• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Murtha Using "Michael Moore" Politics?

KCConservative said:
This is what Dan does, Sarg. Five or six Bush bashing threads each day. Political jealousy is an ugly thing.
Thanks for the color commentary. It reminds me of you and your persistent explorations of your personal feelings for dana.

GySgt said:
Since being drubbed at the voting booths since the mid Clinton years, Democrats have been on a crusade to destroy the credibility of anyone around them.
Last I checked dana's not a Dem. Try a different stereotype.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Thanks for the color commentary. It reminds me of you and your persistent explorations of your personal feelings for dana.

Last I checked dana's not a Dem. Try a different stereotype.

So? Doesn't change what I said about Dems.

Funny thing about stereotypes - they usually fit.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Perhaps he just changed his mind. Maybe he bought the theory and the rationale but then grew discouraged at the slipshod implementation.
I think that's really the whole story.
 
Re: Murtha calls for withdrawal

Stu Ghatze said:
So did Bill Clinton, ..but breaking bread with soviet representatives, & learning all about soviet "good will" when a young college student in his grooming of socialistic causes usually does escape the memory of most democrats when its convenient !;)

Yea...Billy enjoyed, & appreciated his deferrment as much as CHeney, ..or anybody else did.

But Cheney, chicken-hawk that he is, told a reporter in 1989, "I had other priorities in the '60s other than military service,".
I remember everything about Clinton. How could it be otherwise, when the rep/cons want to compare everything Bush does to how Clinton did things. Some sort of "penis envy"?
Cheney was and is a coward. Much like his boss.
 
Re: An Iraqi View of Murtha's Statement

aps said:
Murtha is a combat Vietnam veteran. Somehow I think he may have a better understanding of what our troops need than some Iraqi, who I doubt has engaged in war before. Even if he did, why would the Iraqis want us to leave? Their soldiers aren't making the effort to learn how to defend their own country, so why not have the US troops do it at OUR expense.

How true. And while I agree with what Murtha is trying to accomplish, we invaded that country based on our President's lie and we just can't pull out and leave those people to their fate, it would not be fair to them or us.

I hope every American tries to use their brains, for a change, in the next election.
 
Re: An Iraqi View of Murtha's Statement

Old and wise said:
How true. And while I agree with what Murtha is trying to accomplish, we invaded that country based on our President's lie and we just can't pull out and leave those people to their fate, it would not be fair to them or us.

I hope every American tries to use their brains, for a change, in the next election.

Old and wise, Murtha clarified in his statement that he wanted to bring them home in 6 months.
 
A firestorm served with hor d'oevres from the right when Sen. Durbin equates the US military of acting in the ways of Nazis & Pol Pot...

A firestorm served with hor d'oevres from the left when Scott McClellan equates HR Murtha of acting in the ways of....Michael Moore?!?!...:roll:
 
John Murtha's commentary on Iraq.

I have great respect and the utmost confidence in this man and his knowledge and understanding of military matters. I am going to read this carfully several times before making any comment but here it is for the rest of you to mull over. Be careful of hidden land mines.

