+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 27 of 27

  1. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    I found the transcript lady mod, along with another transcript of a speech he gave a month ago.


    "To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks.

    John Kerry speech,
    10/26/2005
    http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/s...005_10_26.html


    "this debate is not about an artificial date for withdrawal."

    "What it did on the Democratic side seek to do was set an estimated timetable for success which will permit the withdrawal of our troops."

    John Kerry speech,
    11/30/2005
    http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=1274\

    .

  2. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17

    "To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks.

    John Kerry speech,
    10/26/2005
    http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/s...005_10_26.html


    "this debate is not about an artificial date for withdrawal."

    "What it did on the Democratic side seek to do was set an estimated timetable for success which will permit the withdrawal of our troops."

    John Kerry speech,
    11/30/2005
    http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=1274\

    .
    Grim, these statements do not contradict each other. They are exactly what I said the dems wanted. The speeches do not flip flop.

    http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?page_id=1274

    KERRY: It’s all well and good to talk about being there with your troops training on the ground — training — until we are ready to leave.

    But that ignores what his own generals have told him. It ignores what the Iraqis themselves are telling us today.

    General Casey has said very clearly that it is the large presence of American forces on the ground that feeds the insurgency and makes it more difficult for the Iraqis to assume responsibility, because they don’t have to.

    Our own generals are telling the president that our presence in large numbers is part of the problem and that you have to begin to reduce that.

    The president did not acknowledge that today, but gave us the same talk about simply staying as long as it takes to get them to stand up; though he slipped into one sentence, quietly, that we may reduce their presence in the cities and begin to redeploy them in some ways, which is what many of us have been arguing we should do.

    Forty-five percent of the Iraqi people believe it is all right to injure and kill Americans. Eighty percent of the Iraqi people want us to withdraw.

    The largest portion of the Iraqi elected officials have now voiced themselves publicly saying they believe the United States needs to reduce its presence and withdraw.

    So what the president did not acknowledge today at all is that the presence of our troops itself is a part of the current reality on the ground that presents food for the insurgency. And you need to reduce that presence over a period of time in order to be able to succeed, not fail.

    And none of us have suggested a policy that allows the United States to leave a failed state or to withdraw precipitously.

    Let’s understand that.

    KERRY: Let’s have a real debate, not a false debate.

    And, in the end, the strategy for exit is, in fact, part of the strategy for success. They go hand in hand. And that’s a reality that the president and this administration need to understand.

  3. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Earlier:

    http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2005_10_26.html

    The Kerry Plan: The Path Forward

    This difficult road traveled demands the unvarnished truth about the road ahead.

    To those who suggest we should withdraw all troops immediately – I say No. A precipitous withdrawal would invite civil and regional chaos and endanger our own security. But to those who rely on the overly simplistic phrase “we will stay as long as it takes,” who pretend this is primarily a war against Al Qaeda, and who offer halting, sporadic, diplomatic engagement, I also say – No, that will only lead us into a quagmire.

    The way forward in Iraq is not to pull out precipitously or merely promise to stay “as long as it takes.” To undermine the insurgency, we must instead simultaneously pursue both a political settlement and the withdrawal of American combat forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks. At the first benchmark, the completion of the December elections, we can start the process of reducing our forces by withdrawing 20,000 troops over the course of the holidays.

    The Administration must immediately give Congress and the American people a detailed plan for the transfer of military and police responsibilities on a sector by sector basis to Iraqis so the majority of our combat forces can be withdrawn. No more shell games, no more false reports of progress, but specific and measurable goals.

    It is true that our soldiers increasingly fight side by side with Iraqis willing to put their lives on the line for a better future. But history shows that guns alone do not end an insurgency. The real struggle in Iraq – Sunni versus Shiia – will only be settled by a political solution, and no political solution can be achieved when the antagonists can rely on the indefinite large scale presence of occupying American combat troops.

    In fact, because we failed to take advantage of the momentum of our military victory, because we failed to deliver services and let Iraqis choose their leaders early on, our military presence in vast and visible numbers has become part of the problem, not the solution.

    The Military Agrees:

    And our generals understand this. General George Casey, our top military commander in Iraq, recently told Congress that our large military presence “feeds the notion of occupation” and “extends the amount of time that it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant.” And Richard Nixon’s Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, breaking a thirty year silence, writes, ''Our presence is what feeds the insurgency, and our gradual withdrawal would feed the confidence and the ability of average Iraqis to stand up to the insurgency." No wonder the Sovereignty Committee of the Iraqi Parliament is already asking for a timetable for withdrawal of our troops; without this, Iraqis believe Iraq will never be its own country.

    We must move aggressively to reduce popular support for the insurgency fed by the perception of American occupation. An open-ended declaration to stay ‘as long as it takes’ lets Iraqi factions maneuver for their own political advantage by making us stay as long as they want, and it becomes an excuse for billions of American tax dollars to be sent to Iraq and siphoned off into the coffers of cronyism and corruption.

    It will be hard for this Administration, but it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down, starting immediately after successful elections in December. The draw down of troops should be tied not to an arbitrary timetable, but to a specific timetable for transfer of political and security responsibility to Iraqis and realignment of our troop deployment. That timetable must be real and strict. The goal should be to withdraw the bulk of American combat forces by the end of next year. If the Administration does its work correctly, that is achievable.

    We Need A Political Solution:

    Our strategy must achieve a political solution that deprives the Sunni-dominated insurgency of support by giving the Sunnis a stake in the future of their country. The Constitution, opposed by more than two thirds of Sunnis, has postponed and even exacerbated the fundamental crisis of Iraq. The Sunnis want a strong secular national government that fairly distributes oil revenues. Shiites want to control their own region and resources in a loosely united Islamic state. And Kurds simply want to be left alone. Until sufficient compromise is hammered out, a Sunni base can not be created that isolates the hard core Baathists and jihaadists and defuses the insurgency.

    We Need a Regional Security Agreement:

    The Administration must bring to the table the full weight of all of Iraq’s Sunni neighbors. They also have a large stake in a stable Iraq. Instead of just telling us that Iraq is falling apart, as the Saudi foreign minister did recently, they must do their part to put it back together. We’ve proven ourselves to be a strong ally to many nations in the region. Now it’s their turn to do their part.

    The administration must immediately call a conference of Iraq’s neighbors, Britain, Turkey and other key NATO allies, and Russia. All of these countries have influence and ties to various parties in Iraq. Together, we must implement a collective strategy to bring the parties in Iraq to a sustainable political compromise. This must include obtaining mutual security guarantees among Iraqis themselves. Shiite and Kurdish leaders need to make a commitment not to perpetrate a bloodbath against Sunnis in the post-election period. In turn, Sunni leaders must end support for the insurgents, including those who are targeting Shiites. And the Kurds must explicitly commit themselves not to declare independence.

    To enlist the support of Iraq’s Sunni neighbors, we should commit to a new regional security structure that strengthens the security of the countries in the region and the wider community of nations. This requires a phased process including improved security assistance programs, joint exercises, and participation by countries both outside and within the Middle East.

    Improve Training:


    Simultaneously, the President needs to put the training of Iraqi security forces on a six month wartime footing and ensure that the Iraqi government has the budget to deploy them. The Administration must stop using the requirement that troops be trained in-country as an excuse for refusing offers made by Egypt, Jordan, France and Germany to do more.

    Win the Real War on Terror:

    We will never be as safe as we should be if Iraq continues to distract us from the most important war we must win – the war on Osama Bin Laden, Al Queda, and the terrorists that are resurfacing even in Afghanistan. These are the make or break months for Iraq. The President must take a new course, and hold Iraqis accountable. If the President still refuses, Congress must insist on a change in policy. If we do take these steps, there is no reason this difficult process can not be completed in 12-15 months. There is no reason Iraq cannot be sufficiently stable, no reason the majority of our combat troops can’t soon be on their way home, and no reason we can’t take on a new role in Iraq, as an ally not an occupier, training Iraqis to defend themselves. Only then will we have provided leadership equal to our soldiers’ sacrifice – and that is what they deserve."
    No contradiction in what he says from one month to the next.

    He may say things differently but he is saying the same thing.

    Lady Mod

  4. #20
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Correct.

    It is saying the exact same thing, with different words.

    He is saying that the democrats want to set a time table to withdraw troops from Iraq. That is wrong. If you give our enemy a time table, they will simply lay back until that time arrives and take advantage of the situation.

  5. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Correct.

    It is saying the exact same thing, with different words.

    He is saying that the democrats want to set a time table to withdraw troops from Iraq. That is wrong. If you give our enemy a time table, they will simply lay back until that time arrives and take advantage of the situation.
    That's what you have a problem with? I thought it was with Kerry supporting the troops but not supporting the war?

