NationStates Jolt Archive

Republicans in the House of Representatives are encouraging other members of the Republican caucus to not debate the Real Issue (http://majorityleader.house.gov/docUploads/ShadeggHoekstraDearColleague.pdf) (PDF warning) before the house.

I don't know about you, but I think that Republicans need to be honest about what is before the House right now. This is the last chance to stop the President's crazy attempt to escalate the War in Iraq, and it continues to propogate the lie that Iraq has anything to do with the Global War on Terror. Iraq is a Civil War where the U.S. is just an incidental in between two groups who want to kill eachother. This isn't a War on Terror, it's a war on America's ability to defend itself.

When it comes to Iraq, the Republican leadership is "all party, all the time." I've been hearing that the Democrats will get about two dozen Republicans to cross the aisle and vote for the resolution, so this is probably an attempt to limit the damage from the leadership point of view.

No, they are staying the course of supporting our troops.


What other buzzwords can I insert here?

Embolden the enemy. That's the current favorite, I think.

No, they are staying the course of supporting our troops.


What other buzzwords can I insert here?

No, they are staying the course of supporting our troops.


What other buzzwords can I insert here?

Uh... they are helping continue to bring the fight to the Islamofascists?

This is what makes the Administration and the GOP seem so disconnected to me. They don't want to debate with the opposing party, they don't listen to what we want, they don't listen to their own advisors, generals, or committees unless they agree with them. Seems like they're just going it alone and silencing or disregarding anyone who disagrees....

(Looking at that map and the point it's trying to make...)

Do the Republicans honestly think that they will be able to shut down terrorism worldwide? Seriously -- there are over six billion people in this world, the vast majority of them poor and looking for a cause. It doesn't matter how many countries you invade or how harshly you crack down -- there will always be whackos out there with bombs.

Accept it.

Uh... they are helping continue to bring the fight to the Islamofascists?
Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here because Iraqi insurgents are boarding the troopships to make a land assault on Biloxi as we speak

Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here because Iraqi insurgents are boarding the troopships to make a land assault on Biloxi as we speak

uhhh, wait. . . .

AL-QAIDA!

*covers self in white sheet*

Boo!

uhhh, wait. . . .

AL-QAIDA!

*covers self in white sheet*

Boo!

I soiled my armor!

(Looking at that map and the point it's trying to make...)

Do the Republicans honestly think that they will be able to shut down terrorism worldwide? Seriously -- there are over six billion people in this world, the vast majority of them poor and looking for a cause. It doesn't matter how many countries you invade or how harshly you crack down -- there will always be whackos out there with bombs.

Accept it.

Yes. We believe the same thing about our War on Drugs, and we believed the same thing about our War on Poverty. I think it's really a masochism thing, to be honest. We like having unwinnable wars to fight.

Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here because Iraqi insurgents are boarding the troopships to make a land assault on Biloxi as we speak

*nods*

And of course, Republicans are helping to water the flower of Iraqi democracy. It gets so hot in the Iraqi desert...

*nods*

And of course, Republicans are helping to water the flower of Iraqi democracy. It gets so hot in the Iraqi desert...

With trickle-down economics, no less.

what I dont get is all day on NPR even, they have been playing these clips of the Republicans saying over and over how the Dems are emboldening the enemy with this and not a single rebuttal was aired. Or was one even given?

Do they figure their audience is smart enough to be sitting there shaking their heads not needing a rebuttal given to them to know how stupid the Republicans are sounding with all this hollow wish wash mouth spittle?

There really is no such thing 'debate' as we know it in the political sphere. Rather, it is merely the trading of favors and general political prostitution. So if the Republicans do not want to debate, it is because they feel secure in the political favors they have already attained and don't feel like making a trade with the Democrats for theirs.

With trickle-down economics, no less.

How is maintaining Saddam-era regulations, public work projects and central planning trickle-down economics?

With trickle-down economics, no less.

ZiNG!

They greeted the waters as liberators. Wait, they greeted democracy as water. No, it was they greeted us as trickle down economics?

How is maintaining Saddam-era regulations, public work projects and central planning trickle-down economics?

ZiNG!

They greeted the waters as liberators. Wait, they greeted democracy as water. No, it was they greeted us as trickle down economics?

Fleckenstein got the joke--why didn't you? And for the record, one of the things Bremer tried to institute at the beginning of the occupation was the Iraqi equivalent of trickle-down economics. The Iraqis wisely rejected it once they got into the semblance of control they have.

Fleckenstein got the joke--why didn't you?

Cuz I thought you were being more tongue-in-cheek than silly.

And for the record, one of the things Bremer tried to institute at the beginning of the occupation was the Iraqi equivalent of trickle-down economics. The Iraqis wisely rejected it once they got into the semblance of control they have.

Mmmm, not really. The entire reconstruction process, of regulation, public works, and all that jazz, is inherently central planning-esque. The only thing that I am certain of that is really reminiscent of trickle-down economics that Bremer wanted was a Flat Tax, which would definitely suck, but is a bit of an oddity in front of all of the other interventions in the Iraqi economy.

Mmmm, not really. The entire reconstruction process, of regulation, public works, and all that jazz, is inherently central planning-esque. The only thing that I am certain of that is really reminiscent of trickle-down economics that Bremer wanted was a Flat Tax, which would definitely suck, but is a bit of an oddity in front of all of the other interventions in the Iraqi economy.

Actually, one of the things that really has failed in the American operations in Iraq is that we were unwilling to do the necessary planning when it came to rebuilding the Iraqi economy. We should have let the Iraqi's do more of it, and we should have made it our first priority. A working person is a person less likely to take up a gun and join a militia.

