Parade for awards and ceromonies.. my name was mentioned, so I'm told. I left and found a job makin decent $$$... heard she retired and got a job with UPS.
I got the last laff :rofl
Just a lil more of Mac.
Mac
-
Originally posted by AWMac
Rip that's the reason I Retired. I was on the E8 Promotion list and would have made it in Feb '95..I left in Jan'95 terminal leave until 1 Apr '95.
I promised myself if it wasn't fun anymore it was over.. hit that spot at the 17 year mark. Shaving in the mirror with a sharp edge razor and thinking is it all worth it anymore...NOT good. Tottally frustrated. Ended up in Huachuca,AZ in a frikken Sig Bn that had a short fat black female SGM that couldn't run, jump or be an NCO yet she thought she was the "Cream of the NCO Corp".
The day I put my Retirement paperwork in we argued.. she tried to convice me that there were no jobs out there for me and it was best for me to stay... I laffed are her dumb asss.
The day I left they had a Parade for awards and ceromonies.. my name was mentioned, so I'm told. I left and found a job makin decent $$$... heard she retired and got a job with UPS.
I got the last laff :rofl
Just a lil more of Mac.
Mac
Did you know any Marines who were students for Sig/int school there during that time?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
(http://michellemalkin.com/archives/images/CutRun.jpg)
Thanks Gun!!! BIG SALUTE!!! <<>>
-
Gun I worked alot with Jarheads... In Korea mostly and a few at the Hootchie Cootchie MI School... any name in particular?
Give me a year and course number if you have it... I was there just a short time.... '94~'95. But if you want to get intouch with friends from there I might be able to help some...depends on their deployment. I'm sure you know what I mean.
Mac
-
My brother was a Marine going to school at Huachuca,AZ around 95/96 his last name is Timmons.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Thats the best rebuttal you have for your party? Hehe!
Brilliant move by Congress.
Naw, I think I'll just stay out of your little circle ****.
-
Kurt Vonnegut
Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Naw, I think I'll just stay out of your little circle ****.
Just like every other liberal. It's ok, most of you don't think a cut and run from Iraq is the best thing to do even if talking about it hurts the president.
-
Originally posted by JBA
a litle history, why so many are so pissed off at the "bring them home crowed/anti war group"
How North Vietnam Won The War
Ok who was it being interviewed?
and by whom?
-
Wall Street Journal was the interviewer. They were interviewing Bui Tin.
-
Murtha is speaking now.
He's seems likeable, reasonable and is making his point without being an hysterical lunatic, like your average liberal democrat.
He's making good points and seems intelligent. I can honestly say that I respect him and his approach, but that I dissagree with his ideas on Iraq.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Murtha is speaking now.
He's seems likeable, reasonable and is making his point without being an hysterical lunatic, like your average liberal democrat.
He's making good points and seems intelligent. I can honestly say that I respect him and his approach, but that I dissagree with his ideas on Iraq.
I think that's the majority opinion against him Nuke. No one that I know called him a traitor or dishonest but that they respect the man but not his Ideas.
This is a good play by play of some of the debate tonite. I'm actually proud of my congress tonite for actually debating this for once:
9:13 PM Eastern: Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says that her part of California treats veterans with respect, but that Murtha is not being treated with respect (apparently because his proposal wasn’t immediately accepted as gospel). She uses many of the night’s buzz-words, calling this resolution “a political stunt” and repeatedly calling these proceedings a “deception.” She also claims that Murtha’s integrity has been attacked. She is receiving extended rounds of applause after many of her statements from the Democrat caucus. She says Murtha was called a “coward” and accused of “cooperating with the enemy” by Republicans in the House, though of course this comes without explanation or evidence. She says Murtha has “dealt the mighty blow of truth to the President’s failed Iraq policy,” and that the American people have rallied to Jack Murtha’s position. Pelosi also says that Murtha has spoken “truth to power,” which she says is a very high act of patriotism.
9:12 PM Eastern: Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) reads off some touching stories of constituents who have recently given their lives for their country over in Iraq, as well as the thoughts and feelings of family members. He says that his constituents who gave their lives knew that they were fighting for something greater than themselves.
9:10 PM Eastern: Kingston says he agrees that this is not the Murtha resolution, but that it is Murtha’s headline. He says that Murtha and immediate withdrawal are what al-Jazeera is reporting to the people over in Iraq. He also quotes Gen. William Webster, previously referenced, who said that, if the U.S. withdraws troops now, the soldiers he has lost will have been for naught.
