News-Record.com

Well said, Anne. It is sad to think that there is NO good solution left in Iraq. We started the mess, now how in the world do we fix it?

"U.S. violence: 150,000 to 655,000 Iraqis now estimated dead". I would say Anne, that the Shiites and Sunnis are the perpetrators of violence, not us.

That being said, I do admit that Iraq has morphed into a civil war.

"Sen. Biden wisely advises a conference to enact a regional nonaggression pact."

I can't wait to see Biden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad having slumber parties together. Hey if Biden & Co. can make buddies with a guy who called the Holocaust a myth and openly called for the destruction of Israel then more power to them. I won't hold my breath.

Dan,
Once again, you are making the small steps necessary to "de-program" your Bush endearment syndrome. Thank God you can admit it is now a civil war in Iraq. Do you think they caused that on their own? Do you now think this was worthwhile? Heck, even the new designee for Defense Secretary tongue lashed the administration for its ineptness. Robert Gates said we were not winning and went further to say we caused the problems that exist today. So what do you know that he doesn't?? Is war your answer or is just belittling the idea of regional peace talks your solution? Dan, you've got to quit believing Rush Limbaugh and Hannity or you are going to be laughed at by folks other than on this blog. They are entertainers, not newspeople. Just trying to help you, but I do applaud your "baby steps" and hope to see more.

Today at 11:00 AM the bi-partisan commission issues its report. This heretofore administration of arrogance, cannot thumb their noses at what it may or may not say. They need to listen and to THINK before they come out with anymore moronic phrases from "The Decidier".

An excerpt from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's
letter to the American people:

"Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.

Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies.

We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need.

We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples’ rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings."

All his warm fuzzies about justice and being inclined towards good don't seem to match with the following:

Iran sentences prisoners to death after a one day secret trial:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/11/11/iran14560.htm

Iran bans access to higher education for students who hold political beliefs different from the Iranian govt.:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/10/19/iran14406.htm

Former Iranian Parliament member imprisoned and tortured for criticism of Iranian govt.:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/09/26/iran14256.htm

The human rights situation in Iran is worse now than at any time since reformist Mohammad Khatami became president in 1997.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3782793.stm

I could do Syria too, but I have to get to work.

My point here: folks like Anne Cassebaum see America as the source of evil in the world and buy into this idea of Biden and even Jim Baker that we can make buddies with countries who's governments oppress their own people, aid and abet terrorism, and desire the downfall of the West.

That looks like the direction we are heading, appeasment. I'm not calling for the invasion of Iran, but when you get into bed with a cobra chances are you will be bitten. A cobra is a cobra and cannot change into a kitten.

DD, I don't favor any war. I believed the intelligence that our govt. and other world govts. had. I believed the same thing that Congress, including Democrats, did when they voted for the war.

Hindsight isn't 20/20, so if I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have supported the war.

If hindsight were 20/20 then Jake Delhomme would have know he was going to throw an interception in the end zone and lose the game Monday night and then he would have called a run play instead. Life doesn't work that way.

I am not belittling peace talks, but as you can see in my previous post I do not trust people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Do you?

Remember the term wolf in sheep's clothing?

Still bitter and angry about AlGore and Kerry losing, aren't you, Ann?

Good links Dan. Though I thought torture was OK now. I think what those Iranians are doing is just like what those silly frat boys do at Skull & Bones. Do you think Rush would agree?

The Shah of Iran, whom the US supported, had his secret police throw live people into ovens. The Nazi's usually had the decency to gas their victims first. The Shah wanted other detainees to hear the screams of those being burned alive to scare them into submission.

I guess my question is this. Do you oppose torture or do you only oppose torture committed by Muslims? I think it’s wrong no matter who does it. As for Iran’s political direction, I have heard it compared to Israel. Iran and Israel have large populations who are progressive and want peace. Iran has an active and influential student movement advocating modernization.

