U.S. Military Officials: Bush Trying To Bribe Us To Support Iraq Escalation
U.S. Military Officials: Bush Trying To Bribe Us To Support Iraq Escalation
Last night on NBC Nightly News, Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski said that many military officials are “suspicious” of President Bush’s announcement that he plans to increase the size of the armed forces. They believe that “he’s dangling that offer out there in an effort to buy the military support for the option to surge additional American troops into Iraq as if it’s some kind of tradeoff.”
Miklaszewski added that military leaders are also still opposed to an increase in U.S. troops in Iraq, believing it would “be like throwing kerosene on a fire.” Watch it:
In the 2004 campaign, Bush repeatedly attacked Sen. John Kerry’s (D-MA) proposal to expand the Army by 40,000 troops. As recently as six months ago, a “Statement of Administration Policy” stated that the administration “opposes increases in minimum active Army and Marine Corps end strengths.” Bush’s plan to send 15,000 to 30,000 more U.S. troops to Iraq has been unanimously opposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as by Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East.
Transcript:
BRIAN WILLIAMS: The President’s decision to push for this expansion of the US military has caught a few people at the Pentagon by surprise. We turn to our Pentagon correspondent, Jim Miklaszewski. And Jim, a lot of the generals have been asking for this for a long time, as recently as last week on Capitol Hill.
JIM MIKLASZEWSKI: That’s exactly right, Brian. But some military officials are highly suspicious of the President’s sudden turnaround on the issue. They believe that he’s dangling that offer out there in an effort to buy the military support for the option to surge additional American troops into Iraq as if it’s some kind of tradeoff. You throw in 30,000 more American troops into Baghdad now in exchange for an overall larger force four to five years down the road.
But many military leaders that we’re talking to still oppose a surge. They still believe it won’t work and will put more Americans at risk. As one senior military official put it today, it’ll be like throwing kerosene on a fire.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
99 Responses to “U.S. Military Officials: Bush Trying To Bribe Us To Support Iraq Escalation”
Brian Williams is alright in my book.
December 21st, 2006 at 12:49 pmWow! A straight scoop from the msm!
December 21st, 2006 at 12:49 pmLast night, Joe Scarborough stated that if Clinton had ignored the military and asked for a troop increase against their wishes, there would have been an impeachment hearing.
December 21st, 2006 at 12:50 pmBribe us? Sounds more like extortion and blackmail to me!
December 21st, 2006 at 12:50 pmWhat? The top brass think the chymp may be trying outright bribery?
December 21st, 2006 at 12:53 pmHow dare they figure this out!
I had this exact thought go through my brain last night, as I was reflecting on dear departed Secretary of War Rumsfeld’s policy of technology over manpower……
December 21st, 2006 at 12:54 pmDubious does a pretty snappy about face for someone who had a hard time keeping up when he was in the military………….
here is a question … where are they gonna get the personnel to fill an expanded military?
December 21st, 2006 at 12:55 pmHow many Pentagon Generals are secretly Gay or have other hidden stuff in their closets? Bush Regime loves to blackmail those who oppose them!
December 21st, 2006 at 12:55 pmAshenShard > supposedly Bush wants to force the United States to join with Canada and Mexico, to create the “North American Union,” so I guess he can force the poor in Mexico City to join the military?!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:00 pmalso, from last nite’s hardball:
JIM MIKLASZEWSKI, NBC NEWS: Well, you know, I‘ve got to tell you that officials here at the Pentagon are taking—on that second point, are taking the opposite view. They, in fact, believe that there is momentum gaining for the possibility of a surge of some 20,000 to 30,000 American troop into Baghdad.
One of the reason, they view this sudden turnaround by the president and his offer to expand the U.S. military, Army and Marines specifically, as a payoff to the military in exchange for a possible decision on his part to order that surge in forces.
MATTHEWS: Will they make the deal? Will they offer that back? If he says a bigger military, will they cool their jets about opposing more troops in Iraq?
MIKLASZEWSKI: I don‘t think so privately but, publicly, we‘re already hearing some of those generals, Schoomaker, the chief of the Army, and of course, General Conway, the new commandant of the Marine Corps.
They‘re both saying now that they could support a surge in force if there were a measurable goal that were achievable. Now, that may seem as a high bar, but if you put that down on paper, it will all look pretty good.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:02 pmThe twin pillars of the coming Bush approach to Iraq appear to be a “surge” in U.S. force levels combined with the sacking of the generals opposed to it.
For more, see:
December 21st, 2006 at 1:03 pm“Surge and Purge: The Bush Strategy for Iraq.”
Blackmail or not…people have the right to ask why the President who opposed sending more troops vigorously in the past 31/2 and even when the suggestion came before the war started was not considered,now afterthe Baker/Hamilton ISG report and the elections are over he is considering the idea.In fact Bush disagreed with Senator Kerry during their presidential debate over this issue. Now Generals questioning the motive…
December 21st, 2006 at 1:05 pmSee this Reuters story from today. Looks to me like they’re not gonna say they’re listening to the “commanders in the field” anymore. Now it will be that they’re listening to “average troops” that were selected for them to “from the field.”
Bush will try to play on average americans’ support for the troops heartstring to try and get his way, since they are having trouble finding support anywhere else.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:06 pm#7–I’ve been thinking the exact same thing. Every time I drive by my local recruiting office it’s empty.