9:09 PM Eastern: Tom Osborne (R-Neb.) says that he’s concerned about the “acrimony” and the “general tenor” of the discussion, though he refuses to blame anyone in particular. He says he’s worried about what the public and the troops will think about the discussion taking place tonight. He says “we’re better than this.”
9:07 PM Eastern: Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) recalls a letter from John Adams in 1776 that said the early American revolutionaries were on the cusp of self-government. Iraq is in the same position today, according to Gohmert.
9:03 PM Eastern: Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) says that recent developments have made clear the need for an honest analysis of alternative proposals. He says he doesn’t support the Hunter resolution for immediate withdrawal in Iraq. Hoyer says that Hunter proposed this resolution in order to avoid a legitimate discussion of withdrawal or timetables for withdrawal in Iraq. He also says that this is an attempt by the administration and the GOP to trivialize the issue. Hoyer also says this resolution is beneath the dignity of the institution and the members of the House. He calls this a “shabby, petty political maneuver,” and he thinks this resolution reflects a lack of respect for the House and American democracy as a whole.
9:00 PM Eastern: Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) brings up the criticism levied by these Democrats calling the President a liar, even going so far back as to when they slandered President Reagan for his attempts to fight communism in Latin America. This is a particular point that, at least in terms of Reagan, hasn’t been brought up yet. Gingrey brought up the fact that the President has been called a liar or darn near it by the same people complaining of unfair treatment to Murtha.
8:57 PM Eastern: George Miller (D-Calif.) is heading into Murtha territory again. He says that Murtha has been characterized unfairly and criticized relentlessly by the President, the Vice President, the Speaker of the House, and his own colleages who “challenged his patriotism, challenged his character, challenged his integrity.” There appears to be no example of this having actually taken place. Miller says that all Murtha wanted was a debate. Miller also longs for the olden days when he opposed American foreign policy in Southeast Asia and Latin America, when Murtha was on the other side, but he says that people didn’t trash each other to the same degree as he claims they have done now. Miller is going far over his time and causing another ruckus. He gets a round of applause from the Democrat caucus for violating decorum.
8:55 PM Eastern: Wayne Gilchrist (R-Md.) reads off the names of constituents who gave their lives in Iraq for the mission. He says that our troops are successful because they bond together through integrity and trust. He desires an analysis of how to finish the war as opposed to how to fight the war.
8:54 PM Eastern: Ron Lewis (R-Ky.) asks how you can withdraw from the war on terror, making reference to several terrorist attacks taking place against U.S. interests during the 1990s and through the present. He links the desire of the Clinton administration not to fight terrorism in a hands-on way with the fact that the U.S. was attacked on September 11, 2001.
-
contd.
8:52 PM Eastern: Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) mentions that he’s a veteran of two wars, and that our soldiers overseas pay a lot of attention to what their leaders are doing back at home. He says that our troops in Iraq are looking to see whether or not the leaders here have the stomach for the war effort and to keep supporting their mission. He asks what message Congress wants to send to the soldiers overseas.
8:51 PM Eastern: Gene Green (D-Tex.) says that this resolution isn’t about the Iraq war, but rather silencing Jack Murtha. Where he’s getting this from remains to be seen.
8:50 PM Eastern: Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) says he thinks that withdrawal would be an absolute disaster. He says that the exit strategy in Iraq must be victory.
8:46 PM Eastern: Slaughter yields time to Walter Jones (R-N.C.), who says that Murtha has been attacked unfairly. Jones says that he wants to know what the strategy is in Iraq, and brings up a quote from then-Governor Bush criticizing then-President Clinton about not having an exit strategy or timetable in his own war effort. Jones gets a strong round of applause from the Democrats after his speech. The hooting and hollering, not to mention the crosstalk, has begun again.
8:43 PM Eastern: Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) encourages his colleagues to think of what the U.S. has accomplished since the mission began in Iraq. He talks about opening embassies, building new schools, opening colleges and research centers, among other things. Basically, everything Tancredo is listing off is an example of social capital or a mark of an improving democratic nation-state. He also says he wants the soldiers home as soon as possible. He says that, even though he doesn’t see eye to eye with the President, he asks the Democrats not to allow their hatred of the President as a person to get in the way of doing what’s right for the country and its troops.