However, the tense situation in the Middle East makes the people afraid to vote for anyone but hardliners. That is why we see Zionists and Islamic fundamentalists running these countries. I don’t see it as good vs. evil. I see it as two evils fighting and ruining the lives of decent people in both countries.

"Still bitter and angry about AlGore and Kerry losing, aren't you, Ann?"

Still bitter and angry about losing the House and Senate, aren't you Jack-off?

I'm no apologist for the Bush administration. It's been a cluster in Iraq. But I'm tired of all the righteous indignation, and the number of people who do nothing more than point out the horrible toll of the Iraq war. It's like standing at the scene of a car wreck, just pointing out the injuries.
We've got a lot of work to do to restore America's image. I say 'we', because each of us plays a part, whether we live in the 'boro or on Capitol Hill. If we spend all our time arguing over history and hanging our collective head in national shame, we do nothing to address the very real problems we face. Regardless of who caused those problems, they are ours, and it's time to do something about them.
Learn from the past; stop living in it. America and Americans have done great things over the past 200-plus years. Things that should not forever bear the tarnish of the last 6.
The only way to remove that tarnish is to work on it.

Stevie, I'll take your torture frat boy comment in jest as I'm sure you don't think a death sentence after a one day trial is comparable to a frat boy prank.

My purpose of the links was not to get into the torture issue, rather it was to inform of what we are getting into in trying to buddy up to the Iranian govt. Also it was to point out the discrepancies in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's warm fuzzy intro in his letter to the American people versus what is actually going on in Iran. A cobra is a cobra, not a kitten.

Prag, I like your analogy to the car wreck. It seems Anne and many others inherently think America is a bad country and wallow in despair about it.

I don't think many Americans see America as a "bad" country. I think that many see that we have done some truly bad things in the last 5 years. As has been said, we can't undo what has been done. We need to work together to solve the many problems the invasion of Iraq has caused. Since we can't control Iran, I think that we should at least try to talk to them, finally. The Bush administration has refused to talk with any of Iraq's neighbors, with the exception of Saudi Arabia who we seem to love and protect.

The only thing I am bitter about is what has been done to my country, and you know who did it, cack.

We're on the same page, Dan.

"Vision" isn't seeing the obvious. Vision is seeing beyond the obvious. But even that's not enough, because vision is only half the solution: seeing where you want to go is nothing without a plan to get there, and that's something we can all contribute to.

A lot of it has to do with attitude. Open-mindedness used to be considered a strength; now, it's seen as a weakness. We have become absolutists: "it's my way or the highway!". It's all around us: in politics, business, athletics. The Cult of Me extends from the Executive Branch to the elementary schools. It has 300 million members of 300 million clubs, and its creedo is Entitlement with a big, fat capital E.

Have you noticed who the most powerful person in the world is right now? 'Somebody'. As in, "somebody needs to...", "somebody ought to...", "somebody's got to...".

There ain't no somebody. There's only us. Time to start listening instead of talking, and doing instead of demanding.

No point in posting Mahmound Skyhook Ahamadinejad's letter. The limp wristed appeasers can't find anything in it they disagree with. Bush is their problem, not some lunitic with his finger on the nuclear trigger.

Neocon, comments on the article below???

WASHINGTON - President Bush’s policy in Iraq “is not working,” a high-level commission said bluntly on Wednesday, prodding the administration to embrace diplomacy to stabilize the country and allow withdrawal of most U.S. combat troops by early 2008.

After four years of war and the deaths of more than 2,900 U.S. troops, the situation is “grave and deteriorating,” and the United States’ ability “to influence events within Iraq is diminishing,” the commission warned in an unsparing report.

Among some of the changes the commission called for:
• Embed more U.S. forces with Iraqi units.
• Renew the push to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict through a “diplomatic offensive.”
• Involve Syria and Iran in negotiations over Iraq’s future.

“There is no magic bullet,” former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, co-chairman of the group, said later at a news conference that marked the formal release of the results of the commission’s eight-month labors.