My friend’s grandson signed up for the Air Force because the recruiter told him he wouldn’t go overseas. He honestly believed it up until the day he left for boot camp.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:12 pmWhat fools these mortals be! God speaks through George Bush is the great decider and God speaks through him!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:13 pmBush has been keeping about 100,000+ troops hidden in reserve, and refuses to use them in Iraq, so apparently he needs them when he attacks Iran next year?!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:19 pmCome on, everybody. We all know how they get more troops. The Draft. In my youth, they could grab you out of the classroom against your will and send you off to fight in a jungle on the other side of the world. If you didn’t want to go, you either had to leave the country quickly or go to jail. Chew on that a while.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:20 pmComment by AshenShard — December 21, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
Look for Federalization of the State’s Militias.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:24 pmIt is both amazing and astounding that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unanimously fighting Bush’s desire to escalate in Iraq. It’s as if they have banded together and gone on strike, like some union. They are at the peak of their profession, and there is great power in their collective voice. Bush is fighting the Iraq war with his own military and losing. Wow.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:26 pmWhen will the Decider decide his tune ain’t carrying too well when sung from a lame-duck, chickenhawk beak?
And isn’t it strange that the Rover and Darth Cheney have been SOOOOO quiet recently… other than when Cheney co-starred in that “Heckuva Job Rummy” Circlejerk at the Pentagon?
December 21st, 2006 at 1:30 pmupside00,
The Decider will never back down. He will have to be forced to back down, and it will be ugly, on the off chance it even succeeds. And it will be even uglier — and deadlier — if we can’t force him to back down.
Either way, the troops are screwed.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:37 pmPerhaps the military leaders should try and work with Democrats and moderate GOPers to see about somehow removing Bush from office.
And, yes, as someone pointed out - where are these new military recruits going to come from?
December 21st, 2006 at 1:39 pmZooey!
That is a scary thought, as his stubborn attitude has been getting people killed and with no heart, it doesn’t faze him in the least. And didn’t they make a movie (or 8) about that same character from Transylvania?? Why do we have to watch it play out in real life now?
December 21st, 2006 at 1:44 pmAdvice? We don need no stinkin advice!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:44 pmFind some more warm bodies and stuff em in the cannons!
Damn the 89%ers Full speed ahead!
If and when Bush increases the troops in Iraq, then expect to hear in the news about 10 troops killed and/or severely wounded daily. Not that Bush will care, but I hope most Americans will get pissed off about it! The occupation of Iraq must end ASAP, and Bush must be told to pack his bags to return to his Texas ranch as a ex-president!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:46 pmIts really simple. Call and email your reps. daily and tell them to support Dennis Kucinch’s proposal to terminate funding for combat operations in Iraq. That’s all we have to do to end it. Period. Iraq Study Group…Irrelevant. Bush’s escalation plan…Irrelevant. The Generals that Bush has paid off…Irrelevant. Neo-Cons at the Pentagon…Irrelevant.
The Dems were voted to majorities in the House and Senate to end the occupation. This is the will of the American People. They obey our will by ending funding for this conflict. Period.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:48 pmIMPEACH!
December 21st, 2006 at 1:52 pmActually, Larry, it’s not that simple. When you have troops under fire, you have to be very careful about which funding you cut or you provide Repubs with the mother of all campaign slogans.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:53 pmI was talking about the war and stuff last night with my 13 year old. We were talking about how the war started and why the admnistration felt it was necessary to go to war. After 10-15 minutes of discussion, Rachel (my daughter) said: But if are not doing anybody anygood, then why does the president want to send in more people to get hurt? I am not an uneducated man, but I had no answer for her. I could get all snarky, but that would not have helped her understanding of the complicated situation we find ourselves in. Anyway, it appears ‘from the mouths of babes’ that this may be the ultimate question.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:57 pmI support Dennis Kucinch’s position:
“If we truly care about our troops, we’ll get them out. It’s the phoniest argument to say that a cut-off of funds will leave troops stranded in the field. There’s always money in the pipeline to pay for an orderly withdrawal. But those who favor continuing the war or escalating the war are using the troops as a tool to further policies that are against the interests of the troops, against the interests of [the] American people, and against the interests of peace in the world.”
Full interview:
December 21st, 2006 at 1:59 pmhttp://www.truthdig.com/ interview/ item/ 20061116_kucinich_cut_off_funding/
More from Dennis Kucinch:
“…and I believe that Congress must exercise its authority to protect the troops by bringing them home. And the only way we can do that effectively is to vote against supplemental appropriations—which has kept the war going, or to vote against appropriation bills which fund the war. That’s Congress’ ultimate power—the power of the purse.“
December 21st, 2006 at 2:00 pmThw war in Vietman was over when Walter Cronkite turned — if the MSM now turns against Twig and his war of convenience, maybe there’s still hope.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:01 pmLarry, I also agree with Kucinich. He’s been right all along. I just think the Dems should be a little careful about the ramifications for 2008. And, in this case, I don’t really know if there is money in the pipeline. This war has been financed off-budget with emergency funds.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:03 pmAs a collective, we are fools. Americans called for an end to the Iraq invasion and for the troops to come home with a strong and resounding voice on Nov 7th.
Right now, Dec 21st, we are arguing about an escalation of the invasion and sending in even more troops. It’s almost funny.
We, as a nation, are far too reactionary and easily manipulated through emotion. Such is what got us into this mess. Such is what’s keeping us in this mess. And we, as a nation of fools, keep falling for it.
Contact your senators and representatives daily and tell them you want us out of Iraq now. Not next week, or next month, or next year. Otherwise you can continue being manipulated and debating non-issues as the faux experts that we are. Which makes us all just as incompetent and as complicit as Bush and his administration in this horrible act.
We have become an orchestra of Neros. Out of sync, of course, but still just fiddling while Rome, and our honor, burns.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:03 pm[…] Watch Video […]
December 21st, 2006 at 2:07 pm35, I believe they’re going to have to ask for more money in the Spring of 07′. This is when we’ll find out if we truly have an opposition party acting on behalf of their constituent’s will.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:10 pmMany of the members of the House and Senate would like the occupation of Iraq to appear to be winding down just for their elections in 2008, but for 2007 they could care less! Each year in Iraq means the death of 1,000+ US troops, 10,000+ wounded/maimed, and about 250,000+ Iraqis slain too! So those fools in the Congress must be told that they will be held personally responsible, with President Bush, for those additional fatalities next year! If Bush is considered a war criminal, then so are those in Congress who continue to fund it!
December 21st, 2006 at 2:18 pm37, So those fools in the Congress must be told that they will be held personally responsible, with President Bush, for those additional fatalities next year! If Bush is considered a war criminal, then so are those in Congress who continue to fund it!
Unfortunately, you and I, and all Americans, are also responsible. They’re killing in our name with our tax dollars. I wish people understood this point.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:32 pmThis is the message that I am sending my senators and representative DAILY. I highly recommend you do the same:
As my representative/senator I demand that you vote against any and all funding for further actions in Iraq and that you do everything in pursuit of removing our military presence from that country immediately. All other issues are secondary until this is resolved.
I will be watching your record on this closely and will publish your actions publicly.
Do it now, no more excuses.
Sincerely,
(Insert Name).
My two senators and my representative receive this message from me daily. Imagine what it would be like if we all did this.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:44 pmLarry > as American citizens we are simi-responsible, but who the hell listens to average Americans in DC? Unless one is wealthy, and donotes big bucks to politicians, our Reps in the Capital tend to ignore us! If Iraq occupation was in my capacity to stop it, then it would end January 2007, but unfortunately I have no monetary power in Washington! We can protest, but Bush could have us all arrested too > catch-22 here!
December 21st, 2006 at 2:46 pm#39. I fully support your decision to demand this. I have been attempting a different angle with my reps. I have been asking for specifics on where they stand regarding more troops to Iraq, more troops in the military, where have they determined this money will come from and more questions like that.
I don’t necessarily want to have my views put in the reps. trash been. I am requesting where they stand. Let them hang themselves. I’m tired of hearing just the administrations angle.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:51 pmTuber > I have probably sent a few thousand faxes to Representatives and Senators in DC in the past few years, but most of the time I believe they just stick them in a folder under your name in filing cabinet. At least my Faxes probably take up one whole filing drawer in several offices > lol.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:54 pm#40 Jay,
Your voice does matter, just as your vote does. Do not fall for the trap that it doesn’t, and do not suppress yourself. Doing so only causes you to defeat yourself. That’s the true “catch-22″.
Also, I would recommend that you not succumb to fear.
“Courage” is just fear with a sense of faith - author unknown
My position is, let them try and come get me. I will not surrender my honor to the fear of being challenged.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:55 pmhellinabucket
December 21st, 2006 at 2:57 pmI have been constantly (once a week, usually) contacting Jay Inslee about who he’s talked to, what explicit actions he’s taken this week, when and how is he going to vote on the upcoming appropriations legislation, etc, etc, etc.
He’s really tired of me, but continues to keep me posted with what I’m asking, not in enough detail to brag about, but he sure as hell knows where I stand.
#41 hellinabucket,
It’s easy to dismiss and trash one email. But what if it were a thousand? Or a hundred thousand? Or millions?
What’s the risk? Zero. But the potential is awesome.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:59 pmI miss Inlsee as my rep, my wife and I moved back from LA to Seattle, but settled on the eastside, currently I have Dave Riechart as my rep.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:01 pm#42 Jay,
December 21st, 2006 at 3:01 pmExcellent! I think I’ll start faxing as well. Daily. Great idea.
Well Tuber > Bush might start sending the goons after us all soon. Heaven knows they already have made threats against me. I know I am on their lists for treatment > reason why I do not travel much anymore!
December 21st, 2006 at 3:01 pmWe get the democracy we deserve. People think since they voted they don’t need to do anything else. If you desire a healthy flourishing (representative) democracy it takes work, beyond just voting. Most people are too busy with jobs, family and recreation to take the time to call their reps. As a result the power rests with lobbyists and other monied interests. If every citizen participated fully, we the people would regain control of our government. Unfortunately people will not wake up until if affects them so greatly they feel actual pain. Just as an alcoholic doesn’t change until he hits rock bottom.
Yes it sucks being responsible for a war that I don’t support and cannot change. Heck, I cannot even get Barack O’bama to return my email. Not even a form letter. And he’s (supposedly) a good guy!