8:41 PM Eastern: Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) clarifies, again, that this resolution is not about Jack Murtha but rather about where elected representatives stand on an immediate withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Iraq.
8:38 PM Eastern: Steve King (R-Iowa) wonders why there haven’t been any objections to the mission in Afghanistan even though it also cost American lives. He wonders why it is that no one has ever set a limit on the amount of sacrifice that the U.S. can make in Afghanistan, when so many people are concerned with how much is too much vis-a-vis Iraq. He also says that the U.S. hasn’t been attacked since 9/11, and that you can’t separate the troops from the mission. He says that, if the defeatists get their way, the soldiers returning home from Iraq will be received the same way the soldiers were received when they came home from Somalia, Lebanon, and Vietnam.
8:37 PM Eastern: Joe Wilson (R-S.C) (not that Joe Wilson, of course) talks about his children serving in the U.S. military. He says that 9/11 was the beginning of a global war against terrorism, and that we have to face our enemy overseas or else we will be facing them here at home.
8:34 PM Eastern: Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) brings up U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and his position on the current state of the war in Iraq. He also talks about the other individuals in Congress who have made recommendations about how to proceed from here. Emanuel says that the House deserves criticism for not asking the necessary questions about the war in Iraq. He says that our soldiers deserve a policy of success, victory, and exit.
8:31 PM Eastern: Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) says that his father served in the armed forces and is a great friend of Jack Murtha. He makes the differentiation between the Hunter resolution and the Murtha proposal, finally. He encourages honesty in this process. Renzi makes reference to the factual evidence that shows there was no misrepresentation by the Bush administration taking place in the lead up to the war.
8:29 PM Eastern: Chet Edwards (D-Tex.) talks about the Iraq veterans that he represents in his district. He believes that votes on war are the most important that a congressman makes, and points out that the average congressman has 7.8 seconds to speak on the issue tonight without any hearings or witnesses. He believes that the proceedings tonight are challenging the integrity of the House.
8:27 PM Eastern: Candice Miller (R-Mich.) lists the potential results of withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq prematurely. She also believes that the U.S. has to maintain troops in Iraq until a peace is secured, otherwise the U.S. will be fighting the terrorists here at home as opposed to overseas.
8:25 PM Eastern: Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) talks about his history in organizing against the war, but says he’s going to vote against this withdrawal because he believes it’s a fraud for a resolution’s proponent to encourage voting against of it. He’s getting pretty fired up.
8:24 PM Eastern: Ginny Brown-Waite (R-Fl.) recalls a touching story where an Iraqi woman asked her to make sure that American troops don’t leave until Iraq is secure. She says that we do have an exit strategy: when the Iraqi people stand up, we will stand down.
8:22 PM Eastern: Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) says that the Bush administration misled the country into war, and that the Republicans are playing politics with the war. Crowley also asserts that the Republicans are questioning the patriotism of Murtha. As of the time of writing, no elected Republican has challenged Murtha’s patriotism.
8:21 PM Eastern: Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fl.) says that there is an appearance that there is a weakening of support for the mission in Iraq and the troops fighting over there. He hopes that the vote on this resolution will help clear up the issue, because it seems rather obvious that this resolution will be voted down by a very wide margin.
8:17 PM Eastern: Mel Watt (D-N.C.) speaks on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus. Watt says that he reaffirms the CBC’s principles regarding the war in Iraq, originally declared in October 2002. Watt asks the President to submit a detailed plan to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq and to train Iraqi soldiers to maintain internal security. In other words, Watt is endorsing a slightly more detailed version of the Murtha proposal. He makes it very clear that the CBC’s 42 votes will not be misinterpreted, which makes me think, as an editorial note, they will probably vote for the resolution.
8:14 PM Eastern: Gresham Barrett (R-S.C.) says not to believe the things on television and in the news. He says he’s been to Iraq and spoken to the soldiers and leaders, and that the people he sees over there are young heroes, not like the old folks in Congress. Barrett says that, as long as he is a U.S. Congressman, he will not cut and run on the people of Iraq, the soldiers on the ground, or on the United States. He says that we shouldn’t be talking about an exit strategy, but about freedom, democracy, and victory.