Honorable John P. Murtha
War in Iraq
(Washington D.C.)- The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public is way ahead of us. The United States and coalition troops have done all they can in Iraq, but it is time for a change in direction. Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We can not continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf Region.
General Casey said in a September 2005 Hearing, “the perception of occupation in Iraq is a major driving force behind the insurgency.” General Abizaid said on the same date, “Reducing the size and visibility of the coalition forces in Iraq is a part of our counterinsurgency strategy.”
For 2 ½ years I have been concerned about the U.S. policy and the plan in Iraq. I have addressed my concerns with the Administration and the Pentagon and have spoken out in public about my concerns. The main reason for going to war has been discredited. A few days before the start of the war I was in Kuwait – the military drew a red line around Baghdad and said when U.S. forces cross that line they will be attacked by the Iraqis with Weapons of Mass Destruction – but the US forces said they were prepared. They had well trained forces with the appropriate protective gear.
We spend more money on Intelligence than all the countries in the world together, and more on Intelligence than most countries GDP. But the intelligence concerning Iraq was wrong. It is not a world intelligence failure. It is a U.S. intelligence failure and the way that intelligence was misused.
I have been visiting our wounded troops at Bethesda and Walter Reed hospitals almost every week since the beginning of the War. And what demoralizes them is going to war with not enough troops and equipment to make the transition to peace; the devastation caused by IEDs; being deployed to Iraq when their homes have been ravaged by hurricanes; being on their second or third deployment and leaving their families behind without a network of support.
The threat posed by terrorism is real, but we have other threats that cannot be ignored. We must be prepared to face all threats. The future of our military is at risk. Our military and their families are stretched thin. Many say that the Army is broken. Some of our troops are on their third deployment. Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards. Defense budgets are being cut. Personnel costs are skyrocketing, particularly in health care. Choices will have to be made. We can not allow promises we have made to our military families in terms of service benefits, in terms of their health care, to be negotiated away. Procurement programs that ensure our military dominance cannot be negotiated away. We must be prepared. The war in Iraq has caused huge shortfalls at our bases in the U.S.
Much of our ground equipment is worn out and in need of either serious overhaul or replacement. George Washington said, “To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.” We must rebuild our Army. Our deficit is growing out of control. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office recently admitted to being “terrified” about the budget deficit in the coming decades. This is the first prolonged war we have fought with three years of tax cuts, without full mobilization of American industry and without a draft. The burden of this war has not been shared equally; the military and their families are shouldering this burden.
Our military has been fighting a war in Iraq for over two and a half years. Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty. Our military captured Saddam Hussein, and captured or killed his closest associates. But the war continues to intensify. Deaths and injuries are growing, with over 2,079 confirmed American deaths. Over 15,500 have been seriously injured and it is estimated that over 50,000 will suffer from battle fatigue. There have been reports of at least 30,000 Iraqi civilian deaths.
I just recently visited Anbar Province Iraq in order to assess the conditions on the ground. Last May 2005, as part of the Emergency Supplemental Spending Bill, the House included the Moran Amendment, which was accepted in Conference, and which required the Secretary of Defense to submit quarterly reports to Congress in order to more accurately measure stability and security in Iraq. We have now received two reports. I am disturbed by the findings in key indicator areas. Oil production and energy production are below pre-war levels. Our reconstruction efforts have been crippled by the security situation. Only $9 billion of the $18 billion appropriated for reconstruction has been spent. Unemployment remains at about 60 percent. Clean water is scarce. Only $500 million of the $2.2 billion appropriated for water projects has been spent. And most importantly, insurgent incidents have increased from about 150 per week to over 700 in the last year. Instead of attacks going down over time and with the addition of more troops, attacks have grown dramatically. Since the revelations at Abu Ghraib, American casualties have doubled. An annual State Department report in 2004 indicated a sharp increase in global terrorism.
I said over a year ago, and now the military and the Administration agrees, Iraq can not be won “militarily.” I said two years ago, the key to progress in Iraq is to Iraqitize, Internationalize and Energize. I believe the same today. But I have concluded that the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq is impeding this progress.
Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence. U.S. troops are the common enemy of the Sunnis, Saddamists and foreign jihadists. I believe with a U.S. troop redeployment, the Iraqi security forces will be incentivized to take control. A poll recently conducted shows that over 80% of Iraqis are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops, and about 45% of the Iraqi population believe attacks against American troops are justified. I believe we need to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis.
I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy. All of Iraq must know that Iraq is free. Free from United States occupation. I believe this will send a signal to the Sunnis to join the political process for the good of a “free” Iraq.
My plan calls:
To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
To create a quick reaction force in the region.
To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines.
To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq
This war needs to be personalized. As I said before I have visited with the severely wounded of this war. They are suffering.