"We do not recommend a stay the course solution. In our opinion that approach is no longer viable," Baker, a Republican, said. Baker added that the time had come for "a new way forward, a new approach" in Iraq.

“Many Americans are understandably dissatisfied,” former Rep. Lee Hamilton Hamilton, the other co-chairman, said.

"The current approach is not working and the ability of the United States to influence events is diminishing. ... No course of action in Iraq (is) guaranteed to stop a slide toward chaos. Yet, in our view, not all options have been exhausted," Hamilton, a Democrat, said.
Hamilton also said the high-level panel concluded the U.S. costs "could well rise over $1 trillion."
The commission report recommended the United States reduce “political, military or economic support” for Iraq if the government in Baghdad cannot make substantial progress toward providing for its own security.

Bush receives report

Earlier, Bush received the report in at the White House with commission members. He pledged to treat each proposal seriously and act in a “timely fashion”

Carol,
You can count James A. BakerIII and Lee Hamiliton among the 'limp wristed appeasers'.

It's all sunshine and rainbows and puppy-dog kisses in Iraq, isn't neocon?

I mean, it's still safer in Baghdad than in Detroit, right?

I'm sure you have a much better plan than the statesmen from both sides of the aisle have come up with that will allow the US to stop the violence in Iraq and reduce the amount of American lives and treasure being lost there.

Let's hear it, smart guy.

*I know you normally associate denigrate smartness as an insult, but rest assured that the term's being employed in a completely sarcastic sense here.

Big picture, is civil war a bad thing?

From what I've seen, the only way to keep Iraq from being in civil war is an iron fist that either belongs to a Shiite or a Sunni. This pot has been boiling for years and Saddam's hand had the lid on it.

We've removed the lid and yeah, it's explosive.

But it was always there.

Maybe the best thing is to pull back our troops to the borders, try to make sure nobody outside gets in, and let the nuts just fight each other until the death.

From my perspective, a civil war in Iraq is a fight between the peoples in Iraq and not a fight against the US.

How would we have liked Iraq getting involved in our civil war?

Nit, that was the same idea I posted awhile ago, pull out to the borders and let them duke it out. Meanwhile help the Kurds, it seems like they are the only group not hellbent on killing each other. Even JDR liked the idea, where is he anyway?

Carol, there are Americans who think we are a bad country, imperialist, racist, greedy you name it. Ann is a member of that club with statements like "US violence" (actually Shiite and Sunni violence), "reparations", "top military power and #1 seller of arms".

They are the ones who think it is unfair that we are a superpower and so prosperous and that we are the root of all the problems in the world.

Do you trust the govt. of Iran Carol?

Carol,
This 'Iraq Study Group' is, in reality, a 'how to surrender' group.
Skyhook Ahamadinejad is probably wondering how they hold their hors d'oeuvres with those limp wrists.

Dan,

It's true that great minds think alike. Good to see you're not in hiding anymore (wink wink).

I know that solution is awful. It seems heartless and without compassion. But, I have a hard time seeing any other way. It would be nice if there was some magic button we could push that would separate those who want peace from those who want to kill each other.

Neocon, I agree with ya. The latest running to the Shiites and Iran to help try to solve our problems in Iraq is sickening. It seriously undermines our position in the world and that on top of the awful way we've handled the war in Iraq is something I'm afraid is irreparable.

Dan, I don't trust any government at this time. Ours included. It you look at the situation from Iran's perspective, do you blame them for wanting to arm themselves after seeing what we did in Iraq?

The Shite and Sunni violence came about after we took out Saddam. Therefore, we caused the current violence. Do you not see invading a country as violent? Do you not think we are all a bit greedy? We are not the only prosporous country, btw. Look at many European and Scandanavian countries. Canada seems to be doing well. Japan and South Korea, Vietnam, and many others are propsporous.

