This particular talking point wasn't mentioned specifically in the article, but I keep hearing it on the radio and it's making me crazy.

"Congress wants to micro-manage the war effort."

Why doesn't anyone ever call them on this? Micro-managing means interfering in all the little minute details of a plan. "Pulling the troops out of Iraq" is a management decision all the way at the macro end of the scale.

I dunno, I just hate to hear words being used to mean the opposite of what they mean. It's so... Orwellian.

So, what's the best possible outcome you can see in Iraq from this point forward?

he has no concern about political consequences. He is a lame duck. In his reality bubble he's not up for relection so, he can ignore the will of the people. He is fond of saying he is the "decider" and he doesn't not make policy based on opinion polls. He makes his own reality, then initiates a marketing campaign to make sure "the murican people fully unnerstan."

I say pass the appropriations bill with a firm deadline for troop withdrawals, let Bush veto it, then shine a right light on Republican members of congress who refuse to vote to overide. After all, they do have concern about political consequences.

Back when I was teenager the local courts would sometimes *sentence* petty violent crimals to the marines. What a bunch of anti-social dumbshits.

doesn't make policy based on opinion polls.

"I dare Reid and Grieve to go speak to this Marine face to face, man to man (okay, maybe not that last part), and tell him the war is lost."

... from some jackass who doesn't attach a name on an internet post.

Your hypocrisy runs deep, share it with us.

(10 points to the person who names the crappy movie I paraphrased that last line from. Unless it's our friend Anonymous.)

You cite a report in the New York Post (a wonderful publication, by the way) about a web site posting what it alleges to be an e-mail from one marine ranting about Reid, and that's your argument? Please. I'm sure if I tried I could locate a comparatively anti-war posting somewhere, but I don't need to. I'm sorry, but one Marine's opinion doesn't mean squat.

And as far as your use of the word "chickenshit": Calling people chickenshit is what kids do to get other kids to do stuff that they shouldn't do. It seems like some of you haven't changed tactics since the 8th grade. Grow up, please.

then why haven't they won the war already? Mr. Cheney promised us victory within months, its been 4 years. If anyone is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, its the USMC by doing such a poor job.

28 years air force (including 3 years where I was medical support for a marine recon unit in alaska) and I quit short of 30 because I couldn't stand my bosses in washington.

Nobody fighting overseas wants to think they are risking their lives for a lost cause. But in this case they are. This hideously planned and executed war was lost before the first tank rolled over the border.

The Army, Air Force and Marines won the Battle of Iraq 4 years ago. Bush lost the war of Iraqi stability pretty much at the same time and has been getting your brothers killed by the hundreds since then because he doesn't want to believe it's so.

Here you go

http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/georgie.htm

It is true that Bush has brought about changes to Iraq. What

is important however is this. Who wants this sort of change

made? Infrastructure destroyed. People leaving the nation to

save their lives. Such horrors brought to Iraq by Bush should

never befall any human being. It is bringing shame to all

citizens of the United States the type of change Bush has

caused in Iraq. Shame on him. Taking a nation that had a

brutal dictator and changing it to a nation broken into pieces

with a brutal occupation force. Are the Iraqi people really

better off with Bush's change?

Back when I was teenager the local courts would sometimes *sentence* petty violent crimals to the marines. What a bunch of anti-social dumbshits.

-- Doctor Gnu

This is an urban legend. The military wouldn't take someone with a conviction for a violent offense.

And what, precisely, is a"petty violent criminal"? Sounds like you're just blowing smoke out your ass.

Not a myth. It was a guy in my senior class who got in one too many fights (long time ago). Marines thrive on self-mythology and hope no one busts them on it.

It is official. Bush is mentally ill. He is suffering from serious delusions. It is now time to call the men in the white coats to take him away to an institution where he won't be able to be a danger to others any longer. This is truly the reign of Mad King George.

of course the military is taking those with criminal records now because they are stretched too thin.

(drug addicts with guns in poppyland Afganistan ? real smart. more military come back as drunks and addicts anyway , might as well send them that way right?)

US military recruits more felons

The US army says it will recruit quality young men and women

The number of people with criminal records in the United States military has doubled in the past three years, according to a new study.

The report comes at the same time as the US armed forces is facing a decline in the number of volunteers wishing to enlist in the armed forces.

It says 824 felons were allowed to sign up in 2004 as opposed to 1,605 in 2006 under the moral waivers scheme.

Almost 59,000 drug abusers entered the military in the same period.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6361281.stm

Not to forget that according to our own reports - since his illegal lying wasting human life of a war began in Iraq - Bush has INCREASED the amount of terrorists worldwide. He's made more than existed pre 911. ( and iraq had nothing to do with it)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel24sep24,0,2161892.story?coll=la-home-headlines

If condumbs really supported the troops why all the cuts to vet benifits since bush slimed his way into office ?

FROM THE MILITARY TIMES -

Down on the war

Poll: More troops unhappy with Bush’s course in Iraq

By Robert Hodierne

Senior managing editor

The American military — once a staunch supporter of President Bush and the Iraq war — has grown in creasingly pessimistic about chances for victory.

For the first time, more troops disapprove of the president’s han dling of the war than approve of it. Barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, ac cording to the 2006 Military Times Poll.

When the military was feeling most optimistic about the war — in 2004 — 83 percent of poll re spondents thought success in Iraq was likely. This year, that number has shrunk to 50 percent.

Only 35 percent of the military members polled this year said they approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, while 42 percent said they disapproved. The president’s approval rating among the military is only slight ly higher than for the population as a whole. In 2004, when his popularity peaked, 63 percent of the military approved of Bush’s handling of the war. While ap proval of the president’s war lead ership has slumped, his overall approval remains high among the military

Just as telling, in this year’s poll only 41 percent of the military said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects the beliefs of the general population today — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll.