Tomorrow's Talking Points Today

Get your GOP Bush Iraq speech talking points right here. These are from the House Armed Services Committee and these come from the House Republican Conference. Suffice it to say that the general plan seems to be to attack attacks on the idea of escalation without defending escalation as such. Call it the Zengerle/Klein strategy.

1/10/07 3:08PM del.icio.us this incoming links

Comments

The smarmy Adam Putnam memo is the better read of the two. It starts by saying that Democrats and Republicans need to work together, blah blah blah. It ends with a reference to the non-adjectival "Democrat plan," an attack on the Democrats for interjecting partisanship into foreign policy, and an attempt to drive a wedge between Pelosi and Hoyer. These guys sure know the meaning of working together, huh?

Posted by: Steve on January 10, 2007 03:17 PM

anent "Democrat plan"

Just because you're encouraging togetherness doesn't mean you can't be smarmy, insulting, and disingenuous.

Posted by: Jeffrey Davis on January 10, 2007 03:38 PM

"Success is the only option in Iraq" has to be one of the most inane talking points Evar. One cannot just choose success and the decree it as the only option. Every time I hear this BS rolled out, I am reminded of terrible half-time speeches filled with meaningless platitudes. It is scary that that is the guiding principle of American foreign policy according to Republicans.

Posted by: socratic_me on January 10, 2007 04:07 PM

Nit:

The House Committee person who put this together seems to have a 2006 vs. 2007 glitch going on.

Posted by: do on January 10, 2007 04:10 PM

That somehow the Success/Failure dichotomy has been monopolized by the question of whether we choose to withdraw is one of the frustrating aspects of this national discussion. It refuses to accept that our current decision is hemmed-in by the previous failures (the failed decision to go to war, the failure to prosecute the war). People shouldn't be trying to make those mistakes a "success" and should stop telling us we have to "succeed". Of course withdraw is a failure, if you refuse to look at it from the perspective of 2007, and instead look at it as if it were 2003.

The question of the day is will we succeed in making the right decision, given the reality of what has already past. Because we choose now to withdraw from Iraq, faced with exceedingly poor alternative options, is not a "failure". It's a successful mitigation of a previous failure's consequence. The real "failure" is deciding in 2007 to not cut our losses because we don't want to "fail" 2003's goals. Nor is it success if we spend 2007-2008 sending more troops on the same mission, to see little or no improvement.

Failure is an ACT, not an outcome. People don't think Gerald Ford "lost Vietnam" because he oversaw withdraw. They think Nixon and Johnson lost it, because (a) they kept on fighting it and (b) their decision to keep on fighting turned out not to have worked. Either you come up with a REAL plan to win NOW or you make your plan about how to deal with withdaw.

Posted by: arcbender on January 10, 2007 05:07 PM

The Iraq 'surge' is a diversion. As the army attacks Iraq, the US gov't erodes rights at home by suspending habeas corpus, stealing private lands, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, rigging elections, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies. Soon, another US false-flag operation will occur (sinking of an Aircraft Carrier) and the US will invade Iran, (on behalf of Israel).
Final link (before Google Books bends to gov't demands and censors the title):
America Deceived (book)

Posted by: Ben F on January 10, 2007 05:56 PM

Re: the talking points memo:

1. "During their November 30, 2007, meeting in Jordan, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki provided President Bush with a detailed Iraqi plan for transitioning security responsibility to Iraqi forces in 2007." Which, for some reason, we have NEVER HEARD ABOUT until it became politically convenient for GWB to present his latest half-assed ideas as an Iraqi initiative. "Nouri, I'm planning to announce tomorrow that we're building my presidential library in Tal Afar. Can you backdate a memo saying the Iraqi government has requested it? Thanks pal."

2. "President Bush told Prime Minister Maliki that he must make two strong commitments before the United States would commit to this plan: o To treat perpetrators of sectarian violence—whether Sunni or Shi’a—equally". Yah. And the GOP is gonna make a strong commitment to stop showing favoritism to oil-company interests. Uh huh.

3. "Saddam Hussein’s former military personnel will be given a choice between serving with the Iraqi Security Forces and accepting a pension." Sorry - did I miss something? Is it still June, 2003? Did the last 3.5 years actually take place? Because if they did, then somehow offering jobs in the ISF, or pensions, to former Iraqi Army personnel who have spent the last 3 years KILLING US TROOPS just doesn't seem like a realistic proposal.

4. "New oil legislation will break the government’s monopoly on fuel imports, allowing the refined fuel market to grow, relieve subsidies’ cost to the Iraqi Government, and decrease fuel shortages." It's just possible that this is not actually a giveaway to US oil companies, and is instead a real practical measure that might help relieve fuel shortages. Possible - though after what we've seen of the disgusting cronyism and corruption in the US's Iraq effort, not likely. In either case, though, why on earth do we think the Iraqi government is going to cooperate with us on reducing their own power, patronage, and opportunities for graft and income? Typical stupid GOP approach: "Hey, foreigner, here are some measures we've decided you should adopt because they're good for our interests in your country, and because we've decided in our think tanks that they're good for you too in the long run! Unfortunately they require you to give up all your money in the short run, but in the long run you'll be better off, we promise. Now, get to it! What do you mean, you don't trust us? What on earth has made you feel we're not trustworthy?"...

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 10, 2007 09:18 PM

sohbet
chat sohbet
mynet sohbet
kızlarla sohbet
sohbet siteleri
islami sohbet
sesli sohbet
kameralı sohbet
sohbet odaları
sohbet net
kelebek sohbet
alem sohbet
canlı sohbet
bedava sohbet
dini sohbet
ideal sohbet
erotik sohbet
internet sohbet
almanya sohbet
bol sohbet
yazgülü sohbet
seks sohbet
isvec sohbet
sohbet odasi
chat sohbet muhabbet
chat mynet sohbet
almanya sohbet chat
zurna sohbet
sex sohbet
canli sohbet
cet kelebek sohbet
sohbet com
ingilizce sohbet
gay sohbet
cinsel sohbet
mynet odalari sohbet
35 sevgi sohbet
sohbet gen tr
kahkaha sohbet
istanbul sohbet
odasi sohbet turk
chat.tc sohbet
sevgi sohbet
yonca sohbet
makas sohbet
cinsellik sohbet
kraltv sohbet
turkce sohbet
ara sohbet
chat cinsellik sohbet
lesbian sohbet
sohbet cet
chat muhabbet sex sohbet
sohbet et
hotmail.com sohbet
keriz sohbet
izmir sohbet
sohbet sohbet
cam sohbet
islam sohbet
sohbet tr zurna
bayan msn sohbet
sohbet sohbet.com
seviyeli sohbet
sohbet sitesi
yazili sohbet
sohbet ankara
kardelen sohbet
konya sohbet
7 islami kanal sohbet
web cam sohbet
java sohbet