    Honestly Grim. Considering all that has been discovered about what IRAQ wants and that we are only aggravating things over there staying in such large numbers, I think that seeing a timetable might just quiet things there finally. It's our continued presense that is feeding the anger.

    Lady Mod

  6. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    121

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    And who's even to say that all the troops support the war? I have friends who are in the military who are over in Iraq after being redeployed for a 2nd time against their own wishes.

    Lots of them probably had the intention of removing Saddam, and it's done, and they probably wanna go home and forget they ever had to go to Iraq.

    Now they're fighting a war they have no say in.

    But then someone's gonna say "they're in the army, too bad for them".

    Maybe a lot of them have a new mission now that Saddam's been deposed.

    Getting home alive.

    And therefore Kerry does support them and their mission. :P

  7. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    Correct.

    It is saying the exact same thing, with different words.

    He is saying that the democrats want to set a time table to withdraw troops from Iraq. That is wrong. If you give our enemy a time table, they will simply lay back until that time arrives and take advantage of the situation.

    Grim,

    A timetable does not mean, "We are going to remove all the troops at 7:00pm. on December 31, 2005." It consists of waves of withdraw. Starting with a portion of non military personnel. Then eventually more nonmilitary personnel. Then non essential military personnel, and so on. The withdrawal is staggered over a weeks, month and possibly years.

    Unfortunately, the people of Iraq are going to face some sort of civil war. There is nothing this country can do about it on the ground in Iraq. Economic sanctions, and UN peacekeepers will end up spending a longtime there. This situation is going to play out with or without the US. Time will tell.

    DeeDee1965

  8. #24
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee1965
    Grim,

    A timetable does not mean, "We are going to remove all the troops at 7:00pm. on December 31, 2005." It consists of waves of withdraw. Starting with a portion of non military personnel. Then eventually more nonmilitary personnel. Then non essential military personnel, and so on. The withdrawal is staggered over a weeks, month and possibly years.

    Unfortunately, the people of Iraq are going to face some sort of civil war. There is nothing this country can do about it on the ground in Iraq. Economic sanctions, and UN peacekeepers will end up spending a longtime there. This situation is going to play out with or without the US. Time will tell.

    DeeDee1965
    DeeDee, the way I see it, this whole thing on the democrats side is nothing more than for political gain.

    Setting a timetable for what you suggest is a waste of time. They will start to re-deploy the troops when those troops are no longer needed there. Putting a time table on it, doesn't do anything to change that. It does however, give our enemies a date or week, or perhaps month to mark on their calender, that they can look forward to. That isn't a good thing.

    Think about it. If our enemy is almost at the breaking point and there is no sign that we will ever let up, they likely will surrender of just give up and leave Iraq. Now if all of the sudden they find out that those troops of ours will be leaving in a week, they could use it as motivation to hang on until then. Even worse, they could go into hiding and wait until we are weakened by the re-deployment and really do some damage.

    Like I said, putting any kind of public time table on the withdraw of the troops, will only benefit the enemy.

    .

  9. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    DeeDee, the way I see it, this whole thing on the democrats side is nothing more than for political gain.

    Setting a timetable for what you suggest is a waste of time. They will start to re-deploy the troops when those troops are no longer needed there. Putting a time table on it, doesn't do anything to change that. It does however, give our enemies a date or week, or perhaps month to mark on their calender, that they can look forward to. That isn't a good thing.

    Think about it. If our enemy is almost at the breaking point and there is no sign that we will ever let up, they likely will surrender of just give up and leave Iraq. Now if all of the sudden they find out that those troops of ours will be leaving in a week, they could use it as motivation to hang on until then. Even worse, they could go into hiding and wait until we are weakened by the re-deployment and really do some damage.

    Like I said, putting any kind of public time table on the withdraw of the troops, will only benefit the enemy.

    .
    According to the stories, they get more followers every day, and their total focus in on shooting americans. They aren't about to give up. Surely you keep up on the latest news don't you?

    And considering that Iraq now wants us to leave, if it benefits the enemy, that will Iraq's problem, NOT OURS when we withdraw.

    We have overstayed our welcome, nobody likes a "squatter".

    LM

  10. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    586

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17
    DeeDee, the way I see it, this whole thing on the democrats side is nothing more than for political gain.