December 21st, 2006 at 3:03 pmTuber > best chance for your message to be seen by a politician is by FAX! E-mails they never read, personal letters by mail usually get read by a secretary who then sends you a form letter return with a auto-signature, calling them gets you a office boy/girl who are clueless, but a FAX gets filed and perhaps the politician sees it before it gets filed away in drawer.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:12 pmI’m going to go out on a limb and make a prediction. Bush is going to keep saying that he will settle for nothing less then to have 30,000 additional troops deployed. Baker; as reported will use the “Ground troops ask for more troops” as a face saving way to concede to Bush’s demand for a greater installment of troops and eventually pull to his side. They will settle for an additional 25,000 troops, and then there will be a terrorist attack in Isreal (probable dirty or nuclear) that will kill hundreds. The troops will be deployed and a buildup along the Irainian border will ensue. It will be found that the terrorist attack will be Syrian/Iranian born, and Isreal will attack Syria, and the US will attack Iran simultanously. The hawks of the democratic party will call for the draft to be reinstated. Oil production will top out due to instability in the oil rich nations. Economies will collapse. China will see this as a direct threat and come to side with the Irainian’s and deploy 200,000 troops to Iran. Russia will stay out of it.
I pray that this doesn’t happen, but it’s looking a little grimm from my perspective.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:15 pmRemember when Bush bribed everyone with a 300 dollar check?
December 21st, 2006 at 3:16 pm# 49. I agree with you so much that it is no longer a luxury to stand back and hope that we resolve this without voicing oppinion in a Christian way.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:17 pm#54 Gen,
Glad that you are retired. Sad to see that dimentia has taken ahold of you. And when you look up after you have died, that will be me pissing on your grave.
Good riddance.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:27 pmTuber,
He aint even a General, its a troll under his newest name. It started as Michael. He is pasting his stupid post on all the threads, like its going to have an effect or something. The effect is that he proves how much of a moron he is.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:51 pm#57 ForTruth,
December 21st, 2006 at 3:57 pmI know it’s not the “real” general. But I would still p on his grave :)
He aint even a General, its a troll under his newest name. It started as Michael. He is pasting his stupid post on all the threads,
I noticed the ‘general’ pasting stuff everywhere. I mean EVERYWHERE. I guess if you have nothing important to say, just keep posting until you get lucky. Even a blind squirrel finds a meal sometimes. The general must have a low opinion of himself to make people think he might be a soldier. Sir, once people find out about you - and it appears the have - maybe it is best to just go away.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:09 pm“Like pouring kerosene on a fire”. That’s one way to put it. Trying to stop the civil war in Iraq by sending more troops is like putting bandaides on arterial bleeds… everytime there is a pulse or surge, there’s more bleeding. The frat boy is really focused on his legacy. He is the only one whose legacy is completely tied to this war in Iraq, this “comma” in history.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:15 pmbush is very brave in putting his soldiers lives on the line, we get a real indication of his valour when we check out his viet nam service.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:34 pmi guess its the god complex which makes “the decider” do these mortal deeds.
it is time for bush to drop dead, preferably in a compromising position with jeff gannon.
little birdie - whatever your grudge with unbelievable, you are denegrating yourself with your posts.
Please return to writing about the topics of the threads. I am sure you could give valuable insights.
December 21st, 2006 at 5:24 pmhere is a question … where are they gonna get the personnel to fill an expanded military?
Comment by AshenShard — December 21, 2006 @ 12:55 pm
It is obvious and simple. Draft the privileged Bush twins and ship them to Iraq. Hey, if your childred are good enough to serve and die over there, why aren’t his?
Pinko
December 21st, 2006 at 5:26 pmHow about these several points: This person named Bush refuses to listen to anybody but Cheney and his gang…
December 21st, 2006 at 5:48 pmNancy Pelosi needs to change her statement that impeachment is OFF the table…Many believe that is the only avenue left to save this country from Bush and his antics
The new Congress needs to hold hearings as to why several generals who disagreed with Bush’s “surge” are retiring…Could it be Bush’s narrow mindedness and the gall of these generals to disagree with the “decider” who avoided military service in Vietnam…what a yo-yo
There is a larger issue here. The commander-in-chief is dismissing concerns voiced by the armed forces, American elites, and of course, the American public. The man clearly has become unhinged. He has taken leave of his senses, and poses a grave threat to this republic. He is divorced from reality, and cannot deal with the empirical facts. History will judge the GOP quite harshly if they continue to ignore mounting evidence of the President’s (readily apparent) mental illness.
December 21st, 2006 at 5:58 pm# 73 Christianity will NEVER be defeated. sayeth wild willy…
Neither will Atheletes foot.
Whats your point?
Yes, there will always be weak minded people who need something to wrap thier feeble minds around because they cant handle unanswered questions.
I got news for ya you biblehumping neanderthal… you and your little band of fundamentalist cultists are about to lose the keys to the nuclear “futball” for a looooong time. your bullsh1t is coming to roost, vent all you want.
people are waking up and turning against your dundamentalism.
religion is a disease that will never be totally eradicated, its too virulent and too infectious to the weak minded and the deparate, but we can hope to see an increase in secularism like is occuring now is many more educated, cultured countries. i know the only “culture” you think this world should have is the jock itch cultures growing in your pants as you trape through the woods, rifle in hand, desparately looking for something to kill, but i’m happy to say your in the minority and as time goes on and we become more evolved and civilzed that minory you represent will shrink, although sadly, not to the point of non-existence.
and guess what, willy boy, you cant really “nuke em all” because of all the radiation you couldn’t send your white trash halliburton subsidiary contractors to go take all their oil for your 3 SUV”s with the american flag bumper sticks and the confederate flag in the window.
and you want to talk all macho, well it looks like the mightiest christian nation in the world can’t even pacify a tiny dune coon country. my heart goes out to the usa boys who are just trying to do thier job, but when some redneck with your mentality gets his teeth blown into his brain by one of them “brown people bombs” it warms my heart. if your even really military, why dont you get out of retirement and lead the charge over there in iraq tough guy? they need soldiers bad, its not going as well for you. I know, I know, its Cindy Sheehans fault, but one little lady can’t cause that many problem for your big macho army, can they?
that little brown country is going to be the graveyard of american military supremacy, mark my word.
