Reid: War is LOST

[1st love ron]

The noose of truth is tightening around Bush and his sycophants.


The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid told journalists.

Reid said he had delivered the same message to US President George W. Bush on Wednesday, when the US president met with senior lawmakers to discuss how to end a standoff over an emergency war funding bill.

"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."

Congress is seeking to tie funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to a timetable to withdraw US troops from Iraq next year, but Bush has vowed to veto any such bill and no breakthrough was reported from the White House talks.

Bush on Thursday was addressing an Ohio town hall meeting and defending the war on terror launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"It is the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm," Bush told the invited audience in Tipp, Ohio.

"A lesson learned was that -- at least in my opinion -- that in order to protect us, we must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."

But Reid drew a parallel with former US president Lyndon Johnson who decided to deploy more troops in Vietnam some 40 years ago when 24,000 US troops had already been killed.

"Johnson did not want a war loss on his watch, so he surged in Vietnam. After the surge was over, we added 34,000 to the 24,000 who died in Vietnam," Reid said.

The comments came a day after bombers killed more than 200 people in a slew of car bombings in Baghdad, dealing a savage blow to the US security plan which aims to deploy an extra 30,000 troops in the country to quell sectarian unrest.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates fly into Iraq Thursday on an unannounced visit for talks with top US military commanders there.

He met with General David Petraeus, chief of coalition forces in Iraq, his deputy Lieutenant Colonel Ray Odierno and Admiral William Fallon, chief of US forces in the Middle East.

 

[slobone]

Good for Reid, finally the Democrats are delivering the right message. They need to keep the pressure up on Bush with legislation, even if he vetoes it.

The Vietnam parallels are interesting. I read somewhere that the casualty rate in Iraq is actually the same as it was in Vietnam (allowing for the difference in the number of combat troops there), but fewer injured soldiers are dying because of improvements in battlefield medicine.

And if anything, the situation in South Vietnam was more hopeful. At least they had a functioning government when we began fighting there, even if it wasn't very popular.

But the message is the same: the "world's most powerful nation" simply lacks the ability to impose its will wherever it chooses -- if its will includes trying to dictate how other countries should be governed.

PS But why is it so hard for Bush et al to recognize that "victory" in Iraq is just impossible? Are they really that stupid, or just stubborn? It couldn't be more obvious to us regular folks out here.

 

[jackoroe]

Reid is as disingenuous a politician as I've ever seen. If he in fact believe the war to be lost, how does he justify leaving the troops in for another minute? Why does he simply not cut off the money this very second? Because it isn't true, that's why!

 

[chance1]

Good for Reid?

no

unfortunately no

he's a traitor - plain and simple

there's a big difference between having a belief/fighting for what's right and aiding and abetting

Reid is pathetic - but honest

the war is lost

so just say no to all funding Harry

how anyone could pull the lever for Harry is beyond me

His partisanship knows no bounds

Harry is on the "war is lost" bus and will tell anyone who asks - do u think harry wants the surge to work?

nah

Harry knows the war is lost

thank god Harry is not in the military

 

[slobone]

^^^ Neither of the above two posts particularly surprises me.

This war was lost before it was started. Does the fact that Rumsfeld categorically refused to make any plans for what would happen after Saddam was overthrown give you any clues?

 

[chance1]

^^^ Neither of the above two posts particularly surprises me.

This war was lost before it was started. Does the fact that Rumsfeld categorically refused to make any plans for what would happen after Saddam was overthrown give you any clues?

dude ur a JUB poster

not a U.S. Senator

ur belief is cool as is Harry's

Harry saying it in public is not cool

big diff

 

[jackoroe]

^^^ Neither of the above two posts particularly surprises me.

This war was lost before it was started. Does the fact that Rumsfeld categorically refused to make any plans for what would happen after Saddam was overthrown give you any clues?

Be intellectually honest, for just a moment. OK? Harry Reid believes the war is lost. OK, so why would you continue the troop funding for a year? Is it his desire to see troops continue to be sitting ducks? Does he want to see more bloodshed just for grins and giggles? What justification could he possibly have for allowing troops to remain in harms way, if all is lost? Please tell us what this idiot is thinking!

 

[naked gent]

Its a little over the top to say Harry is a traitor but he is an astoundingly bad and shortsighted politician who uses the word "I" a lot for someone with the title majority leader.

We're not going to completely leave Iraq and Harry knows it and how using the word lost increases Harry's chances of holding some of his less staunch democratic colleagues in line after a Bush veto is beyond me. And as I recall he doesn't have too many votes to play with.

He's right about Bush being like Johnson in not wanting to loose on his watch. Thats why he tossed aside the Iraq Study Group and increased his bet. There's a good chance he'll purposely drag this out till the next guy comes in.

 

[Centexfarmer]

The noose of truth is tightening around Bush and his sycophants.


The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid told journalists.

Reid said he had delivered the same message to US President George W. Bush on Wednesday, when the US president met with senior lawmakers to discuss how to end a standoff over an emergency war funding bill.

"I know I was the odd guy out at the White House, but I told him at least what he needed to hear ... I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically."