8:10 PM Eastern: Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) says that the resolution makes no mention of redeployment. He continues the laudatory remarks about Murtha, claiming that Murtha is being attacked by this resolution and this debate. This appears to be the consistent Democrat line so far, though it could degenerate into a shouting match as it did previously. Skelton encourages hearings in the Armed Services Committee on these issues.
8:08 PM Eastern: Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.) rises in opposition to the resolution. Pitts makes reference to his own experience as a Vietnam veteran, where he would “hear the politicians in Washington undermining the war effort for political purposes.” He says that the political rhetoric from pro-withdrawal Democrats “comes at the expense of our troops in the field,” and Pitts says it’s “demoralizing and insulting” to the soldiers, and it emboldens the terrorists.
8:06 PM Eastern: Slaughter links the Bush administration to torture in Iraq, and claims that “mismanagement and corruption” within the administration are responsible for failure in Iraq. She says that the reaction of the Republicans proves how right and important Murtha really is. She says the Hunter resolution is “nothing like” Murtha’s proposal, which is not factually correct. They are not the same, but they are similar.
8:02 PM Eastern: Slaughter re-connects the Hunter resolution to Murtha. Argues that Murtha’s reputation on national security and defense issues gives his words weight, and this resolution tonight is a panic response. Slaughter compares Murtha’s service history to the President’s, Vice President’s, and Secretary of Defense’s. She also says that the Republicans are attempting to Swift Boat Murtha.
7:59 PM Eastern: Chet Edwards (D-Tex.) makes a request that all members of the House be allotted 5 minutes each to speak on this issue. Gingrey does not yield time to Edwards to make the unanimous consent request. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) will control the time for the Democrat side.
I can only assume that all times are EST
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Ok who was it being interviewed?
and by whom?
1st paragraph
Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995......
....following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army....
try google it works pretty well.
BUI TIN,
I have watched a Doc, on the hanoi hilton, the one with interviews with McCain and his fellow prisoners, They mentions this specifical about the NV useing the Anti war movement here in the US to try to brke them.
-
All well and good but the Dems arent asking for a complete pullout. One man said his opinion.
But it is the rep way to paint with broadstrokes...............
-
Originally posted by JBA
1st paragraph
Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995......
....following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army....
try google it works pretty well.
BUI TIN,
I have watched a Doc, on the hanoi hilton, the one with interviews with McCain and his fellow prisoners, They mentions this specifical about the NV useing the Anti war movement here in the US to try to brke them.
Who do you think organized (this isn't really AT you JBA but more or less a general question) a majority of the "peace" ralleys and "peace" movements.
wait for it....
Communists, and I'm not saying bad Americans, I'm saying certified communisists. Even today if you go to the ralleys you will see a boat load of commie and marxist literature. The best way to defeat America is from within and with dissent. I'm not saying that dissent is a bad thing, but it makes sense that 1+1=2.
-
As has been said, this wasn't Murtha's proposal that they were voting on. It was a hastilly written and mangled version of it introduced today by the Republicans in reaction to Murtha's actual bill. A stunt.
A stunt that just blew up in their faces tonight.
LMAO.
The Dems oughta now craft up a peachy new bill tomorrow.
Entitled: "Bushy, You're Doing a Heck of a Job."
It would be the Senate's ringing endorsement of Bush's great handling of the war.
Lets get everyone on the record on that.
Of course, the Republican majority would never let something like that see the light of day.
Oh well.... But what a night. :)
-
I agree Guns, that’s the problem with the buttnutts and their "no war for oil" crap and everything else we've been subjected to for the past 2-3 years. they have no prospective of the damage they are doing,
And yes, I'll say it out loud,
they are traitors for doing it. Aiding and giving comfort to the enemy...
-
^
Lol.
Ya can't help but laugh.
"Traitors!" "Adding and giving comfort to the enemy!"
Jesious....
(though the "adding" enemy part I can agree with)
-
I say we stay, shouldnt we?
-
yup what Nash wont realize is the fact that every time one of these democrats goes to the nearest microphone/camera and says "bring our boys home" it gives strength to the insurgancy. Asking for a timeline for troop withdrawl gives strength to the insurgancy. Why not ask for a timeline for a victory in Iraq......that's something I can get behind.
-
We will stay and see it through. We are 90% there right now.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
yup what Nash wont realize is the fact that every time one of these democrats goes to the nearest microphone/camera and says "bring our boys home" it gives strength to the insurgancy.
Gunslinger, the insurgency already has strength. They don't need the Democrats nor the mics in front of them for that. In fact, their strength is the reason for what we're seeing now play out in the Congress. Not visa versa.
Man, the Dems cut folks like you waaaaaaay too much slack. They're just now trying to reign it back in.... when it became painfully obvious that ya didn't have a clue what to do with it.
Certain cultures refer to this phenomenon as a spanking.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Gunslinger, the insurgency already has strength. They don't need the Democrats nor the mics in front of them for that. In fact, their strength is the reason for what we're seeing now play out in the Congress. Not visa versa.
Man, the Dems cut folks like you waaaaaaay too much slack. They're just now trying to reign it back in.... when it became painfully obvious that ya didn't have a clue what to do with it.
Certain cultures refer to this phenomenon as a spanking.
The insurgency has so much strength, that they have not put dent in our forces. They are reduced to terrorist strikes against soft targets, mostly Iraqi civilians.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Gunslinger, the insurgency already has strength. They don't need the Democrats nor the mics in front of them for that. In fact, their strength is the reason for what we're seeing now play out in the Congress. Not visa versa.
Man, the Dems cut folks like you waaaaaaay too much slack. They're just now trying to reign it back in.... when it became painfully obvious that ya didn't have a clue what to do with it.
Certain cultures refer to this phenomenon as a spanking.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
you are truley delusional
look at history, every peace ralley gave the NV strength, every visiting celebrity gave the NV strength. The NV leadership listened the US news on a daily basis wich gave them strength. When you have Al Jazera with front page headlines talking about a US pull out do you not think that gives the insurgancy hope for a victory?
-
Maybe we should escelate the war, take it to Iran or invade another terrorist harboring country.
-
Gun, not cool.
-
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Maybe we should escelate the war, take it to Iran or invade another terrorist harboring country.
no we should keep up pressure on current insurgant operations while like we have been doing while stregnthening the Iraqi Armed Forces. When they are ready to take the reignes and have a stable govt in place then we phase our troops out of the region. That is a solid solution for victory and it is entirly obtainable. I do not accept the defeatists attitudes from the democratic leadership in this country and those of the likes of Nash from others.
-
Originally posted by Nash
^
Lol.
Ya can't help but laugh.
"Traitors!" "Adding and giving comfort to the enemy!"
Jesious....
(though the "adding" enemy part I can agree with)
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
Nuke: Thanks.
Gunslinger: Your answer is strengthened Iraqi security forces? Rely on that? So how is that looking?
JBA: blurrrrrr
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Gun, not cool.
Edited. I seriously think he is though. Usually he has a rational if not biased point to make. As of late he makes very little sense.
-
What gunslinger says, its very true. This is like roe vs wade for terrorism and guerilla warfare. If you stay it will be a long time before things settle down. Then again it may be a few months and things change the the insurgency looses strenghth or the Iraqi forces start to get the right people.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Nuke: Thanks.
Gunslinger: Your answer is strengthened Iraqi security forces? Rely on that? So how is that looking?
JBA: blurrrrrr
Well why don't you look for yourself.
-
Originally posted by Nash
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
-
You think I haven't been paying attention?
I'll bet slightly more than you.
And, wrt the other thing.... "Edited. I seriously think he is though."
Have you had a drink in the last two years? Smoked? Ate garbage? If so, to any of that, then who the hell are you to talk?
-
Originally posted by JBA
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
Is that right?
If I'm a joke to you, I'm doing something right.
-
Originally posted by JBA
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
You forgot the USA... Alexandre
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You forgot the USA... Alexandre
Sure and Mexico, Columbia, Venezuela, and Canada, But I think I made my point.
-
Originally posted by Nash
And, wrt the other thing.... "Edited. I seriously think he is though."
Have you had a drink in the last two years? Smoked? Ate garbage? If so, to any of that, then who the hell are you to talk?
I sincerly appologize for my statment it was a low blow. But know I think you see the doom and gloom every day from the MSM and you just assume that there is no possibility for victory in Iraq.
-
Apology accepted.
..... and I'm done with this crap for tonight.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Is that right?
If I'm a joke to you, I'm doing something right.