Because we in Congress are charged with sending our sons and daughters into battle, it is our responsibility, our OBLIGATION to speak out for them. That’s why I am speaking out.
Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the U.S. can not accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. IT IS TIME TO BRING THEM HOME.
(####)
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/pres...apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/pr051117iraq.html
 
[Moderator mode]

Merged the threads "An Iraqi View of Murtha's Statement" & "John Murtha's Commentary on Iraq" into this one...same topic...

[/Moderator mode]
 
I never even heard of John Murtha prior to his fiasco. And that's sad, being as he represents Pennsylvania.:2razz:
 
kal-el said:
I never even heard of John Murtha prior to his fiasco. And that's sad, being as he represents Pennsylvania.:2razz:

LOL, kal-el. Me too! I really admire him based upon what I have learned about him.

cnredd, the attacks on Murtha were down-right cruel and mean. Watching what happened in the House yesterday disgusted me. They misrepresented Murtha's statements (saying he wanted the troops to be removed RIGHT NOW) and trashed his character. That is stunning to me, and it tells me how low the republicans will stoop to attack someone who has hurt their cause.

It is pathetic.
 
aps said:
LOL, kal-el. Me too! I really admire him based upon what I have learned about him.

cnredd, the attacks on Murtha were down-right cruel and mean. Watching what happened in the House yesterday disgusted me. They misrepresented Murtha's statements (saying he wanted the troops to be removed RIGHT NOW) and trashed his character. That is stunning to me, and it tells me how low the republicans will stoop to attack someone who has hurt their cause.

It is pathetic.
Agreed but not agreed...

Is this how low the Republicans will stoop to?...

Or is this how low a couple of Republicans will stoop to so you can bundle them all up into a tight little bow and group them all together?...:roll:

Durbin's speech on military's comparison to Nazis=All Liberals...stupid...

Have I made my point clear?...
 
cnredd said:
Agreed but not agreed...

Is this how low the Republicans will stoop to?...

Or is this how low a couple of Republicans will stoop to so you can bundle them all up into a tight little bow and group them all together?...:roll:

Durbin's speech on military's comparison to Nazis=All Liberals...stupid...

Have I made my point clear?...
I don't recall that Durbin ever called the military to nazis. He said Americas treatment of detainees resembled that of the nazis.
 
scottyz said:
I don't recall that Durbin ever called the military to nazis. He said Americas treatment of detainees resembled that of the nazis.

Congratulations scotty... you have caught a perfecrt example of revisionist history in the act.
 
Paladin said:
Murtha AP



I especially like the part I highlighted. I don't think much of Cheney because he "had better things to do" rather than serve in Vietnam.
ted
Representative Murtha has a long history of military and government service. Therefore, he has enough experience to know that there is no way that this President would pull our troops out within 6 months. It's not logical or reasonable to try to do that while an army of terrorist are trying to blow up our soldiers and vehicles and are hell-bent on attacking the new democratic government of Iraq before they can defend themselves. He also knows that those military commanders on the ground in Iraq are committed to the goals set before them (as I imagine he was to the goals set before him): mainly, fighting the terrorists who have invited them selves into Iraq to destabalize the region, defending and supporting the transition to democracy, and training and equipping the Iraqi military.
No honorable marine, sailor, airman, or soldier would choose to leave while these important tasks are still at hand. Congressman Murtha knows that because of the current nature of affairs in Iraq, and because of the firm conviction and steady committment of this President, he will not pull our troops out before these goals are met. Because of Congressman Murtha's government experience, he also knows that because his words will not move the President on Iraq war policy, he has free reign to use his rhetoric for political gain. He knows he can say anything about this war - including the irresponsible and irrational call for immediate widthdrawal - to earn political brownie points for these bold statements in his PA voting district and from his side of the aisle in the House of Representatives. Like the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate, he is up for reelection next year. This is why I am convinced that his motivation for such statements is not to urge or guide military policy, it's to take advantage of public opinion at home. That's what makes it irresponsible. Those troops who remain committed to success in Iraq do not want to be hearing calls for immediate widthdrawal. They don't want to keep hearing that their country and their elected representatives don't remain steadfast in support of what they voted for in 2003. Any congressman who voted to give the president the authority to use force in Iraq - votes which are complicit in sending these soldier to Iraq - who doesn't remain committed to that vote is a plain hypocrite. I would even venture to say that Congressmen who use this political atmosphere at home to their advantage while young men fight and die in a war they voted for is also a traitor; traitor to his principles (if indeed his or her vote was guided by principle) and traitor to this great nation.
 
