Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Yeah, Warner and all those Republicans who talked tough with Patraeus...who do they think they are?
I already lauded a Republican (Hagel) who asked Petraeus some tough questions that actually specifically had to do with Iraq and Petraeus's mission there. Hagel was very good; excellent even. His questions were far superior to some of the talking point idiocy and obvious fringe pandering that came out of the mouths of a few Dimocrats.
So despite your mighty swing with that attempted snarky comment, you got nuttin' but air, dude.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From a logical standpoint TLC, you have a contention that the Hagel's questions were the best but you cite no supporting evidence for your conclusion. So we are supposed to take it on your very dubious source authority? Then you raise the heat by saying snarky and nuttin but air which only appeals to only the emotion. So again we have a you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own logic. If its your opinion, why not state it as such?
But even if we take that above rhetorical who do you think those Republicans are as a somewhat illogical statement not proved, all the democrats need is to pull 9 or more clear thinking or illogical Republicans, it don't matter from a logic standpoint, and the democrats can have the veto proof majority in the Senate needed to get some real things done.
Because, in my opinion, Iraq is going to be decided on raw political power. With Republican
results getting us no where. I would say if dramatic improvements are not seen in Iraq very soon, logical arguments will not matter and panicky politicians will be the things to worry about.