Monday, June 19, 2006

"We can ah ah just you know beam in ah ah in no time" or something like that.


That was one policy statement from Democratic Congressman Jack/John Murtha aka Mothra, in typical jackass party fashion there are many, many others. (and why are the names Jack and John interchangeable?, but I digress) Here is an excerpt from Meet the Press where Mothra tries to explain having a quick reaction team in Okinawa:

MR. RUSSERT: You say redeploy. Again, Mr. Rove challenges that comment.
Let’s listen and give you again a chance to respond to the White House.

(Videotape, Monday):

MR. ROVE: Congressman Murtha said, “Let’s redeploy them immediately to another country in the Middle East. Let’s get out of Iraq and go to another country.” My question is, what country would take us? What country would say after the United States cut and run from Iraq, what country in the Middle East would say, “Yeah. Paint a big target on our back and then you’ll cut and run on us.” What country would say that? What country would accept our troops?

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: What’s your response?

REP. MURTHA: There’s many countries understand the importance of stability in the Middle East. This is an international problem. We, we use 20 million barrels of oil a day. China’s the second largest user. All these countries understand you need stability for the energy supply that’s available in the Middle East. So there’s many, many countries.

MR. RUSSERT: Who?

REP. MURTHA: Kuwait’s one that will take us. Qatar, we already have bases in Qatar. So Bahrain. All those countries are willing to take the United States. Now, Saudi Arabia won’t because they wanted us out of there in the first place. So—and we don’t have to be right there. We can go to Okinawa. We, we don’t have—we can redeploy there almost instantly. So that’s not—that’s, that’s a fallacy. That, that’s just a statement to rial up people to support a failed policy wrapped in illusion.

MR. RUSSERT: But it’d be tough to have a timely response from Okinawa.

REP. MURTHA: Well, it—you know, they—when I say Okinawa, I, I’m saying troops in Okinawa. When I say a timely response, you know, our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly. And—and—when they don’t know we’re coming. There’s no question about it. And, and where those airplanes won’t—came from I can’t tell you, but, but I’ll tell you one thing, it doesn’t take very long for them to get in with cruise missiles or with, with fighter aircraft or, or attack aircraft, it doesn’t take any time at all. So we, we have done—this one particular operation, to say that that couldn’t have done, done—it was done from the outside, for heaven’s sakes.

Expose the Left has the video. The transcript is here.

Comments:
So Murtha is in favor of a "sanitized war". Cruise missiles & airstrikes. OMG...and from Okinawa no less. He's a prime example of an "old warrior" who lacks understanding of the enemy and the left's hysteria of "collateral damage".

He's lost it.
 
OO,

Supposedly he looks like getalife's grandfather, which may be his only saving grace.
 
"A war initiated on false intelligence should not be followed by a premature withdrawl of our troops based on a political timetable. An untimely exit could rapidly devolve into a civil war, which could leave America's foreign policy in disarray as countries question not only America's judgement but also it's perseverence"

I like this old version of Murtha. He's right. President Bush committed a catastrophic blunder with the Iraq invasion. But the Pottery Barn Rule stands fast. We can't leave until we fix what's broken.
 
What Seneca said^
 
Of course only Mothra would take potshots at the liberation of Iraq circa 2003 in a book ostensibly about how we got from Vietnam to 9/11/2001.

Just like a liberal to endlessly snipe at anything all the time and then pile on with 50 different positions on how to move forward.

I guess it can be summed up by saying that the only thing Democrats are good at is recognizing things in the past that may have been difficult. They are also good at making wildly erroneous predictions of the future, but they always blame not being right on how the people doing the heavy lifting screwed up.

One of the famous lib predictions was that we would lose in excess of 10,000 soldiers attempting to take Baghdad. I'm glad we screwed that one up.
 
One of the famous lib predictions was that we would lose in excess of 10,000 soldiers attempting to take Baghdad.

And somehow, that's better than the Bush administration predictions of virtually no casualties, greetings with candy and flowers, instant democracy, a prompt exit, and a huge influx of Iraqi oil revenue that would pay for the war and reconstruction?

I don't think so.
 
Seneca,

The major difference is that what I mentioned is an accurate portrayal of what was predicted, whereas you are talking out of your ass.
 
How's it going, Mr. Sunshine?
 
Fine Nicole, and you?
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?