kal-el said:
I never even heard of John Murtha prior to his fiasco. And that's sad, being as he represents Pennsylvania.:2razz:

If you've never heard of Murtha then you haven't been paying attention. He represents the views of about 60% of America these days. Why would you call that a fiasco? I loved his line about Chickenhawk Cheney sending our troops to war, when Cheney got 5 deferments himself. Using Swift Boat Veteran tactics against Murtha is backfiring. Playing the Bush campaign stump speeches over again isn't going to get it done either my friends.

The White House seem to be out of ideas. All they can do is attack,attack,attack. Clearly, Rove is off his game these days.
 
cnredd said:
If you look closely, you can see Nancy Pelosi right behind him pulling on some strings when his mouth was moving...

This comment from the article tells me all I need to know...

"I like guys who've never been there who criticize us who've been there," Murtha said. "I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and sent people to war and then don't like to hear suggestions that what may need to be done."

Either Cheney DIDN'T listen three years ago when Murtha voted for the war and Murtha kept his mouth shut...or Murtha DID have something to say three years ago when he voted for the war and Cheney's WAS listening then...but not now...Maybe Cheney listened to him, then listened to other miltary people and drew his own conclusions...That's how people do things, ya know...

That's either whining because Cheney disagrees with him NOW because he's listening to others...or somebody's telling him what to say in order to pose a bigger front...

Wonder how Murtha would feel if the DNC or the Democratic House leaders cut him off from campaign or district funding...

Why is so hard for you to believe what sounded like a good idea then, is a disaster now?

Murtha's big point is that the troops presence in Iraq is the major cause of bloodshed. 80% of Iraqis want us GONE.

Have you never changed your mind on anything since birth?

Why is it so hard for the president to admit a mistake?

Chickenhawk Cheney's approval is at 19% and very few Americans are buying his gloom and doom anymore.

Go ahead and "Swift Boat" Murtha, a war veteran and longtime civil servant. I would expect little else these days.
 
Inuyasha said:
Congratulations scotty... you have caught a perfecrt example of revisionist history in the act.
Show me a quote of him saying "the military is made up of nazis". When Repubs can't fight back with facts they resort to accusing the opposition of insulting or undermining the troops. This has been the Bush policy since this war began.... You don't agree with Bush! omigod u must hate the troops and want them to die.... :roll:
 
scottyz said:
Show me a quote of him saying "the military is made up of nazis". When Repubs can't fight back with facts they resort to accusing the opposition of insulting or undermining the troops. This has been the Bush policy since this war began.... You don't agree with Bush! omigod u must hate the troops and want them to die.... :roll:

No Scotty I am AGREEING with you. Durbin never said "the military is made up of nazis". What i meant is that when you caught that statement you caught a revisionist red handed.
 
scottyz said:
I don't recall that Durbin ever called the military to nazis. He said Americas treatment of detainees resembled that of the nazis.
Inuyasha said:
Congratulations scotty... you have caught a perfecrt example of revisionist history in the act.
revisionist?...

Read again...I said "comparison"...scootyz said "resembled"...

There's no jump to make...