December 21st, 2006 at 7:27 pmThat’s bush’s mentality. You see, to these pricks everything can be bought. After all, they sold their souls to the varied interests that promised them anything they wanted as long as they did what was told. Skull & Bones, the bankers, corporate CEO’s, those all powerful haves and have mores that bush calls his “base”.
But something happened on the way bush’s Hell - he had to talk to men, real men - men that have actually put their lives on the line for something bush and his ilk could never understand - honor. Honor above money, security and a job.
There is a great battle that will be fought soon. Great walls are going to fall. Powerful forces will collapse. Many will not survive. But the one’s that do will have mostly freed themselves of the evil side of mankind.
December 21st, 2006 at 7:43 pmTHERE’S A MARCH ON WASHINGTON JANUARY 27TH - DON’T WAIT FOR THIS BOUGHT OFF CONGRESS TO DO SOMETHING - NOBODIES GOING TO ANYTHING UNLESS WE MAKE THEM! WE NEED TO PUT A MILLION+ PEOPLE ON THE STREETS NOW! MAKE THE COMMITMENT! COME! LET’S GET OUR COUNTRY BACK!
December 21st, 2006 at 8:00 pmI agree with J.R. above: I have sent hundreds of emails, and the only result seems to be a form letter explaining why they don’t care about my opinion. If I’m lucky, they might get a list of #/pro’s vs. #/cons on the issue. If we indundate their fax lines, shut them down with our opinion, at least it will come to their attention. Be sure to pass this on, because everyone’s Sen/Rep has a local office. Drop dime and fax our orders to defund the war, bring the troops home (met with a BIG party) and impeach this psychotic before he covinces himself that he is the “Rapture” button pusher!
December 21st, 2006 at 8:49 pmWhomever is posting under the multiple names “cointelpro assholes”, get a clue. First you give yourself away when there are no spaces between your paragraphs:
December 21st, 2006 at 9:27 pmIt seems your playfriend here on TP ,unbelievable, has flown the coup.What gives?Yes you go ahead and try to defend of what is left of her honor.But you know what?At the end of the day,she is the same vile troll as you yourself are.Let`s see now.Since you are a progressive,you are probably a -married single- then? Whatever works.Putz.
One step closer to the USA’s first military coup.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:38 pmSTUPID. Bush is saying with forethought that he understands the position that if we increase troops over in Iraq that we should also need to increase troop levels over all. There is no problem here.
You all need to remove those tinfoil hats they are not helping but instead actually hindering your thought process.
December 21st, 2006 at 11:07 pmHere’s where Bush’s additional soldiers will come from:Detained illegal Mexican immigrants.
US Immigration officials have already begun rounding up illegal immigrants. Thousands are already detained in those Halliburtan camps around the country. The plan is to coerce armed service from them in exchange for legal residence.
Jeff
December 22nd, 2006 at 4:47 amKerosine on a fire, Yeah, I like that idea. Let’s do that.
December 22nd, 2006 at 9:08 amAmen!! deport all the illegals to Iraq; solve 2 problems at once. hell, if they want to come to America they can start by fighting for their citizenship.
December 22nd, 2006 at 9:12 amWhy do we allow our leaders to play game with us. Is it that they really have no plan and are playing it by ear. If they keep up this endless drive to nothing it will be more like white gas not kerosene.
December 22nd, 2006 at 1:41 pmImpeachment is stupid, in a few years our Army will take over and Bush and company will be hiding in South America.
Let me get this straight: in early 2003 before the war started the HEAD of the United States Army General Shinseki said it would take several hundred thousand troops to occupy Iraq; the UN strongly opposed war; and most mainstream moderate U.S. churches condemned the war because it would result in a huge amount of human suffering.
And the result of Americans listening to this advise: a Gallup/CNN/USAToday poll on May 1, 2003 showed 79% approval on the war. Documentation: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1155-2003May16
Americans mostly now act shocked at how we got into this mess. Do some Democrats have foggy memories on their war support in 2003? Many Democrats are Wishywashywimps.
America wanted war, it got one. We broke it, we fix it. Join up and fight. What part of that is so friggin’ hard to understand? It’s not fair to the current troops to go back to Iraq year after year.