Bottom line is that WE started the war in Iraq. WE started the chaos that is now called Iraq. WE caused the average Iraqi citizen to live in fear, bury their dead, live without many things they had, namely adequate electricity, water and jobs. If we have not been a "bad" country for the last five years, what do you think we have been? I really want to know what you think this country, under the current leadership, has done that is good. Please help me out...make me a short list.

"Carol, there are Americans who think we are a bad country, imperialist, racist, greedy you name it."

To be fair, Dan, please agree that you can love your country and hold the view that the actions of your leaders in the government fit that description.

nitpicker, I agree with you about America taking the lid of the pressure cooker that was Iraq. (My analogy was going to be a can of worms, but pressure cooker works, too.)

At this point, there is no good solution to Iraq. Now it's a matter of finding the least bad solution. Personally, I think the best solution may be to partition the country and let each faction have its own land.

neocon, stubbornness is what got us into this mess. I'm not sure stubbornness is the best way to get us out of it. Bush and his cronies, though, are a big part of the problem in Iraq. He has alienated many people who could help defuse the situation. We have to deal with whomever will deal with us, even if they are extremely unsavory.

Also, your gratuitous insults are a sure way to turn off people who might otherwise agree with you. Do you and DemonDeacon have a contest to see which of you can throw in more unnecessary insults in the shortest amount of time?

Dan, I don't trust the government of Iran. But at this point, due to the secrecy and corruption that has infested Washington, DC, I don't trust our government either.

Dan, do you have to have a bogeyman as an excuse against negotiations? What is, is. Your childlike rants about negotiating with other countries is straight from the Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity playbook. How many marriage counselors throw in the towel when one side refuses to negotiate or EVEN TALK to the other??? Folks like you and your symbiotic brother neocon, think that if you talk to someone, you have to agree wtih EVERY little thing about them. We are not going to change the minds of the Iranians any more than they will change us, so you can drop that little "bogeyman" thing. (Guess you've abandoned your Pelosi as "bogeyman")
We can engage the Iranians and set out some very attainable goals that would be mutually beneficial. That certainly makes more sense than the mutually destructive way you want to play. In the process of talking, we can make all sorts of progress on intelligence gathering so that we never again suffer the embarrassing folly of George W. Bush ever again! Billy Graham onced described the arms race with Russia like this:
"Both sides are in a pool of gasoline up to their waist. The Soviet Union has 5 matches and we have six matches." As I hope you know, it only takes one match to light the gasoline, so we should try to talk to Iraq's neighbors rather than act like we understand all the problems they are facing. If anything, we might learn something by actually 'LISTENING' for a change!
Dan, I would encourage you to read more, and listen to Rush and Sean less.
***********
neocon,
I can't go any longer without saying it. You are such an idiot.

RAMADI, Iraq - American troops in one of the most dangerous corners of Iraq welcomed plans for change Wednesday as the Pentagon prepared for a new chief and a bipartisan commission urged a new war strategy. But many of the soldiers from Company C, 1st Battalion, 37th Armored Regiment were skeptical they'll be going home anytime soon, despite a high-level U.S. panel's recommendation that most combat troops leave Iraq by early 2008.

There's no way we're leaving in two years, no matter what any recommendation says," Spc. Eisenhower Atuatasi, 26, of Westminster, Calif., said. He thought 2012 was more realistic.
Sgt. Christopher Wiacik, 28, of Lavonia, Mich., also was pessimistic.

"It's just a study group. It's not really going to affect the president. I don't see any major changes happening until presidential elections start," Wiacik said. "I think both sides will promise to get troops out and give timelines then, but not before."

The U.S. Army troops, based in the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Ramadi, are still reeling from learning two months ago that their tour was being extended until at least February.
"We've been here for 12 months now and there's been no progress," said Spc. Richard Johnson, 20, of Bridgeport, Conn., as he manned a machine gun on the rooftop of an outpost ringed by a shallow moat of sewage.

