Iraq Is America's Debacle, And America Wants To End It

Responding to Senator Harry Reid's statement:

I understand the restlessness that some feel. Many who voted for change in November anticipated dramatic and immediate results in January. But like it or not, George W. Bush is still the commander in chief -- and this is his war."

Cliff May writes:

Actually, like it or not, it's America's war.

May's criticsm of Reid is right. But what does May NOT mention? That America wants the Debacle ended and Bush is defying the wishes of the American People:

Which of these comes closest to your opinion? 1. Congress should block all funding war in Iraq no matter what OR 2. Congress should allow funding only for a limited period of time OR 3. Congress should allow all funding for the war in Iraq without a time limit.
Block all funding 9
Allow only w/time limit 58
Should allow all funding 29
Don't know/No answer 4

The principles of Reid's proposal are supported by 2/3 of the American People. The President is NOT a King Clifford May. He does not get to rule the American People by diktat. The American People do not support the Debacle in Iraq. They want it over. And Harry Reid is the voice for the will of the American People. The view of Bush that you support is at odds with what the American People want. The war in Iraq is a Debacle the American People want ended. Time to do the will of the People Mr. May.

< Tuesday Open Thread | Obama's Foreign Policy Speech >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    And it's now time for John Kerry moment (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by walt on Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 05:58:36 PM EST
    Who's going to be the last member of the US Armed Forces to die in Iraq for the lies & false data used by Bu$h xliii to wage an aggressive war, torture people & murder civilians?

    And then a moment for Cindy Sheehan's question about that "noble cause" would be appropriate.

    Soo... (1.00 / 2) (#3)
    by jarober on Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 07:31:21 PM EST
    When The Democrats finally push the Clement Vallandigham plan and get out - and the entire region is engulfed in genocidal war as the power vacuum is filled by the Saudis and the Iranians, will there be any recognition on the left?  Or will it be more like Cambodia, conveniently forgotten over time?

    Riddle me this (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 01:13:00 AM EST
    What was the ORIGINAL plan to get our troops out?

    When I said BEFORE the invasion that it was a bad idea, the worst strategic decision on our history, what did you say about it?  Did you think it was a GOOD idea?

    It doesn't matter what will happen when we leave.  We don't have the resources to stay there forever.

    Have you ever served in the military?  If you think the war is a good idea, why aren't you taking part?  Chickenhawks like you and your enablers want other people to take the risk and then pay for it by borrowing the money from the Chinese, so our children and grandchildren will be stuck with the bill.

    Did anyone EVER THINK ABOUT THIS?  Now you are saying we have to stay in Iraq forever, even though the majority of people there want to kill our people?

    You haven't even considered the social cost of the returning veterans, have you?  Most of them will suffer for the rest of their lives from this stupidity.

    But YOU DON'T CARE, because you are a chickenhawk and it won't affect you.

    Excuse me.  I have to vomit now.


    The Vallanigham crack (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:31:51 AM EST
    is calling us traitors.

    I have warned him on this and he persists.

    I call him a troll.


    Troll (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:32:21 AM EST
    Calling people traitors is not allowe dhere.

    Stop it now.


    Not to mention... (1.00 / 2) (#4)
    by jarober on Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 07:35:29 PM EST
    The President is hardly a "King".  Last time I looked, the veto was part of his powers, and there's no aspect of the Constitution that says "when the polls say X, the President may not say Y".

    How about we take a quick trip back to 1961, and run civil rights legislation according to polls?  Sound like a good idea to you?  And before you even think it, no, I wouldn't want to see the America that would have resulted from such a policy.

    Lies... (1.00 / 2) (#8)
    by jarober on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 10:08:20 AM EST
    I love the way politics has just disintegrated - from both sides, but from the left in particular.  There's no room for actual disagreement over anything - there's "truth" (i.e., what a partisan believes) - and then there are lies.

    This isn't good for anyone

    As the saying goes (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Alien Abductee on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 02:11:27 PM EST
    Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

    If there are some facts here you dispute why don't you just go ahead and do that instead of trying to imply that anyone who has a different opinion from you is a traitor.


    RWJN's (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Edger on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 02:24:23 PM EST
    If there are some facts here you dispute why don't you just go ahead and do that

    That is never their purpose. They want lies and disinfo to be given equal weight with fact, as another point of view worth consideration.


    That suggests (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Alien Abductee on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 02:35:00 PM EST
    more machiavellian agency on their part than would seem likely considering the quality of most of their arguments.

    I think it's more of (none / 0) (#13)
    by Edger on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 02:43:37 PM EST
    a faith based thing. :-)

    erm.... RWNJ's n/t (none / 0) (#11)
    by Edger on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 02:25:43 PM EST