Your thoughts on the democratic plan for the war?

Question

I have asked many times and in many ways what the democratic plan was for the war on terror. Now I have my answer: the are going to define it away!!!

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/04/military_gwot_democrats_070403w/

And the spin just keeps on comming.

Answer 1

The Democrats loved voting for the war while it was popular. Now that CNN, ABC and CBS and the other socialist news media have turned the American public (some of then anyway) against waging war on those who have been killing Americans for years they want to cut off funding for our troops in the field. This to me is treason. There plan is simple, surrender to a bunch of terrorists in man-dresses.

Answer 2

I'm an open minded conservative, but I agree with the Democrats on defining the war. Calling it a "Global War on Terror" is worthless. It is not a global war on terror when it involves a handful of Muslims and the western world. Speaking of a "Global War on Terror", Iraq has little to do with global terrorism. It didn't have anything to do when Saddam was in power, and it certainly has nothing to do with it now. Bush has conducted this war for too long with no oversight, and it has wasted a lot of money with little progress. Only when the Democrats took the house and Rumsfeld got the boot did I see any progress in Iraq. For the first time since the Iraq war began, I could turn on the liberal news outlets and see positive reports about Iraq.

Still, I'm not going to agree with the Democrat's plan to pullout and leave just to please the anti-war constituency.

Answer 3

At least we know what the comprehensive plan is that the wise tacticians in the Republican HQ have carefully devised . . . VICTORY!

It is quite possibly the best plan I've heard, since John Madden said that his plan for an upcoming football game was to, "Stop them on defense and score on offense." In a further explosion of brilliance, he a fleshed out his strategy, thusly, "We just need to control the ball, and put points on the board."

I don't know how the Democrats can compete with the dazzling intelligence displayed by the Red Team.

Answer 4

Whatever you call it, Bush has been doing a terrible job at fighting terrorism.

Regardless, defining our fight against terrorism as a “war” is propagandistic and self-defeating. Terrorism is a tactic -- whether the terrorists are domestic right-wing fanatics or extremist Islamic factions.

Our immediate concern is with fanatical extremist Islamic factions who have to be found, eliminated and their influence undermined through a combined effort of intelligence, covert operations, military operations, diplomacy and effective foreign policies. Terrorism as a tactic can probably never be fully eliminated.

Answer 5

Any outcome will be very very painful. Cons want to slip out of the chaos unoticed and lay it in the laps of dems while crying ... "look at all the pain"

... the only path of "No Pain" ... was to not go into a way in the first place over imaginary WMDs.

Answer 6

As a country, we really need to compromise and come together on this issue. Democrat or Republican, time is running out and Iraqi and US soldiers and Iraqi civilians are dying!

Answer 7

Man how can terror ever be defeated? I'm terrorized every time my exwife calls me. Are you going to take care of her for me?

Answer 8

The plan: Recognizing that it's a clandestine war that requires clandestine means. Also that making more enemies among rank-and-file Muslims, pushing them into jihad, is not a smart idea.