December 22nd, 2006 at 2:32 pmLet’s see if I can remember
Quote:
October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry — all Democrats
“We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.â€
Quote:
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world, and this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998
“If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.â€
Quote:
Chuck Schumer > October 10, 2002
“It is Hussein’s vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and future potential support for terrorist acts and organizations that make him a danger to the people of the united states.â€
Quote:
Madeleine Albright > February 1, 1998
“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Nancy Pelosi > December 16, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.â€
Quote:
John Kerry > January 23, 2003
“Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he’s miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. His consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Al Gore > September 23, 2002
“We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.â€
Quote:
Sandy Berger > February 18, 1998
“He’ll use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has 10 times since 1983.â€
Quote:
John Kerry > October 9, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the US the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.â€
Quote:
Senator Carl Levin > September 19, 2002
“We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.â€
Quote:
Ted Kennedy > September 27, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Senator Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
Jay Rockefeller > October 10, 2002
“There was unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember that we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Madeleine Albright > November 10, 1999
“Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.â€
Quote:
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“[H]e does have the capacity, as all terrorist-related operations do, of smuggling stuff into the United States and doing something terrible. That is true. But there’s been no connection, hard connection made yet between he and al-Qaida or his willingness or effort to do that thus far. Doesn’t mean he won’t. This is a bad guy.â€
Quote:
Robert Byrd > October 3, 2002
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of ‘98. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
Madeline Albright > February 18, 2002
Iraq is a long way from (here), but what happens there matters a great deal here, for the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest national security threat we face — and it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm.â€
Quote:
Al Gore > September 23, 2002
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.â€
Quote:
Jane Harman > August 27, 2002
“I certainly think (Hussein’s) developing nuclear capability which, fortunately, the Israelis set back 20 years ago with their preemptive attack which, in hindsight, looks pretty darn good.â€
Quote:
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“I think he has anthrax. I have not seen any evidence that he has smallpox, but you hear them say, Tim (Russert), is the last smallpox outbreak in the world was in Iraq; ergo, he may have a strain.â€
Quote:
Dick Durbin > September 30, 1999
“One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may acquire or develop nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
Bill Clinton > December 17, 1998
“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq…. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.â€
Quote:
Bill Nelson > August 25, 2002
“[M]y own personal view is, I think Saddam
has chemical and biological weapons,
and I expect that he is trying to develop
a nuclear weapon. So at some point,
we might have to act precipitously.â€
Quote:
Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspections, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program.â€
Quote:
Nancy Pelosi > October 10, 2002
“Yes, he has chemical weapons. Yes, he has biological weapons. He is trying to get nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
Dick Gephardt > September 23, 2002
“(I have seen) a large body of intelligence information over a long time that he is working on and has weapons of mass destruction. Before 1991, he was close to a nuclear device. Now, you’ll get a debate about whether it’s one year away or five years away.â€
Quote:
Evan Bayh > August 4, 2002
“I’m inclined to support going in there and dealing with Saddam, but I think that case
needs to be made on a separate basis: his possession of biological and chemical weapons, his desire to get nuclear weapons, his proven track record of attacking his neighbors and others.â€
Quote:
Russell Feingold > October 9, 2002
“With regard to Iraq, I agree Iraq presents a genuine threat, especially in the form of weapons of mass destruction: chemical, biological and potentially nuclear weapons. I agree that Saddam Hussein is exceptionally dangerous and brutal, if not uniquely so, as the president argues.â€
Quote:
Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998
“We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st Century…. They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein.â€
Quote:
Johnny Edwards > January 7, 2003
“Serving on the intelligence committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It’s just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
Hillary Clinton > January 22, 2003
“I voted for the Iraqi resolution. I consider the prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein who can threaten not only his neighbors but the stability of the region and the world, a very serious threat to the United States.â€
Quote:
John Kerry > January 31, 2003
“If you don’t believe…Saddam Hussein
is a threat with nuclear weapons, then
you shouldn’t vote for me.â€
Quote:
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“We know he continues to attempt to gain access to additional capability, including nuclear capability.â€
Quote:
Bill Nelson > September 14, 2002
“I believe he has chemical and biological weapons. I think he’s trying to develop nuclear weapons, and the fact that he might use those is a considerable threat to us.â€
Quote:
Johnny Edwards > February 6, 2003
“The question is whether we’re going to allow this man who’s been developing weapons of mass destruction continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, get nuclear capability and get to the place where — if we’re going to stop him if he invades a country around him — it’ll cost millions of lives as opposed to thousands of lives.â€
Quote:
Al Gore > September 23, 2002
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.â€
Quote:
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
“First of all, we don’t know exactly what he has. It’s been five years since inspectors have been in there, number one. Number two, it is clear that he has residual of chemical weapons and biological weapons, number one.â€
Quote:
Tom Daschle > February 11, 1998
“The (Clinton) administration has said, ‘Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?’ That’s what they’re saying. This is the key question. And the answer is we don’t have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily.â€
Quote:
Senator Bob Graham > December 8, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.â€
Quote:
Bill Richardson > May 29, 1998
“The threat of nuclear proliferation is one of the big challenges that we have now, especially by states that have nuclear weapons, outlaw states like Iraq.â€
Quote:
John Kerry > February 23, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East.â€
Quote:
Hillary Clinton > October 10, 2002
“It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.â€
Quote:
December 22nd, 2006 at 6:13 pmAl Gore > December 16, 1998
“[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He has already demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons…â€
All I want to know is whether or not we have enough buffoonery and evidence to impeach him yet?
December 22nd, 2006 at 6:25 pm“Turnaround”? Sounds like a flip-flop to me.
In 2000, Smirk was bashing Clinton because gasoline was $1.46/gal, and said he would never let it get that high. In 2004, he was bashing Kerry for saying the military should be grown.
What a hypocritical loser. He still couldn’t find Iraq on a map or name 5 of the soldiers he sent to their deaths. Why won’t the Republican GOP call him on all of these lies and flip-flops?
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:52 pmNewt and other republicans sent Clinton a memo trying to get him to invade Iraq in 1998, but Clinton quite a bit smarter than what we have now refused, saying that up till now the sanctions were working, and let the weapon inspectors do their job.
But, of course Bush wanted war for oil, and pulled the inspectors from Iraq…. Another thing, looks like there was another reason for outing convert CIA agent Plame: She was in charge of a net work of people keeping tract of Iran’s nuclear progress. Bush wants to do what he wishes and the data to match……….