    Setting a timetable for what you suggest is a waste of time. They will start to re-deploy the troops when those troops are no longer needed there. Putting a time table on it, doesn't do anything to change that. It does however, give our enemies a date or week, or perhaps month to mark on their calender, that they can look forward to. That isn't a good thing.

    Think about it. If our enemy is almost at the breaking point and there is no sign that we will ever let up, they likely will surrender of just give up and leave Iraq. Now if all of the sudden they find out that those troops of ours will be leaving in a week, they could use it as motivation to hang on until then. Even worse, they could go into hiding and wait until we are weakened by the re-deployment and really do some damage.

    Like I said, putting any kind of public time table on the withdraw of the troops, will only benefit the enemy.
    .

    Grim,

    What I wrote is NOT a suggestion. It is HOW a withdrawal is done. Wars are not fought forevermore. Every war in the history of the world had some kind of strategy of ending. Generals, and Admirals plan exit strategies in conjunction with the leaders of their prospective countries. Leaders in the military know they cannot drive their men (and now women) on and on, with no end it sight.

    I think Lady Mod just said it, unfortunately, the problem of a possible civil war in Iraq is an Iraqi's problem, not our. When we leave violent elements will return.

    Grim, Iraq does not belong to us, so beating them back to the until they say "uncle" is not our job. We are engaged in a "war on terror." Which means terrorists are everywhere, not just in Iraq.

    DeeDee1965

  11. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,222

    Re: Is This A Democratic Flip Flop?

    Forget about withdrawal. This thing is going to go on for a long long time.
    Here's the storyline.

    Act One
    Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, a hatred for the United States and is going to work with terrorists to supply them with wmd's to destroy the US. Our only option is to invade Iraq and remove Saddam to make the world safer.

    Act Two
    After a rather quick invasion and a jet trip to declare Mission Accomplished,
    Saddam is taken out and two thirds of Al Queda has been destroyed. The world is starting to be a safer place right? WRONG

    Act Three
    With Iraq now leaderless, a power vacuum has been created. Terrorists, who have flocked to Iraq to fight a holy war with the great Satan, have crafted a plan to take over Iraq and (can you say domino theory?) overtake country by country until they have an Islamic Empire that stretches from Indonesia to Spain.

    The Sequel
    With Iraq finally secure at the cost of who knows how many lives, we find out that (Insert country of choice here) has weapons of mass destruction, a hatred for the United States and is going to work with terrorists to supply them with wmd's to destroy the US.


    George Bush Sept. 12, 2002
    If we fail to act in the face of danger, the people of Iraq will continue to live in brutal submission. The regime will have new power to bully, dominate and conquer its neighbors, condemning the Middle East to more years of bloodshed and fear. The region will remain unstable, with little hope of freedom and isolated from the progress of our times. With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors.

    George Bush October 7, 2002
    Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

    George Bush March 18 2003
    The danger is clear. Using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kills thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country or any other.

    George Bush Sept 7 2003
    America and a broad coalition acted first in Afghanistan by destroying the training camps of terror and removing the regime that harbored al-Qaida. In a series of raids and actions around the world, nearly two-thirds of al-Qaida's known leaders have been captured or killed, and we continue on al-Qaida's trail.

    George Bush May 25, 2004
    We did not seek this war on terror, but this is the world as we find it. We must keep our focus. We must do our duty. History is moving, and it will tend toward hope, or tend toward tragedy. Our terrorist enemies have a vision that guides and explains all their varied acts of murder. They seek to impose Taliban-like rule, country by country, across the greater Middle East. They seek the total control of every person, and mind, and soul, a harsh society in which women are voiceless and brutalized. They seek bases of operation to train more killers and export more violence. They commit dramatic acts of murder to shock, frighten and demoralize civilized nations, hoping we will retreat from the world and give them free rein. They seek weapons of mass destruction, to impose their will through blackmail and catastrophic attacks. None of this is the expression of a religion. It is a totalitarian political ideology, pursued with consuming zeal, and without conscience.

    George Bush June 28, 2005
    The progress in the past year has been significant, and we have a clear path forward. To complete the mission, we will continue to hunt down the terrorists and insurgents. To complete the mission, we will prevent al Qaeda and other foreign terrorists from turning Iraq into what Afghanistan was under the Taliban, a safe haven from which they could launch attacks on America and our friends. And the best way to complete the mission is to help Iraqis build a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself.

    George Bush November 30 2005
    Their objective is to drive the United States and coalition forces out of Iraq and to use the vacuum that would be created by an American retreat to gain control of the country.
    They would then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America and overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East and try to establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain.