Congress is seeking to tie funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to a timetable to withdraw US troops from Iraq next year, but Bush has vowed to veto any such bill and no breakthrough was reported from the White House talks.

Bush on Thursday was addressing an Ohio town hall meeting and defending the war on terror launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"It is the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm," Bush told the invited audience in Tipp, Ohio.

"A lesson learned was that -- at least in my opinion -- that in order to protect us, we must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."

But Reid drew a parallel with former US president Lyndon Johnson who decided to deploy more troops in Vietnam some 40 years ago when 24,000 US troops had already been killed.

"Johnson did not want a war loss on his watch, so he surged in Vietnam. After the surge was over, we added 34,000 to the 24,000 who died in Vietnam," Reid said.

The comments came a day after bombers killed more than 200 people in a slew of car bombings in Baghdad, dealing a savage blow to the US security plan which aims to deploy an extra 30,000 troops in the country to quell sectarian unrest.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates fly into Iraq Thursday on an unannounced visit for talks with top US military commanders there.

He met with General David Petraeus, chief of coalition forces in Iraq, his deputy Lieutenant Colonel Ray Odierno and Admiral William Fallon, chief of US forces in the Middle East.

Before we break off into the usual camps here, do you have any sites / links for these quotes?

What are your sources?

 

[iman]

Bush made his "Mission Accomplished" carrier landing on May 2, 2003. I think it is safe to assume that he was wrong. If the war is not lost, four years later after we have lost ground, when is it lost? When is it won?

If Bush didn't know the war was lost, he would not be looking for an "Iraq Czar".

Bush's only concern now is to some how blame the Dems, either stretch the war out till the election or have the Dems stop the funding (which they cannot do). Bush is trading lives for legacy - aren't you proud.

 

[playwithmemonkey]

Reid is a very weak man. It's actually very sad.

 

[pisces_ken02]

Democrats are bitches... They are so afraid of the damn republicans.. and THEY ARE THE ONES IN CHARGED. Pisses me off.

 

[Andreus]

good lord

whats the matter with you people

 

[OtterJoq]

^ Well, compared to George WTC Bush, whom among us isn't?

Is he the same guy as Richard Milhouse Bush?

 

[lancelva]

People seem to be looking past the fact that Reid is arguing that the war is lost militarily...that all the king's horses and all the king's men will not win it. It can only be "won"--if you define the term in very broad terms--politically. Hence the purpose of tying funding to a timetable and benchmarks for the Iraqi government--some of the same benchmarks Bush said he would support just a few months ago.

At this stage in the military war, "winning" means just about the same as Nixon's "peace with honor" in Vietnam. It's quite telling that so many pounce on Harry Reid for telling the truth instead of repeating similar bullshit.

 

[Txgoodoldboy]

If the war isn't lost, does that mean we are winning? Get real. And get out. Does anyone else, besides George W. Bush, believe we are winning in Iraq? I don't think so.

 

[1st love ron]

What are your sources?

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1943792720070419

 

[Centexfarmer]

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1943792720070419

Thanks!

 

[naked gent]

People seem to be looking past the fact that Reid is arguing that the war is lost militarily...that all the king's horses and all the king's men will not win it. It can only be "won"--if you define the term in very broad terms--politically. Hence the purpose of tying funding to a timetable and benchmarks for the Iraqi government--some of the same benchmarks Bush said he would support just a few months ago.

At this stage in the military war, "winning" means just about the same as Nixon's "peace with honor" in Vietnam. It's quite telling that so many pounce on Harry Reid for telling the truth instead of repeating similar bullshit.

Lance I'm not pouncing on Harry for telling the turth I'm pouncing on him because what he said was unnecessary and hurts his chances to achieve his stated goals going foward. The politically astute word to use is mistake, using the word lost is bound to make some senators skitish.

But I suppose we'll see. Perhaps other members of the senate share your love of truth.

I doubt it.....that was just bad politics. He talks like he has votes to spare when in reality he does not.

If you're satisfied with the truth thats fine but I would have thought results were preferable.

 

[letme]

We Have Lost the War !!! Good Harry-Benedick Arnold Reid. Let's just throw the white towel into the ring, and say to all of the countries in the world,, YES WE ARE LOSERS. Yes Harry Thanks for stabbing the backs of our soldiers and saying they are a bunch of LOSERS. 'gezz ya'all did kinda your best,but we are cutting your funds cuz Nancy & I wanta make some hay of all of this . It's how we play politics in my home-state(Nevada ya know) It's a big crap shot and MY SEAT holds the Tables.'

Yes Harry Arnold Reid, you are a coward and a trader. You Told the world and all the factions fighting , that the USofA is nothing more then a bunch of Pussies that can't play well in the sand-box at the school yard.

Did Mohamed Ali's trainer ever pitch the towel ? Lance Armstrong only has 1 testicle, and HE sure has more BALLS the Harry does. Good people get inspiration from these 2 of many men . Not 1 Soldier will get any inspiration from Reid. How could they when he just twisted the knife deeper in their backs.