I recommend you contact the mainstream media and demand retractions to their "revisionist" history...:roll:

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/21/AR2005062101654.html

BTW - Either of you did not address the thrust of the comment...To equate certain Republicans "stooping so low" with ALL Republicans would be as stupid as equating Durbin's comment to ALL Democrats...

red-handed...:rofl :rofl :rofl
 
Want another source to prove you're trying to look too deep?

How about ME!

From YESTERDAY on this thread...

cnredd said:
A firestorm served with hor d'oevres from the right when Sen. Durbin equates the US military of acting in the ways of Nazis & Pol Pot...

A firestorm served with hor d'oevres from the left when Scott McClellan equates HR Murtha of acting in the ways of....Michael Moore?!?!...:roll:
Didn't say he called them Nazis..."acting in the ways"...

Read a little sometime...something might sink in...:2wave:
 
scottyz said:
Show me a quote of him saying "the military is made up of nazis". When Repubs can't fight back with facts they resort to accusing the opposition of insulting or undermining the troops. This has been the Bush policy since this war began.... You don't agree with Bush! omigod u must hate the troops and want them to die.... :roll:

cnredd said:
BTW - Either of you did not address the thrust of the comment...To equate certain Republicans "stooping so low" with ALL Republicans would be as stupid as equating Durbin's comment to ALL Democrats...

Now I KNOW why scottyz didn't address this...apparently, grouping everyone together to make a derogatory broad-brush generalization is his forte...:roll:

C'mon Mr. Inuyasha...you seem to be a reasonable person...maybe YOU would agree to my comment?...It seems like the other person referenced can't...
 
cnredd said:
revisionist?...

Read again...I said "comparison"...scootyz said "resembled"...

There's no jump to make...

I recommend you contact the mainstream media and demand retractions to their "revisionist" history...:roll:

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/21/AR2005062101654.html

BTW - Either of you did not address the thrust of the comment...To equate certain Republicans "stooping so low" with ALL Republicans would be as stupid as equating Durbin's comment to ALL Democrats...

red-handed...:rofl :rofl :rofl
What he actually said was this:
"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control," he said, "you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

I don't see the word troops or military in there. This is an attack on American policy towards the detainees. You make a broad brush generalization that any attack on Bushs policies are attacks on the military.
 
scottyz said:
What he actually said was this:
"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control," he said, "you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings."

I don't see the word troops or military in there. This is an attack on American policy towards the detainees. You make a broad brush generalization that any attack on Bushs policies are attacks on the military.
No,no,no,no,NO!!!

Read...the...f'in...paragraph....from...the...article....I...sourced...in Post #45...

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.

TROOPS!...again...TROOPS!!!!!

Durbin's OWN WORDS!!!(same article)...

Durbin said his biggest concern is the perception of troops serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. His voiced quavered when he said in his floor speech yesterday, "When you look at the eyes of the soldiers, you see your son and daughter. I never, never intended any disrespect for them."

Now why would someone apologize and say he "never intended any disrespect them" when, according to you, he wasn't even talking about them in the first place?!?!?

Because HE WAS!

Your defending someone who disagrees with you...The ultimate is partisan hackery...:roll:

What's next?...Clinton didn't lie?...Kennedy wasn't in Chappaquiddick that night?...
 
cnredd said:
No,no,no,no,NO!!!

Read...the...f'in...paragraph....from...the...article....I...sourced...in Post #45...

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.

TROOPS!...again...TROOPS!!!!!

Durbin's OWN WORDS!!!(same article)...

Durbin said his biggest concern is the perception of troops serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. His voiced quavered when he said in his floor speech yesterday, "When you look at the eyes of the soldiers, you see your son and daughter. I never, never intended any disrespect for them."

Now why would someone apologize and say he "never intended any disrespect them" when, according to you, he wasn't even talking about them in the first place?!?!?

Because HE WAS!

Your defending someone who disagrees with you...The ultimate is partisan hackery...:roll:

What's next?...Clinton didn't lie?...Kennedy wasn't in Chappaquiddick that night?...
I don't see any quote of his in the article.
 
Back
Top Bottom