Joe Biden Can Lie Without Flinching
in other news, water is wet, sun rises in east
By streiff Posted in War — Comments (37) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I suppose it was natural that Joe Biden, son of a coal miner and student of the ownership patterns of gas station, Dunkin Donuts, and 7-11 franchises in Delaware, would casually lie about the impact of Congress going on vacation without passing a Defense Supplemental bill. This from our own Mark Kilmer's essential roundup of sunday morning shows.
Should Congress cancel its vacation to fund the troops? Joe Biden laughed that the troops had enough stuff as it is: "They'll be fine 'til June!" He cited a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report which says so.
Read on.
This is becoming the story line by the Democrats committed to the slow bleed of our military troops engaged in combat (here | here)
First and foremost, the CRS does not say the military will be fine. To the contrary it acknowledges that the military will have to extensively reprogram funds to continue the war effort (as an aside, one has to wonder why the CRS issued this letter and not the Congressional Budget Office. One has to suspect that it is tied to the recent decision by the CRS to stop reporting earmarks in legislation. In other words, it knows where its bread is buttered.)
Second, no one in the administration has said the military will run out of money on April 15. They have stated that the military will be detrimentally affected by the delay in the funds.
April 15
- curtailing and suspending home station training for Reserve and Guard units;
- slowing the training of units slated to deploy next to Iraq and Afghanistan;
- cutting the funding for the upgrade or renovation of barracks and other facilities that support quality of life for troops and their families;
- stopping the repair of equipment necessary to support pre-deployment training.
May 14
- reducing the repair work being done at Army depots;
- delaying or curtailing the deployment of brigade combat teams to their training rotations, this will cause additional units in theater to have their tours extended because other units are not ready to take their place;
- delaying the formation of new brigade combat teams;
- implementation of a civilian hiring freeze;
- prohibiting the execution of new contracts and service orders, including service contracts for training events and facilities;
- holding or cancelling the order of repair parts to non-deployed units in the Army.
They are trying to slow bleed our military. They are succeeding. Why are they lying about it?
« We need more COIN in the Afghan realm — Comments (0) | "We will miss them." — Comments (2) »
Joe Biden Can Lie Without Flinching 37 Comments (0 topical, 37 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
...the State of Delaware still demands a three dollar toll for the privilege of driving their turnpike during a snowstorm without their ever putting the edge of a snowplow to the pavement. The 'Chutzpah' runs from top to bottom in that state's government.
They are trying to slow bleed our military. They are succeeding. Why are they lying about it?
The question should be what are we going to do about it?
Support the Mission - Honor the troops
Exsolvo Orbis Terrarum
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
I am really confused because I don't know what our mission is in Iraq, besides trying to get a stable government in place so we can leave. Can someone please describe for me what we are trying to accomplish? EX-military, looking for a Powell-doctrine mission- one with overwhelming-power, and a defined exit strategy. You know, like Desert Storm.
now has to be seen as a failure. 12 years of snubbing his nose at his agreements, cheat and retreat, and rampant abuse of the Kurds and the Shia majority were the byproduct of too limited a strategy under Powell doctrine.
Since Saddam had no WMD in the end, and pre-war his country was a basket case, and the Kurds have basically their own country since Desert Storm, how was the Powell doctrine a failure? How was the post-Desert Storm situation _worse_ than what we have now? A bunch of insane religious wackos in a vicious civil war with our soldiers trying to keep a lid on it. OK, we've put the Shia majority in power- great- another Islamic Theocracy. It gets back to the question, what is the mission?
so often used prior to 2003?
The only way we settled the question of WMD's was by invading.
How was the post-Desert Storm situation _worse_ than what we have now?
Ask the Kurds...the mission is to leave Iraq with a relatively stable nation.
How was the post-Desert Storm situation _worse_ than what we have now?
Your question illustrates a level of disconnect, or a serious deficit in your knowledge of what Iraq was like prior to April of 2003.
Only Pres. Bush and his council thought they had WMDs. Hans Blix and the UN said, post-94, that there were not any.
The Kurds were autonomous after Desert Storm, with no interference from Saddam's wicked bunch.
post OIF is worse than post Desert Storm - 3000 dead soldiers, 50,000+ civilians, and you and me in the hole for $400bn to bring democracy (cough) to Iraq. The best thing about post OIF is that Saddam is dead, and that is now a very meager reward.
The topic will be on American political commentary on the Iraqi WMD program, pre-2003. It will include at least five quotes from Democratic members of the executive and legislative branch; extra credit for an analysis of world opinion. Demonstrate that you have a firm grasp of the subject matter and we'll consider turning your account back on.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
that Iraq had WMD
including then Pres Clinton:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
...a cited reference of the most recent massacre of Kurds by Saddam, as well.