Nearby buildings have been leveled by rocket or tank fire, and others are riddled with bullet holes. The neighborhood only has electricity a few hours a day and most streets are barricaded with barbed wire and blast walls.

"It's like holding a child's hand. How long can you hold onto his hand before he does something on his own?" Johnson said. "How much longer do we have to get shot at or blown up?"

The bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, said Wednesday that the United States faces a "grave and deteriorating" situation after nearly four years of war in Iraq.
The panel recommended the U.S. reduce political, military or economic support if the Iraqi government cannot make substantial progress toward national reconciliation and that American forces shift to a training role.

1st Lt. Gerard Dow said he agreed with the commission's assessment that the situation in Iraq was "grave and disappointing."

"In Iraq, we try to win the hearts and minds of population," said Dow, 32, of Chicago. "They want Americans out of here. They blame us for all their problems. They look at us as the terrorists and then they turn around and help the terrorists who are trying to kill us."

Dow trained Iraqi soldiers in Ramadi and in the north during his first assignment in Iraq, and he doubts U.S. forces will be able to hand over the fighting by early next year as the commission recommends.

"The Iraqi army is getting there," he said. "But they are still not where they need to be and I doubt they will be by then. Too many times, they are in a selfish state of mind. Too often they are along for the ride while we do the work for them."

He said the largely Shiite soldiers sometimes loot homes, fail to follow orders and openly acknowledge that they don't trust the Sunni population.

"They are only going to do the right thing if someone's watching and they know they will be punished if they don't," he said. "That's not every soldier. I have met some great guys, but it is a lot of them. They don't care, and this is their country."

Asked if he was frustrated with the situation in Ramadi, he replied: "That doesn't cover it."
"U.S. soldiers are dying trying to help people who don't want their help," he said. "That makes you angry."

Dow said elders at a nearby mosque broadcast messages saying Americans are the cause of all the problems in Ramadi, the capital of restive Sunni-dominated Anbar province, 70 miles west of Baghdad.

The soldiers here also welcomed news that Robert Gates had been named to replace Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Gates told a Senate committee Tuesday that "all options are on the table" about how to resolve the Iraq crisis.

"Yes, please! All of us want to change what we're doing because we're not doing very much," said Staff Sgt. Rony Theodore, 33, of Brooklyn, N.Y.
Wiacik also hoped for change.

"We're just sitting around not making any progress. It's annoying. You're not motivated to help anybody," he said, adding his contract was up in 2008 and he did not plan to re-enlist.
"I don't want to live my life like this," he said.

I appreciate the letter writer's intent. I am in unison even though I think some of the points are over simplified.

At some point, Iraq and the region(?) have to find their own peace and it may have no resemblance to anythings we have talked about:freedom, democracy etc.

However long we stay, the inevitable has to happen, they have to and they will find their own resolution. Arriving at their resolution won't be pretty as the "now" is not pretty either.

I really think that we, despite what the writer has so deftly written, need to withdraw. Maybe, like Nit was suggesting, we can set up a border to keep out those who don't need to go in---and then that might not be a good idea either because that "kept out force" might seek entrance anyway.

Things have truly been shaken up--but the longer we stay, things seem to keep getting worse. As we talked in these columns before, it seems that Iraq doesn't want us there any more--and maybe we have done our part to open up old festering wounds that needed to be dealt with a long time ago. The former dictatorship in Iraq took a huge toll on the quality of peoples' life. Maybe, just maybe, our part was bringing it to a head. Their religious, political, social etc. lenses are different from ours.

That region has to develop its own vision for how it wants to see itself. I say this with a painful heart but an honest one.

Duffus Dickend & Stevie D(umbass),

Your name calling is prohibited by the terms of use. Got that jerks !