Actually, one of the things that really has failed in the American operations in Iraq is that we were unwilling to do the necessary planning when it came to rebuilding the Iraqi economy. We should have let the Iraqi's do more of it, and we should have made it our first priority. A working person is a person less likely to take up a gun and join a militia.

we just weren't unwilling, the government was entirely oblivious to the fact that it WAS necessary. They sorta expected we'd topple saddam's regime and....everything would sorta be cool

Actually, one of the things that really has failed in the American operations in Iraq is that we were unwilling to do the necessary planning when it came to rebuilding the Iraqi economy. We should have let the Iraqi's do more of it, and we should have made it our first priority. A working person is a person less likely to take up a gun and join a militia.

So what is arresting blackmarket gasoline dealers, using contractors to try to get the oil out of the ground, and using the army to provide water, electricity, and, most absurdly, wireless internet to the Iraqi people? Free-market economics? The problem is bit that there was no plan to 'reconstruct' the Iraqi economy- the problem is that the government thought that it was smart enough to interpret the Iraqi people's desires so as to attempt (and miserably fail) to satisfy them.

The question I have is just what do you think this resolution will do?

Some people say this is the “last chance to do something” which is complete and utter crap. Do something? This does absolutely nothing but waste time. It is a non-binding resolution, which means it does exactly nothing. The one and only purpose of this ‘debate’ is to give politicians a chance to make a few sound-bites and try to trick the public into thinking they are actually ‘doing something’. It seems to be working with some of the more gullible people.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of a ‘stay-the-course’ mentality which is just making things worse, then turn around and try to pass a resolution saying they want the president to not do anything differently.

It is complete and utter bullshit.

Right now we are spending billions of dollars a month to get our soldiers killed. What do the Democrats do when the president tries to change a failing situation? They waste days bickering about how it isn't the right thing to do, but do not give any other suggestions – basically the equivalent of saying ‘just keep doing what you're doing because we don’t have any better ideas’. Of course when they were in opposition they tried to make political points out of criticizing the Republicans for it. Perhaps now that the parties have changed the situation in Iraq has changed… perhaps when Republicans are in control it is unwise to stick to the same failed strategy but as soon as the Democrats took power, it is now the wise thing to do?

This ‘surge’ is not the right thing to do. The right thing to do (IMHO) is to recognize that this is a civil war and we cannot do anything about it – the Iraqis themselves are the only ones that can make things better. Until they are willing to put in the effort to stop the violence, all we are doing is flushing our money down the drain to get our soldiers killed.

That being said, I strongly oppose this resolution on general principle. If you want to actually do something, use the time to investigate just what can be done and propose an alternative strategy. Unless you have a better idea, keep your mouth shut and let those who are at least making the effort space to work. The situation on the ground is not going to change just because you think it should – you have to actually do something, not just talk about what shouldn’t be done.

I soiled my armor!

You have armor? :eek:

The question I have is just what do you think this resolution will do?

Some people say this is the “last chance to do something” which is complete and utter crap. Do something? This does absolutely nothing but waste time. It is a non-binding resolution, which means it does exactly nothing. The one and only purpose of this ‘debate’ is to give politicians a chance to make a few sound-bites and try to trick the public into thinking they are actually ‘doing something’. It seems to be working with some of the more gullible people.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of a ‘stay-the-course’ mentality which is just making things worse, then turn around and try to pass a resolution saying they want the president to not do anything differently.

It is complete and utter bullshit.

Right now we are spending billions of dollars a month to get our soldiers killed. What do the Democrats do when the president tries to change a failing situation? They waste days bickering about how it isn't the right thing to do, but do not give any other suggestions – basically the equivalent of saying ‘just keep doing what you're doing because we don’t have any better ideas’. Of course when they were in opposition they tried to make political points out of criticizing the Republicans for it. Perhaps now that the parties have changed the situation in Iraq has changed… perhaps when Republicans are in control it is unwise to stick to the same failed strategy but as soon as the Democrats took power, it is now the wise thing to do?

This ‘surge’ is not the right thing to do. The right thing to do (IMHO) is to recognize that this is a civil war and we cannot do anything about it – the Iraqis themselves are the only ones that can make things better. Until they are willing to put in the effort to stop the violence, all we are doing is flushing our money down the drain to get our soldiers killed.

That being said, I strongly oppose this resolution on general principle. If you want to actually do something, use the time to investigate just what can be done and propose an alternative strategy. Unless you have a better idea, keep your mouth shut and let those who are at least making the effort space to work. The situation on the ground is not going to change just because you think it should – you have to actually do something, not just talk about what shouldn’t be done.

I agree, only what can you expect from politicians? As much of a staunch Democrat as I am, I think a non-binding resolution is a waste of time. Either put up or shut up, and pass something meaningful. Of course, if they did pass something meaningful, like a bill to limit funding for the war and to set a timetable to bring the troops home, they'd be called traitors and unpatriotic and all sorts of names by the Neo-Cons. These people like their jobs in DC and want to get re-elected in 2008. Besides, 2008 is the Big Show, the chance to get into the White House, so of course we'll have non-binding resolutions and a lot of talk and stuff. It sucks, but it's politics.

Uh... they are helping continue to bring the fight to the Islamofascists?

oooh, "fight them here or right them there." or "they would cut and run and endanger the lives of all Americans from the threat of RADICAL ISLAM."

oooh, "fight them here or right them there." or "they would cut and run and endanger the lives of all Americans from the threat of RADICAL ISLAM."

Maybe someone should remake "The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!" only with a plane-load of Mulsims making an emergency landing on Gloucester Island. I think most of the original cast is still around, if a bit older.