Bob Brozman
Subtropical Stomp

The escalation tag team have their heads so far up each other’s butts……..are we looking at a McCain/Lieberman ticket in 08? They spoke on Iraq at an AEI event. Lieberman must have fit right in at a conservative “think tank” event.

McCain:
Contrary to popular notions that U.S. troops are getting, quote, “caught in the crossfire between Sunni and Shia fighters,” and are therefore ineffective in ceasing the smoldering civil war, the track record is that when U.S. troops in stopping sectarian violence is excellent, where American soldiers have deployed to areas in turmoil, including Baghdad neighborhoods, the violence has ceased almost immediately.

We will need a large number of troops. During our recent trip commanders on the ground spoke of a surge of three to five additional brigades in Baghdad and at least an additional brigade in Anbar province.

44 U.S. deaths in Anbar in December. So if it’s not Al Qaida, then our troops are caught in the crossfires of a civil war. I can’t believe this guy is a vet, let alone a prisoner of war. He is so friggin shameful it’s not even funny.

From Lieberman:

And he’s not taking the easy way out here. But he’s taking the way that he believes is best for the safety of our children and grandchildren and the values and the way of life that Americans come to represent.

And it is what makes John McCain an extraordinary national leader and why I’m proud to call him my colleague and my friend.

Let me offer, from the perspective of the trip John McCain and I and some colleagues made to the Middle East, four points. A couple of them, I can be brief because, not surprisingly, Senator McCain and I agree absolutely.

I think the first point I want to make is that we err and we do our national security a disservice if we focus on the war in Iraq separately.

It is — it, of course, has a life of its own. But we have got to see it in the broader context of the war against Islamist extremism and terrorism.

And we could feel it and hear it and see it in our trip to the Middle East.

Uh huh….. I see a McCain/Lieberman ticket coming.

Full transcript at the Washington Post

From the Huffington Post:

When we asked about the likelihood of the president sending additional troops to Iraq, Murtha was adamant. “The only way you can have a troop surge,” he told us, “is to extend the tours of people whose tours have already been extended, or to send back people who have just gotten back home.” He explained at length how our military forces are already stretched to the breaking point, with our strategic reserve so depleted we are unprepared to face any additional threats to the country. So does that mean there will be no surge? Murtha offered us a “with Bush anything is possible” look, then said: “Money is the only way we can stop it for sure.”

To this end, Murtha, the incoming Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, is planning to hold wide-ranging hearings, starting January 17th, that will focus on the depleted state of our military readiness , as well as contractor corruption in Iraq and Afghanistan. The goal is to turn the spotlight on how drained the military has become, and on how any talk of a troop surge is utterly irresponsible (as well as strategically misguided). “The public,” he said repeatedly, “is already ahead of us on all this.

He says he wants to “fence the funding,” denying the president the resources to escalate the war, instead using the money to take care of the soldiers as we bring them home from Iraq “as soon as we can.”

Oh I can hardly wait for these hearings. Marking on calendar: January 17th, Murtha kicks ass.

Israel, which as a nation does not celebrate the Gregorian New Year, nonetheless woke up on January 1 to learn that their little country is set to be more than ever at the center of world scrutiny and pressure in 2007.

In an interview published concomitant with his assumption of office on the first day of the year, brand new United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon revealed that he, like British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the majority of world leaders, saw solving the Israel-A-Palestine- conflict as key to sorting out the rest of the mess in the Middle East.

This does not necessarily mean Ban believes Israel per se is to blame- Israelis have expressed the hope that he would be friendly towards their country.

It strongly suggests, however, that under his leadership the international community which is pushing so hard to see Israel surrender its land to the Arabs will continue - and very likely intensify - that push; and all the more as an appeasement-inclined West becomes desperate to defuse the Iranian nuclear standoff.

“If the issues with the conflicts between Israel and Palestine go well, [resolutions of] other issues in the Middle East, including Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Syria, are likely to follow suit. I will meet with the concerned parties as soon as possible,” Ban told the South Korean Hankyoreh.

Read more here

President George W. Bush
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

The start of the new Congress brings us opportunities to work together on the critical issues confronting our country. No issue is more important than finding an end to the war in Iraq. December was the deadliest month of the war in over two years, pushing U.S. fatality figures over the 3,000 mark.

The American people demonstrated in the November elections that they do not believe your current Iraq policy will lead to success and that we need a change in direction for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people. We understand that you are completing your post-election consultations on Iraq and are preparing to make a major address on your Iraq strategy to the American people next week.

Clearly this address presents you with another opportunity to make a long overdue course correction. Despite the fact that our troops have been pushed to the breaking point and, in many cases, have already served multiple tours in Iraq, news reports suggest that you believe the solution to the civil war in Iraq is to require additional sacrifices from our troops and are therefore prepared to proceed with a substantial U.S. troop increase.

Surging forces is a strategy that you have already tried and that has already failed. Like many current and former military leaders, we believe that trying again would be a serious mistake. They, like us, believe there is no purely military solution in Iraq. There is only a political solution. Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain. And it would undermine our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq.

In a recent appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, General John Abizaid, our top commander for Iraq and the region, said the following when asked about whether he thought more troops would contribute to our chances for success in Iraq:

“I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey. We all talked together. And I said, in your professional opinion, if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no. And the reason is, because we want the Iraqis to do more. It’s easy for the Iraqis to rely upon to us do this work. I believe that more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future. ”

Rather than deploy additional forces to Iraq, we believe the way forward is to begin t he phased redeployment of our forces in the next four to six months, while shifting the principal mission of our forces there from combat to training, logistics, force protection and counter-terror. A renewed diplomatic strategy, both within the region and beyond, is also required to help the Iraqis agree to a sustainable political settlement. In short, it is time to begin to move our forces out of Iraq and make the Iraqi political leadership aware that our commitment is not open ended, that we cannot resolve their sectarian problems, and that only they can find the political resolution required to stabilize Iraq.

Our troops and the American people have already sacrificed a great deal for the future of Iraq. After nearly four years of combat, tens of thousands of U.S. casualties, and over $300 billion dollars, it is time to bring the war to a close. We, therefore, strongly encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops any deeper into Iraq. We want to do everything we can to help Iraq succeed in the future but, like many of our senior military leaders, we do not believe that adding more U.S. combat troops contributes to success.

We appreciate you taking these views into consideration.

Sincerely,­­­­

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

CHIRAC: IRAQ WAR BRED TERRORISM

NEW FEDERAL RULE REQUIRES COMPANIES AUDIT IMS

BUSH TO SEEK BILLIONS

GUARDSMEN OVERRUN AT THE BORDER

CHILD’S STUNTED GROWTH SPARKS FURY

2 OUT OF 3 HISPANICS SAY BRING TROOPS HOME

U.S. SHIPS BLOCK ESCAPE ROUTE IN SOMALIA

Saddam Hussein
Execution
Hanging
Cartoon

WASHINGTON, Jan. 4, 2007 - North Korea appears to have made preparations for another nuclear test, according to U.S. defense officials.

“We think they’ve put everything in place to conduct a test without any notice or warning,” a senior U.S. defense official told ABC News.

The official cautions that the intelligence is inconclusive as to whether North Korea will actually go ahead with another test but said the preparations are similar to the steps taken by Pyongyang before it shocked the world by conducting its first nuclear test last Oct. 9.

Two other senior defense officials confirmed that recent intelligence suggested that the North Koreans appear to be ready to test a nuclear weapon again, but the intelligence community divides over whether another test is likely.

“That would surprise me,” a senior intelligence official said when asked if North Korea is likely to soon conduct another test.

Another official had a different view, predicting North Korea would conduct a test sometime over the next two or three months.

Read more at ABC News

Toooo funny!

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - The party Sen. Joe Lieberman created to mount his independent re-election campaign has been seized by one of his critics, and the secretary of state’s office said Wednesday that it won’t challenge the takeover.

After the senator’s Nov. 7 victory under the Connecticut for Lieberman Party banner, John Orman switched his party affiliation from Democrat to Connecticut for Lieberman and voted himself chairman.

Orman, a political science professor who ran briefly against Lieberman last year, said only critics, bloggers and anyone named Lieberman can join the party, which he said would be a watchdog of the senator’s actions.

Ted Bromley, a lawyer for the secretary of the state’s office, said it won’t take a stance on the legitimacy of Orman’s leadership. He said the issue could be settled by a judge, but only if it’s challenged in court.

Lieberman campaign manager Sherry Brown did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment Wednesday.

Lieberman was defeated in the Democratic primary by Ned Lamont, a multimillionaire in his first run for public office who harshly criticized the incumbent’s support for the Iraq war. But state election laws allowed Lieberman to run in the general election as an independent and ultimately win a fourth term.

Orman had bitterly protested Lieberman’s creation of the party, saying it was a ploy to secure a better position on the ballot. In Connecticut, minor party candidates are listed on the ballot before unaffiliated party candidates.

Orman said he hopes to keep the Connecticut for Lieberman party active and endorse a Senate candidate in 2010.

Source: The Guardian

From Senator Russ Feingold:

Greetings,

According to the latest news reports, in the coming days the President will address the nation about his intentions regarding the situation in Iraq. While the President ought to set forth a timetable to redeploy our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible, all signs point to a repackaged version of “stay the course,” possibly with an increased U.S. presence on the ground. That strategy simply doesn-t make sense. Our open-ended presence there only fuels the insurgency, and adding more troops with no end date in sight only adds more fuel to the fire.

Thanks to each and every one of you, starting today, Democrats now control Congress - and now is the time for us to lead. There is no higher foreign policy priority than making America safer and getting our nation back on track by redeploying our troops out of Iraq.

Co-Sponsor the Resolution to Redeploy Our Troops Out of Iraq

It has been almost two months since Americans went to the polls and rejected the President’s strategy in Iraq. Since then I’ve continued the fight we started in August 2005 when we were alone in demanding a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. Today, in this new Democratic Congress, I have introduced legislation that would require the redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq within six months.

The administration has repeatedly ignored recommendations for a timely redeployment of our forces currently fighting in Iraq. But it’s reckless to continue to devote so much of our resources to one nation while ignoring the growing threats we face elsewhere in the world. It is now time for Congress to work toward redeployment.

I’m asking for citizen co’sponsors from all 50 states to join my call for redeployment. I know the Progressive Patriots Community has always been by my side and I hope you-ll continue to work with me on this extremely important issue.

I will continue to work for a sensible foreign policy that refocuses our efforts from Iraq in order to continue the global fight against terrorist networks. Please co’sponsor my resolution to help send the message that we can’t afford to wait any longer. It’s time for Congress to take the necessary steps to fix our Iraq policy immediately.