With Baker and Hamilton waving the white hankie at Skyhook Ahmadinejad, we are fulfilling the limp wristed appeasers' third and final stage of how they conduct 'war'... Stage 1.. deny there IS a threat...stage 2...appease the enemy....stage 3 surrender and blame the defeat on the republicans.

franklin st, the world traveler can't help it. He thinks he is still in the frat house rolling Jamaican Red he paid for with his allowance.

Interesting to hear the military men talking about the Baker-Hamilton report. While none agreed with all of the seventy some recommendations, they ALL agreed that the current strategy was an abject failure. They all rejected the administration's directives to the military and all said that Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush and the neocons within the administration were making a mockery of the power of our military. Folks, the military objectives were accomplished. Our great war machine did what it was supposed to do. The weak link was that diplomacy is an afterthought of this administration. If you liked their incompetence in waging war, wait until you see their incompetence at diplomacy! Boy would I be glad to see that NOT be the case, but basing my opiinion on past, real life events, I am not the least bit optimistic. How can the ones who screwed up royally, be trusted to "FIX" humpty dumpty?
Why doesn't the President go on television with some humility and speak frankly to the American people about how he F'd up and really wants to atone. We are a very forgiving nation and I believe strong leaders are those willing to take responsibility for failure and to move on. We deserve to hear from the President and we deserve to see a more open administration. It reminds me of the recent N.C. State football coach. As long as he was winning, the fans could care less about his swagger, his star trek sunglasses and designer shoes. But when the curtain was pulled back and folks found out he wasn't what he thought he was, his shine came off and that schtick ended abrubtly. Bush, although never respected by 50% of the country, is now a pariah of 70%+. You may disagree or "nitpick" the numbers but the facts remain. Bush needs to be humble, lose the swagger and open up the dialogue---not only with the world, but at home!

Franklin st., I don't what rock you climbed out from under, but I have yet to see you post a single shred of intelligence. Yes, I called neocon and IDIOT and if you follow his bits and pieces, you will reach the same conclusion.

DD, I wouldn't consider posting information from Human Rights Watch about human rights abuses from the Iranian govt. to be childish, in fact it's quite serious. Of course you give Iran a pass since they don't like Bush either.

If you think we call all sit around and sing kumbaya with Mahmoud I'd like to sell you some prime swamp land. Look at the links.

As for your analogy to marriage counselors, if my wife was religiously and politically motivated to exterminate me and others I know, I don't think I would be sitting in a counselors office. Pathetic analogy.

As for the term "bogeyman", that is your term, I've never used it. So if you want the term dropped then drop it yourself. BTW, it's not PC to refer to Pelosi as a "bogeyman". You may want to consider "bogeywoman" or just play gender neutral with "bogeyperson". "Bogeylady" might work as well if you want to be more formal.

Please keep up the Rush/Hannity stuff. As you mention the same thing in EVERY post to me, I've started a new archive to illustrate your foolishness. Once I get enough of them I will post them all in a row, I can't wait. I need another few weeks of them please. BTW you forgot to add O'Reilly on that last one. You can put in Laura Ingraham for good measure if you wish.

BTW, this is a new archive. It is totally separate from the "DD insults to Dan" archive. That is too precious to mix with Rush/Hannity stuff.

Off to Charlotte tomorrow at 5:00 am to make a living, so I won't have any time to post. I will be listening to NPR on the way down since Rush isn't on in the morning.

I liked your last post, DD. You made some good comments about Carol's article. I also appreciate that you didn't insult anyone without provocation. (franklin st. was begging for it.)

I appreciate it when DD doesn't insult anyone either, doesn't happen often.

Bush has refused talks with the lunatic from Iran.

Perhaps he hasn't been cowered by the left and their limp wristed 'how to surrender' study group after all. We'll see.

Neocon, as I have read various posts over the last few months, I must say that yours are the most insane and ignorant. The death toll of soldiers has risen to 2919. I remember your ranting that the increased violence in October was just to get the Democrats elected. So to what do you attribute the increased violence?

That Bush has failed to talk to Iran and has ignored any possible assistance from the countries in the Middle East is just another example of his ignorance. That you continue to support his policies shows your ignorance.

It seems impossible that anyone could really have your views. Are you really DemonD? Is that you, DemonD? Making idiotic statements to make the Bush supporters seem totally ignorant?

Once again, I'm awestruck by the 'tolerance' on display from the Kum By Ya crowd.

With the success of their brethren in last month's election, the islamofacists are emboldened and they smell victory. The sad part is, they are probably right.

I gotta agree with neo on this one. Iran is still ignoring UN resolutions and developing nuclear capability and now we're gonna run to them for help with Iraq? I agree that Bush has done some stupid things but cowing to Iran would be the ultimate. I'm sure, however, that he'll eventually cave.

Nitpicker and Neocon, what do you consider cowing to Iran? What do you suggest we do with Iran? We have been so successful in Iraq, what say we just cross over and topple them also. Negotiations are all we have left.

In case you haven't noticed, we have been losing for years in Iraq. What's new with "they are now going to win"???? You should be thankful the Democrats won the elections. Now you can say we lost because of them...what a narrow minded view.

Dan, Nitwit, and neocon all show their ignorance of Iran.
Before we invaded Afghanistan, we asked Iran for their help. They helped. Why? Because by talking to them, we impressed upon them that they would be the recipient of refugees unless they helped. Did we fire any shots at Iran? NO. We held discussions and open talks. If we do not open dialogue on Iraq with its neighbors, we will lose everything we currently have obtained. That's not a lot, but the damage could be far worse for a long period of time. Folks like the three mentioned above have no idea of how human rights are limited in nations with which we already have good relations--Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt. Do we have dialogue with them? Yes.

As I have said often, if Dan would only read more, he'd look far less ridiculous. As for neocon, there is no amount of ANYTHING that would change him. You can't make chicken salad out of chickensh_t! Nitpicker...who knows where that logic comes from. My guess is a very strict Baptist upbringing butting up against real world common sense. The upbringing usually wins.

http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061207/NEWSREC010201/612070301/1014/NEWSREC020201

Pretty good editorial about this very subject.

Actually, I don't think the democrats winning is all bad. Still more than a month away from assuming power in congress and they are already showing the public they have no stomach for war. They have taken the recommendations of surrender of a couple of limp wristed has been "statesmen" and are acting as if it is the second coming.

The public will be truly educated after they are sworn in and actually have to come up with an agenda themselves, insted of reacting to the 'how to surrender group'.

"Still more than a month away from assuming power in congress and they are already showing the public they have no stomach for war."

The American people are tired of this war and want out. If you remember, that's one of the primary reasons why the Dems were elected this time around- they promised a change of course.

By arguing against the "surrender group", you seem to be advocating "staying the course", a policy that even Rumsfeld ditched.

How does that make you feel?

I would hope that all would have no "stomach for war". Neocon, I suggest you buy a ticket to Iraq and put your life on the line to show that you are a true "patriot". It's easy for you to want war when you have no stake in it, except like the rest of...our money flying out the window and our young soldiers dying. Send us your address when you get to Iraq. Let us know how great things are going and how we are winning the war on terror.

neocon,
Just be sure and tie your trailer down tight when you get there. Those sandstorms will wreak havoc on your underpinning!! (LOL!)

You know, folks like neocon are the ones who got us in this quagmire and they feel compelled to support it no matter what! Hell, neocon couldn't tell you why we are over there if his life depended on it. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. Sounds very much like "Stay the course" to me.
It is also interesting how neocon can characterize a bipartisan group as "limp wristed" when some of the most respected folks from both political parties are a part of it. It would be case study for psychologists to see neocon list the reasons "WHY" he supports President Bush.

I picture some character like "Carl" from Slingblade when he posts. Someone once said Forrest Gump, but Gump was a likeable idiot. I think Carl from Slingblade is the more probable personality. Let's hope ol' neocon gets some help up at "the nervous hospital"! LOL!

"As I have said often, if Dan would only read more, he'd look far less ridiculous."

As I have said often, if DD would only insult less, he'd look far less ridiculous.

Back later, gotta go feed the kids.

"I would hope that all would have no stomach for war"...

Yes Carol, but the problem is the islamofacists have plenty of stomach for it. And useful idiots like yourself and the world traveler are helping them win.

I'm too old for the military now, or I'd be glad to go to Iraq. I kinda miss the smell of napalm in the morning. No limp wrists here, sorry.

Poor little world traveler...trying to comment on military matters when he's so ignorant of such things. All he knows is what he reads on the daily kos or what John Kerry and the dnc feeds him. (quagmire, etc.) Don't tell me!... you have a 'friend' who is a retired general and you play golf with him and HE says Bush has made this a quagmire, right?...Riiiiiiiiight!

Don't you have homework to do or a room to clean?

WASHINGTON - President Bush, admitting that "it's bad in Iraq," acknowledged Thursday that the United States needs a new approach in the unpopular war and promised to unveil details in an upcoming speech. Bush said he was disappointed in the progress in Iraq, but continued to oppose direct U.S. talks with Iran or Syria and remained steadfastly committed to spreading democracy across the Middle East.

Carol, already heard that on NPR at 4:00, old news. Sorry to disappoint, but I listen to NPR as well (DD :))

I bet Mahmoud was waiting for a phone call from Bush and is now dissapointed. Good night.

I hope they can all meet and talk and find a way to stop the escalation of violence in Iraq. All will have their own self-serving agenda, but let's just pray they can reach a truce of some sort.

I guess "new approach" will be the buzz word. I wonder what it will be.

"And useful idiots like yourself and the world traveler are helping them win."

So what's your plan? Aside from name calling and accusing your countrymen of treason, I mean.

Today's headlines:

Poll: Few Americans expect victory in Iraq
Dissatisfaction with Bush’s handling of war hits new high of 71 percent
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16107249/

Are Saudis funding Iraq terror?
Report says millions sent to Sunni insurgents for weapons
http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/165050,CST-NWS-bushsaudi08.article

Things are just peachy over there. Just peachy.

I just want to reiterate what I suggested above.
After alot of reading and thinking, I don't think that there is any plan or any long term plan that we can come up with. I think that we need to get out of the way. Please folks, I'm not a cut and run person. There will be continued destruction while we are there; I feel sure about that. There will be more after we leave, no matter when that is. I don't like what I'm writing but this is the best I think we can do, for now. They have to work things out their way, not ours. There may be some oppression when the dust settles, but then I see oppression everywhere: some of it subtle and some of it blatant. There are as many world views or visions as there countries and we need to accept that. We have a wonderful country here, but it is far from perfect, there are serious power imbalances and fiscal imbalances and so forth. We have alot of poverty, a high crime rate. There is alot of work for us to do here. And people are getting hurt. BUT this is something we have to work out for ourselves, using our history, values, precedents, preferences, theologies and so forth. No one from another country can come in with a gun and determine our fate and direction. At some point, even if something solid might be put in place, we will tear it down and rebuild something that represents who we are with all of our frailties, prejudices and so forth. I think that in toppling Sadam, which was going to be bloody and destructive no matter who did it, the US has done something positive for Iraq (mind you--I'm a dove) and now it's their turn to go on. We can be consultants or whatever, but we need to start pulling out.

Carol,
We can all pat ourselves on the back for getting Dan to listen to NPR! He would never admit it, but it has helped him understand the world a little better. Granted, he has a long way to go before he cuts the umbilical cord from FOXNews but for now, he's battling his own hardened belief system. He should feel better about himself when he reads a post from neocon, as each one is a snapshot of what Dan could become if he doesn't read more. Kind of a Dickensian dream where Dan sees the future and what he will become if he stays on the road he is currently traveling.