December 28, 2000
President Clinton will announce that The United States is on course to eliminate its public debt within the next decade. The Administration also announced that we are projected to pay down $237 billion in debt in 2001. Due in part to a strong economy and the President’s commitment to fiscal discipline, the federal fiscal condition has improved for an unprecedented nine consecutive years. Based upon today’s new economic and budget projections for the coming 10 years from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB):
The United States can be debt-free this decade. By dedicating the entire budget surplus to debt reduction, The United States can eliminate its publicly held debt by FY 2009. The next Administration and Congress will need to decide what priorities to address: eliminate the public debt by FY 2010 and still use part of the surplus for responsible tax cuts, prescription drug benefits for Medicare recipients, and investments in key priorities like education and health care.
READ WEB SITE ABOUT HOW GOOD IT COULD HAVE BEEN WITHOUT BUSH & CHENEY…….
http://clinton4.nara.gov/ WH/ new/ html/ Fri_Dec_29_151111_2000.html
======================================
The two great myths that have settled across the nation, beyond the Hussein-9/11 connection, are that Clinton did not do enough during his tenure to stop the spread of radical terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, and that the attacks themselves could not have been anticipated or stopped. Blumenthal’s insider perspective on these matters bursts the myths entirely, and reveals a level of complicity regarding the attacks within the journalistic realm and the conservative political ranks that is infuriating and disturbing.
Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, “threat meetings” were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it “The enemy of our generation.”
======
If Bush had listen, and paid attention to his intelligent information that the intelligent agency was trying to give him,,, just maybe 911 would not have happened…….
======
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:54 pmI believe that this “surge” is to have more military on the right side of the ocean in event of a “necessary” attack on Iran. The US government does not represent it’s people, and nothing it says can be taken at face value. I would gladly give up my life to prevent Canada joining a union with the US. Fortunately. the more this administation screws up, the less likely we’d be willing accomplices in that fiasco.
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:46 pmTP, you really need to have an auto-ban on overly wordy spewing.
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:52 pmIt’s ESCALATION to WIDER WAR with Iran. Time for the Uniform Code option.
December 23rd, 2006 at 11:12 pmNice
December 24th, 2006 at 10:34 amI am happy to hear that America is getting a major ass kicking in Iraq and other places in the world. Our men are good at raping helpless women and killing disarmed people. But the Iraqis are really putting the hammer on the G-dles pigs.
Look for an inside assassination job on Decider in ‘07…he has become a HUGE political liability to the VP and Poppy, thus all the talk about florida shrub’s great credentials (gimme a f**king break!). If the Generals had any cohones at all, they would arrest the whole bunch of them on Sedition and Treason charges. JHawk
December 24th, 2006 at 12:52 pmMerry Christmas amerikkka,
December 24th, 2006 at 12:59 pmThings not going the way you planned, not getting everything you wanted for Christmas? I wonder why?
Yes, send more troops into the illegal invasion of a sovergn nation, to fight a war based on LIES LIES LIES all the time. Those sons and daughters will be forced to kill, and possibly die, for your idiot president and his good friend, israel zionist olmert.
I have an excellent idea. Why don’t you send the sons and daughters of your elected officials, and all 18 and older jewish israeli amerikkkans, to fight in this war, a war to protect tiny israel (and its huge nuclear arsenal) from those pesky arabs. At least this way, the vested interests of israel will be served by those who feel the need to do so, directly. And if they die, it will not be in vain, as it would be for true Americans. Let zionists fight for themselves, and let the good christian Americans live and love, in peace. Amen, or shalom, if you prefer…
and BTW, the you know why we are fighting Muslims? because they are the last bastion against the NWO. Christianity capitulated years ago. Most of its leaders if not all are part of the illuminati. Many Muslim leaders also are part of the illuminati, but the true mujhideens ( the fighters ) know too well about the NWO and they prefer to die than surrender and they are winning. Pray for them because they are fighting for you too.
December 24th, 2006 at 1:14 pmbush is a IDIOT….
2 - 3 years of this insanity is long enough. how many
billions if not trillions will we be into debt for this
totally corrupt warlord compulsive liar
and what has been accomplished what now
in it’s 4 year …. a complete MESS
the situation is much worse than it has ever
been and this idiot wants to throw more
kerosene on THAT fire.
IMPEACH this criminal and take back
our constitution this idiot has fringed
upon. enron, lie after lie
IMPEACH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
December 24th, 2006 at 7:57 pm[…] [ Sell-Out Democrats Walk Into Bush Trap On Iraq ][ Bush Trying To Bribe US Military To Support Iraq ‘Surge’ ][ Is Bush Eyeing The Draft? | Feds Plan ‘Test’ Of Military Draft ][ Bush’s ‘Global War On Radicals’ | Defiant Iranian President Mocks Bush ][ Bush’s Worst Lies Of 2006 | The US Is Dead Broke ][ The Christmas Truce - When Men Said No To War | Reject The War ][ Orwell Was Right - Spy Cams Watch Brits’ Every Move ][ Head-Butt By Horse Restores Man’s Sight ]Read full entry […]
December 25th, 2006 at 9:25 pmIt’s truly amazing how so many ignorant fools can not see beyond the pure bullshit that the drive-by news media spoon-feeds them on a regular, daily basis. Truly unbelievable.
December 27th, 2006 at 3:14 amI would suggest that anyone who still believes that war is justified, to read the Nuernberg trials (1946).
December 28th, 2006 at 10:41 amIt clearly states that any war of agression is a war crime……..
It further stated that the defense :”I had to follow orders” does not excuse the acts of an individual.
Look what happened to the German Generals who followed orders - they were executed.
W.
[…] http://thinkprogress.org/ 2006/ 12/ 21/ troops-iraq-kerosene/ […]
December 28th, 2006 at 11:44 amTHE TIME HAS COME FOR ALL AMERICANS TO FACE THE VERY PAINFUL TRUTH THAT THE WARNINGS GIVEN TO US BY TWO GREAT AMERICANS ,THOMAS JEFFERSON ,WARNING US ABOUT THE DANGER OF CORPORATIONS, HOW THEY WILL BECOME A GOVERMENT UNTO THEMSELVES,DICTATEING TO THE ELECTED GOVERMENT. AND OF COURSE THE WARNING FROM GEN. AND PRESIDENT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER..THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. THE TIME HAS COME FOR THE OVERTHROW OF THIS THIRD WORLD STYLE GOVERMENT.THEIR GOAL IS TO TURN AMERICA AND THE REST OF THE WORLD INTO GIANT THIRD WORLD PLANTATION. WE HAVE NEVER HAVE HAD A SYSTEM AS CORRUPT AND SELF SERVING AS BOTH THE CLINTON AND BUSH GANGS…OVERTHROW THE FILTHY ROTTEN BASTARDS NOW! JIM MC GARRY
December 28th, 2006 at 4:28 pm[…] Before the escalation becomes inevitable, it must be made clear that this reckless strategy is being dictated by the White House and not by the military commanders who are being poked, prodded, pushed — and bribed — into backing it. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. RSS 2.0 […]
December 28th, 2006 at 5:08 pm[…] [ Sell-Out Democrats Walk Into Bush Trap On Iraq ][ Bush Trying To Bribe US Military To Support Iraq ‘Surge’ ][ Is Bush Eyeing The Draft? | Feds Plan ‘Test’ Of Military Draft ][ Bush’s ‘Global War On Radicals’ | Defiant Iranian President Mocks Bush ][ Bush’s Worst Lies Of 2006 | The US Is Dead Broke ][ The Christmas Truce - When Men Said No To War | Reject The War ][ Orwell Was Right - Spy Cams Watch Brits’ Every Move ][ Head-Butt By Horse Restores Man’s Sight ] […]
December 31st, 2006 at 9:28 amDepartment of defense officials disclose to Bush their strategy for inflicting more damage to the terrorist movement:
“Sir we have been considering the advantage of bringing in more troops but the problem is that the military is too far stretched at this point.â€
Bush replies: “Well ok I’m with ya and I’m 100 percent behind you on this how about I increase your budget and we up the recruiting goal?â€
Generals reply: Great then that seems like the best approach at this time then.
Walking bag of crap liberal henchman at the Pentagon sneaks out the door runs to MSNBC leaking classified information like a stuck pig. Frantically flailing his arms he screams “Bush is bribing the DOD!”
Stupid idiot prosecutor Fitzgerald does not seem to notice that this is a leak of classified information that needs to be investigated.
Brian Williams puts on his “I’m so very concerned about this looks like someone got caught with their hand in the cookie jar” face and then proceeds to disseminate propaganda out of his mouth like that Blair chick in “The Exorcist” spewed vomit passes it successfully off as news rather than what it is.
ThinkProgress.org does what they perceive to be their part and forwards the propaganda filth along.
You all should be so very proud.
January 1st, 2007 at 3:42 pm[…] U.S. Military Officials: Bush Trying To Bribe Us To Support Iraq Escalation Military commanders have called an escalation a disastrous move. Some call it, “like throwing Kerosene on a fire.” http://thinkprogress.org/ 2006/ 12/ 21/ troops-iraq-kerosene/ […]
January 8th, 2007 at 9:09 pmNow that nearly everything the army does has been outsourced to profit-seeking corporations, it hardly matters whether we are losing - much of the excessive profits return to politicians as campaign contributions to fund ads like those that portrayed Kerry as a flip-flopper or fund “independent” efforts like the Swift Boaters, and decent politicians lose elections. Until we have public financing of Congressional campaigns, money will defeat truth. The military-industrial complex was hard enough to challenge before; now that it is peeling the potatoes and doing the laundry, it is practically impossible. We all need to work for public campaign finance. Pelosi’s priority list sounds great, but public financing of Congressioinal campaigns did not seem to be on it.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:26 pmAs for not supporting the troops, Congress can set a reasonable deadline which allows enough time for an orderly withdrawal. After that, there would be no more funds. If Bush ignores the deadline, it would be Bush who is not supporting our troops.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:10 am
[…] Sources 1. “Bush Facing Deep Divide Over More Troops for Iraq,” The New York Times. Jan. 6, 2007. [Link] 2. NBC Nightly News, Dec. 21, 2006. [Link] 3. Testimony of Gen. John Abizaid in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee. November 15, 2006. 4. Letter to President Bush from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Jan. 5, 2007. [Link] 5. “A ‘Surge’ Faces Trouble In the Senate” The Washington Post. Jan. 1, 2007. [Link] 6. CNN Poll by Opinion Research Corporation. Dec. 15-17, 2006. N=1,019 adults nationwide. MoE +/- 3. [Link] 7. CBS News Poll. Jan 1-3, 2007. N=993 adults nationwide. MoE +/- 3 (for all adults) [Link] […]
January 10th, 2007 at 2:57 am