Similar Threads

  1. Don't Flop Shop
    By bluebird87 in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-05-2013, 01:13 PM
  2. Tea Bag Loons 1.5 Million March Really 60K Flop
    By dchristie in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-18-2009, 03:16 PM
  3. I smell flop sweat from all the overconfident
    By oneway in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-04-2008, 07:25 AM
  4. Johnnie Songbird Dances The Flip-Flop
    By dchristie in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-18-2008, 04:28 AM
  5. Obama pulling a "flip-flop"... Or just lying... Ta
    By Grim17 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 01:07 AM

Tags for this Thread

Add / Edit Tags
000, academy, accomplished, accurate, acknowledge, acted, action, actions, acts, administration, admit, age, agreement, agrees, al qaeda, alive, alliance, amazing, american, another, apart, apologize, appreciated, arab, aren, army, art, article, assistance, ation, attacks, audio, away, baa, back, bad, base, beating, benefits, best, bet, better, biggest, billions, bin, bit, blackmail, break, breaking, bring, bringing, british, bush, calender, called, calling, camps, cannot, captured, card, care, career, cer, challenge, change, chief, choose, civil, claim, clip, com, coming, commentary, commit, community, comparison, complete, completely, comprehension, compu, con, conflict, contagious, continue, continues, conversation, core, correct, cost, countries, country, crisis, current, damage, damen, date, day, dead, december, decision, declared, defeated, defend, defense, deliver, democratic, democrats, dems, des, deserve, destroyed, destroying, destruction, didn, different, differently, difficult, ding, diploma, diplomatic, distract, doesn, don, don’t, double, dow, duc, ear, earlier, early, earth, east, economic, eed, egypt, elected, electio, elements, eme, empire, ended, ends, enemy, engagement, entire, error, essential, event, everywhere, examples, exercises, exit, experts, explanation, extraordinary, extremely, face, fail, failed, failure, fall, false, fear, fed, figures, final, fine, five, flag, flop, focus, followers, forces, forget, forward, four times, fra, france, front, future, gain, games, gave, generals, george, giving, gonna, good, great, greater, grim, ground, group, guess, guns, had, hand, hands, hard, hasn, heard, help, hey, hiding, him, his, holidays, holy, home, horrors, hose, house, html, ial, ice, ignores, ill, ime, important, improved, ina, include, indonesia, influence, insult, invade, invite, ion, iraq, islamic, isn, jet, john, john kerry, join, joint, joke, jordan, judge, judgement, just, kerry, killed, killers, kills, kind, kurdish, laden, lady, large, last, latest, launch, lead, leaders, leading, league, leaving, legitimate, lets, lie, likes, line, lives, lol, long, longer, major, make, makes, making, many, mark, mass, math, mea, meaning, mind, minister, ministry, mission, month, more, move, nam, national, nations, nato, need, needed, nice, nixon, november, now, nuclear, numbers, october, offering, officials, only, open, operation, options, order, overthrow, overwhelming, page, par, part, party, pas, pathetic, pelosi, people, perception, person, place, plan, play, point, policy, popular, por, pos, position, post, posted, posting, posts, power, prepared, presiden, pretty, prevent, prime, process, progress, promise, prove, proven, public, pull, puppet, putting, question, quick, quote, quotes, raids, read, ready, real, reality, reason, red, reduce, refuses, regime, remarks, removal, research, respect, response, responsibilities, responsible, richard, rip, role, roy, run, safe, scale, script, secretary, secure, seem, sense, sept, september, ser, services, set, settlement, share, shares, shock, shoo, shooting, short, shows, sides, sign, simply, sir, soldiers, solution, soo, sorry, source, speaking, speaks, speech, speeches, spin, star, start, starting, state, stated, states, stay, step, stop, stories, story, strategies, strategy, stupid, succeed, success, successful, such, sun, supply, support, supporting, surge, survey, take, taken, takes, tal, taliban, talk, talking, targeting, ted, terrible, terror, themselves, theory, they, thing, thought, thread, tied, time, times, today, told, tom, top, total, trail, transfer, tries, troops, turkey, turning, uncle, uni, united, united states, url, victor, victory, view, viole, violence, violent, wait, wanted, wars, waste, watched, ways, week, weeks, welcome, win, winning, withdraw, won, word, working, worse, writes, writing, wrong, year, years, yesterday, your

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •