Comments on: McCain: Dems Making Empty Promises On Iraq

Presumptive GOP Nominee Says Obama's, Clinton's Plans Indicate "Failure Of Leadership"

[ranger1948]

the web site is:

http://www.warisaracket.com

[ranger1948]

Just received an email from a friend that contained a website about a general that won the medal of honor twice. No matter who you are backing you might want to see what this website says.

[fibonacci_]

Thanks for majorly *** things up Republicans!

[user168-2009]

%u201CWar is the tool of small-minded scoundrels who worship the death of others on the altar of their greed.%u201D

As one Republican senator said: %u201CThe thought of his (McCain) being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He%u2019s erratic. He%u2019s hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me.%u201D

[samthetvcat]

"To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility," he said. "It is a failure of leadership."
_____

From the BBC/ABC March 08 poll of Iraqis . . . Question: If the American forces left the country entirely, do you think the security situation in Iraq overall would become better, become worse, or remain the same?

Better 46%
Worse 29%
About the same 23%
Refused/don%u2019t know 2%

[samthetvcat]

McCain''s promises on Iraq:

Sept 24th, 2002: "I believe that the success will be fairly easy

Sept 29, 2002: "I believe we can win an overwhelming victory, in a very short time"

Dec 4, 2005: "We will probably see significant progress in the next six months to a year."

November 13, 2006: "The fate of the Iraqi venture will be decided in the next six months or so."
___

Barack''s assessment of Iraq, Oct 2, 2002:

"even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda."

[brianbwb-2009]

"...regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests,..."

Total bull, if he cared at all about the Iraqi people, he would stop killing them, he wouldn''t have voted for the invasion, and he would have more vehemently criticized Blackwater, Abu Ghraib, and Guantanamo, and he would quit prolonging their purely internal power struggle.

Vital interests? Iraqi oil is the interest of some privately-owned multinational corporations, who are currently strangling the US economy, and those corporations are not vital to the US, let these corporations pay for their own military to pursue their agenda, and hold them subject to any laws that they violate in the process.

[samrensho]

The only thing empty is Insane McCain''s head. God help us all if that fossil gets into office.

[watcher269-2009]

A confidential draft agreement covering the future of US forces in Iraq, passed to the Guardian, shows that provision is being made for an open-ended military presence in the country.

The draft strategic framework agreement between the US and Iraqi governments, dated March 7 and marked "secret" and "sensitive", is intended to replace the existing UN mandate and authorises the US to "conduct military operations in Iraq and to detain individuals when necessary for imperative reasons of security" without time limit.

The authorisation is described as "temporary" and the agreement says the US "does not desire permanent bases or a permanent military presence in Iraq". But the absence of a time limit or restrictions on the US and other coalition forces - including the British - in the country means it is likely to be strongly opposed in Iraq and the US.

Iraqi critics point out that the agreement contains no limits on numbers of US forces, the weapons they are able to deploy, their legal status or powers over Iraqi citizens, going far beyond long-term US security agreements with other countries. The agreement is intended to govern the status of the US military and other members of the multinational force.

[brianbwb-2009]

"It is a failure of leadership."

So now McCain presumes himself, and his master Bush, to be the leaders of the middle East? Does this mean we have now annexed the middle east, and their people must now submit to "U.S. leadership"?