Oh, and in Moe's part, include quotes from Blix post-1994 and pre-2001.
what are we to do when such a significant portion of the population believes their revisionist history as this fool does? I despair for humanity's future.
In a recent poll conducted between Feb. and March by BBC/ABC News poll, 38% said the situation in the country was better than before the 2003 war, while 50% said it was worse.
this one says:
Fifty-six percent say their lives are better now than before the war, compared with 19 percent who say things are worse (23 percent, the same). And the level of personal optimism is extraordinary: Seventy-one percent expect their lives to improve over the next year.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
In fact, both the 2007 and 2004 polls were conducted by the same firm for ABC News and BBC. Another poll was also conducted in 2005.
BBC even posts a graph comparing all three polls:
this one shows 42% saying things are better and 22% saying things are the same.
I'm not really sure what any of this proves.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
cite a BBC poll. So how was trick or treat this year Jack?
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
As for 12 years of containment not working- I was there with the Berlin Brigade in Nov '89 when the wall came down after 28 years. We ground the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact down through containment and it worked like a champ.
the USSR for all of its faults, was at LEAST governed by rational human beings who wanted to live. How many Soviets strapped bombs to their children and sent them out to kill their "enemies?"
Comparing containment of the USSR through MAD, and Saddam Hussein who was actively aiding people who WERE strapping bombs to their children, is ignorance beyond the call of duty!
why does his doctrine matter?
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
... or at least, didn't fire the guy who did.
--
See the Academy
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
I was thinking of Colin Powell, who I served under. Powell's doctrine for Desert Storm was "clear mission, overwhelming force, defined exit strategy." It was all in response to the quagmire he witnessed in Vietnam, where too many Americann GIs died in the middle of a vicious civil war fought by corrupt dictators on our side, with unrelenting fanatical nationalist communists on the others. That is why Bush Sr didn't let Schwarzkopf drive to Baghdad- who wanted the mess? It is also the source of Powell's pottery barn analogy pre-invasion 2003- "you break it, you buy it." He was the best guy they ever had in the current administration.
He wasn't a friggin liar. Except for that whole UN thing, where I give him the benefit of the doubt and think he was given bad info, not lying. There, I wrote about Joe Biden.
was caused by the same people who are causing the mess we find
our selves in Iraq, our american leftist terrorist supporters and the leaders of the Democrat party. Vietnam would have ended years earlier with far fewer deaths, had the support from the American leftists not convinced the North Vietnam leaders that they could win. Between the efforts of Walter Cronkite, Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark, John Kerry and the rest of the leftists, the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong were rewarded for what they couldn't accomplish in the field, the defeat of America.
The exact same thing in happening in Iraq. There is no chance the terrorists can defeat the US military. Only the American
leftist terrorist supporters and the leaders of the Democrats can defeat America in Iraq.
to fight the last war.
--
See the Academy
that they are lying.
They can essentially insist that their lack of funds hurts nothing, while it does indeed hurt some aspects of readiness, so that they can then turn around and say Bush doesn't care.
The media of course will be complicit in helping them put forth the lies.
"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)
Why are they lying? because even though the majority of Americans are against this war, (because of the Mainstream Media) The majority of Americans are against ending the war in this fashion. Every Dem and everyone with a brain knows that. 'Nuff said?
If you mean by withdrawing from Iraq in 18 months, then I can't find a poll that shows anything but support from a majority of Americans for a withdrawal. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/13/iraq.poll/index.html.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-15-poll-vietnam_x.htm.
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm. Where do you get the info that most Americans want us to stay in Iraq?
you are welcome to 1) discuss the story at hand which is Joe Biden's performance on FNS today, or 2) start a diary to discuss your views on Iraq which probably aren't a lot of interest to much of us, or 3) leave.
Your choice. I can be of assistance no matter what you decide.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
The President should just start taking money from other places and applying it to the vital needs of soldiers in the field. Let the Democrats and other lefties try to sue him over it and let's have that fight. Yes, Congress controls the pursestrings, but that doesn't give them the right to sit and do nothing.
While he's at it, the President should start by taking the money he needs from military bases and installations in districts represented by those members who voted in favor of this atroscity. See how supportive their constiuents are when they start losing their jobs.
Now I don't mean to cripple the military, but I'm sure there are a lot of "non-essential" civilians employed by the military branches all over this country. Wouldn't the residents of NC-11 like to know that they lost their job because freshman Heath Schuler decided to sell his soul and vote for slow bleed? How about the folks in Indiana?
Let the Democrats defend themselves and make the argument why it's wrong. Just as with the recess appointments to the judiciary, the action (at least I think so) puts the other side on defense and unable to do anything without revealing their true intentions - which always manage to turn people off.
Idiots who vote for Democrats should suffer consequences.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
n/t
______________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
Why is fire hot, or the sky up?
It's their main component.
--
See the Academy