YA that’s right you haven't posted a dissent read in two years, first words out of you are NO, Its Bushes fault, Americans are bad, bla bla bla bla bla……
I used to read your rants, now I glaze over and fast forward.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Edited. I seriously think he is though. Usually he has a rational if not biased point to make. As of late he makes very little sense.
I agree with a lot you have to say, and even have been amazed at how strongly you have defended your ideas. I like you.
I also like Nash, a lot. I like people who are creative, different, smart and not afraid to stand out and speak their mind.
Nash let us all in on a very personal demon that he had delt with, in his PAST. I respect Nash and hate to see anyone using his openess against him.
-
Originally posted by JBA
YA that’s right you haven't posted a dissent read in two years
Nash posts "dissent reads" all the freaking time.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I agree with a lot you have to say, and even have been amazed at how strongly you have defended your ideas. I like you.
I also like Nash, a lot. I like people who are creative, different, smart and not afraid to stand out and speak their mind.
Nash let us all in on a very personal demon that he had delt with, in his PAST. I respect Nash and hate to see anyone using his openess against him.
While I appreciate your input I appologized and he accepted.....done deal as far as I'm concerned.
-
Originally posted by JBA
Sure and Mexico, Columbia, Venezuela, and Canada, But I think I made my point.
Yeah, but you forgot The United States of America....
(http://www.bluestoneivory.com/Patriotic/Lady_Liberty_-_flag.jpg)
I mean how could you come up with a list of countries and leave out The United States of America?
(http://www.tcfatlanta.org/flag6.jpg)
You won't see me leaving out The United States of America.
(http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Flag%20and%20Statue%20of%20Liberty.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Yeah, but you forgot The United States of America....
(http://www.bluestoneivory.com/Patriotic/Lady_Liberty_-_flag.jpg)
I mean how could you come up with a list of countries and leave out The United States of America?
(http://www.tcfatlanta.org/flag6.jpg)
You won't see me leaving out The United States of America.
(http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Flag%20and%20Statue%20of%20Liberty.jpg)
(http://www.lomcovak.cz/f3b/2k2/wc/images/1_wc/wc_04.jpg)
(http://www.f1-fansite.com/wallpaper/2004/09%20USA/usa-1-20-06-04-1280.jpg)
(http://www.dallasforever.com/_derived/fotonewyork.html_txt_larry%20usa1.gif)
-
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Maybe we should escelate the war, take it to Iran or invade another terrorist harboring country.
Not much need to do that at this point.
We have two amusement park ticket booths centraly located now so everyone can come join the "fun".
That`s exactly what the lame arses are doing. :0
They are standing in line from all over the ME to buy tickets for the "Grim reaper" ride.
They come, they get their butts handed to them in a hand basket, they die.
Pretty simple and effective and also very economic way of getting all the factions to come have a l`il fun and games, U.S. style. :)
-
"The House voted 403-3 to reject a nonbinding resolution calling for an immediate troop withdrawal. "
so who were the 3?
-
did nash just puff up, stamp his feet and prance out of here?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
did nash just puff up, stamp his feet and prance out of here?
lazs
seems like it.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
did nash just puff up, stamp his feet and prance out of here?
lazs
Mommy make the bad man stop!!! :)
-
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
All snide comments aside, I think the resolution is a good idea. There have been comments made by both sides that this issue is dividing the country. Frankly IMO it is the people not making a decision or criticising a desicion that are dividing the country. It's time to make a no BS stand on what you believe for these politicians. The continuous wrangling in the press, who have their OWN non elected agenda, is what is causing any division there is in the country. So for both sides it is in their interest to stop the division and state what their position is. For the constituents, they will either laud or lambast their representatives and hold them accountable. They were elected to represent and be a part of the leadership of the country. If they cannot stand being held to their convictions or position they should step down.
-
Nash is just a Disgrntled CanNUK... he has the assss for juse being a CanaDUHian....a "Special Child" Please treat him well.
Mac
-
Funny how all the dems talked about how bad the war was going etc then all (almost) voted to not to bring them home.
Does'nt that seem a touch hipocriticle to anyone ?:confused:
-
Originally posted by Flit
Funny how all the dems talked about how bad the war was going etc then all (almost) voted to not to bring them home.
Does'nt that seem a touch hipocriticle to anyone ?:confused:
thought that was a democrat requirement
-
Originally posted by Eagler
thought that was a democrat requirement
lol, ya know, you got a point there !