Does Bsh intend for us to withdraw troops or is he trying to divert our

[_dynamicdems]

attention? Senator Kerry asked for 20K troops to be sent home after the elections. Since when does Bsh not do the exact opposite from what is suggested by our favorite Senator. I'm skeptical and this article is disturbing.

The US Plans a Long, Long Stay in Iraq

By Eric Margolis

11/25/05 "Lew Rockwell" -- -- The US Air Force’s senior officer, Gen. John Jumper, stated US warplanes would remain in Iraq to fight resistance forces and protect the American-installed regime "more or less indefinitely."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11144.htm

[_dynamicdems]

1. The US Plans a Long, Long Stay in Iraq

Just kicking this up to the top because it seems to be relevant to the thread Kerrygoddess started that has everyone so riled up. There are points to be made on both sides of that discussion, and I honestly don't have a clue how the dice are going to roll on the final outcome. The only thing I trust is that, no matter what they say or appear to do, we can never trust this administration or let our guard down. But read this article because brings another side of the withdrawal plan to the discussion.

[fedupinBushcountry]

2. I would say divert and more

This is what I posted earlier, on what I think Bush is doing.

My main problem is watching the media spin even this a serious conversation that we should be having. Instead they are pitting Dems against one another, and if they have it their way they'll have this administration coming out on top.

You know last year during the campaign so many times Kerry came out with something and within a few days Bush would back down.

All I know is what I know as fact, and yes they have taken some of Kerry's ideas, as they have before, Kerry's words are written down or saved on video all over the internet, and KG your site is a great reference tool for that, you guys are on top of things, and we need that so badly.

My one main thing on the Murtha story is the media spin put in it. I have nothing against Murtha and am glad he spoke I just respectfully disagree with his plan. For days we heard the word IMMEDIATELY, but even Murtha himself said that is not what hew meant. His plan called for 6 months, and later he even made it a year, after our own elections in '06. Kerry's plan is calling for 12-15 months, not a big difference on that point. But the big difference is where Murtha puts those troops, and it is not home, but rather just across the border ready to go back in when needed. Well I'm sorry but that is not about letting Iraqis defend Iraq.

My other concern about how they describe Murtha in the media and in print. A hawk Dem who has always supported the troops, now that same wording is being used for another hawk Dem Dicks. So what is that saying, that if you are not a hawk you don't support the troops, you see how they use words.

I am so sick of the spin, that is why it is so important to keep up with everything that is said on both sides.

In the end no matter what this administration's plan is , it will be sprinkled with Dem ideas. They will use their plan as a tool to get some Dems on their side. This is so sad,it will end up being another IWR type of vote. I can see it now and we must work our hardest to make all the Dems see this as what it is a political tool for the '06 elections.

[kerrygoddess]

3. I've always felt it important to point out when they use JK's ideas

and yes they did it frequently during the campaign.

Honestly today I labored to write what I did while in a lot of pain, so it may not have been as clearly thought out as it could have been. But the point is they are using some of JK's ideas, how they implement them is different story. I wish they were implementing the Kerry plan as is. They are not I get that we all get that, but I do feel it's important to show that they are saying they plan to do things that Kerry has called for. My goodness the wording in the Newsweek article in some points was verbatim to JK's - those were the points I painstakiningly (literally) pulled out.

Anyway not here to kick up dust again.

FedupinBushcountry, I agree on the Murtha assertions. His plan has been way taken out of context by so many. And interestingly Kerry has been called a hawk in the past - now suddenly Murtha becomes the poster child. WTF? Where is the outrage that our own did not defend JK the way they have Murtha. Frankly that burns my ass. JK has been doing the circuit defending Murtha, and has Murtha once spoken up and said, you know BushCo needs to lay off the attacks on JK.

This will all get spun six ways from Tuesday I'm afraid. In the meantime the more we all point out what JK is saying out in the blogosphere the better.

[_dynamicdems]

4. The Administration is only talking about withdrawal because

the country has turned against this war. The long-term implication behind these bases is that, while appearing to cave to public opinion, the Bsh Administration might simply be shifting gears. While all attention is focused on withdrawal and who came up with what, the ultimate goal of "empire building" does not appear to have been deterred. Are they are tossing bread crumbs to lead us away from their real agends.

While I agree with everything you say in your post about Murtha and the media spin, I also think the media spin is dangerous because the real motives of the Administration may go unnoticed and their power grab unchecked. They will pirate Dem ideas but they do not have the same goals we do.

[fedupinBushcountry]

5. Another valued point

That is an interesting take, and is very possible. Another reason why we must stay on top of everything that the media plays into.

I don't trust anything that comes from this administration for everything they do is for their agenda, not the good of the country or the American people.

[_dynamicdems]

6. As long as there is still oil in Iraq, I'm not going to trust the Admin.

The proposed bases are a drastic difference from Kerry's plan. On Hardball he mentioned "small assistance or training" not bases.


MATTHEWS: Should we be there in any form nine years from now, still having military troops in Iraq, nine years from now?

KERRY: Certainly not a combat kind of operation. It's conceivable you could have some sort of small assistance or training, but I would hope not. I would hope the United States of America would have done its job. I think you can do this within the next 12 to 15 months, and that's the plan that I've laid out.


What has happened to all the Iraqi oil money that was supposed to go to reconstruction? There was a great article from the "Christian Science Monitor" earlier in the year on this. And the subject of oil money seems to have been swept aside.

When this President seems to capitulate, watch out. It is difficult to trust any of them or their motives.

Withdrawal is good, but do we need permanent bases in Iraq to do it? I'd really like to hear what Senator Kerry has to say about the bases.