President Bush Hurting Our Defenses?

[daveshel]

Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

 

[Red Dawn]

How about when his Administration anounce that we caught a High Echelon Al Qaeda member to the press giving out his name only to be scolded by the Brits and the Pakistani's that we gave up the name of a mole that we have flipped. This Administration is one big clusterfsck!

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

Because we dont need all those troops stationed in Europe right now.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about when his Administration anounce that we caught a High Echelon Al Qaeda member to the press giving out his name only to be scolded by the Brits and the Pakistani's that we gave up the name of a mole that we have flipped. This Administration is one big clusterfsck!

Outing that mole was to prove that the high alerts in the 3 cities were justified. The War on Terror is more of a domestic issue than a foreign affair, and Bush did the politically effective move.

Zephyr

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about when his Administration anounce that we caught a High Echelon Al Qaeda member to the press giving out his name only to be scolded by the Brits and the Pakistani's that we gave up the name of a mole that we have flipped. This Administration is one big clusterfsck!

Outing that mole was to prove that the high alerts in the 3 cities were justified. The War on Terror is more of a domestic issue than a foreign affair, and Bush did the politically effective move.

Zephyr

I have to question the political effectiveness of a move that further alienates the military. Bush has been criticized for not listening to the generals, and for cutting they pay of those in the military. I can't see how this redistribution of forces is likely to rehabilitate his image among those who serve.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about when his Administration anounce that we caught a High Echelon Al Qaeda member to the press giving out his name only to be scolded by the Brits and the Pakistani's that we gave up the name of a mole that we have flipped. This Administration is one big clusterfsck!

Outing that mole was to prove that the high alerts in the 3 cities were justified. The War on Terror is more of a domestic issue than a foreign affair, and Bush did the politically effective move.

Zephyr

I have to question the political effectiveness of a move that further alienates the military. Bush has been criticized for not listening to the generals, and for cutting they pay of those in the military. I can't see how this redistribution of forces is likely to rehabilitate his image among those who serve.

I am not how such a move would alienate the military.

And military pay has not been cut, it has gone up.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

Yes, much like the BRAC that is happening in the US right now.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

I assume you mean the re-positioning has been planned for months or years, but even so, is it a good idea to publicly announce this now? But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
How about when his Administration anounce that we caught a High Echelon Al Qaeda member to the press giving out his name only to be scolded by the Brits and the Pakistani's that we gave up the name of a mole that we have flipped. This Administration is one big clusterfsck!

Outing that mole was to prove that the high alerts in the 3 cities were justified. The War on Terror is more of a domestic issue than a foreign affair, and Bush did the politically effective move.

Zephyr

Perhaps Coventry should have been evacuated by Churchill. After all what's the big deal about being able to read the Nazi war machine's every move to the lives of a couple thousand people.

Perhaps The US. Ambassador to Lebanon (1983) shouldn't have made it a requirement to warn/evacuate civilians of car bombs for the US military to install radio detonators on top of the Embassy. I mean why should Lebanese die when Americans can die instead.

How many lives is it worth to give up something so vital? Ultimately how many lives do you save if you stay quiet?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

I assume you mean the re-positioning has been planned for months or years, but even so, is it a good idea to publicly announce this now? But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

What exactly are our troops defending in europe?

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

I assume you mean the re-positioning has been planned for months or years, but even so, is it a good idea to publicly announce this now? But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

What exactly are our troops defending in europe?

'Western interests,' I'll bet.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: daveshel
I assume you mean the re-positioning has been planned for months or years, but even so, is it a good idea to publicly announce this now? But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

It has been announced several times over the last couple of years. Most recently, it was discussed during the time Spain was going to pull its troops out of Iraq.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

This has been planned for MONTHS, if not YEARS.

I assume you mean the re-positioning has been planned for months or years, but even so, is it a good idea to publicly announce this now? But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

What exactly are our troops defending in europe?

'Western interests,' I'll bet.

which are?

 

[daveshel]

Embassies, companies in which we are invested, leaders friendly to the United States, the kind of thing that terrorists have been targeting.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: charrison
What exactly are our troops defending in europe?

'Western interests,' I'll bet.

which are?

Remnants of the Cold War.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Embassies, companies in which we are invested, leaders friendly to the United States, the kind of thing that terrorists have been targeting.

I'd be willing to bet the Marine guards at embassies won't be affected.

I'm curious to see the details of this plan. I'm especially curious about the prepositioned equipment that would have to be deployed by ship if brought back to the states.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: daveshel
But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

I suggest that you do a little more research and understand the basis for the criticism of Kerry's announcement.

 

[Red Dawn]

What happened to those bases we were going to setup in Poland as a reward for them helping us in Iraq?

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: daveshel
But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

I suggest that you do a little more research and understand the basis for the criticism of Kerry's announcement.

You're absolutely right. Niave of me to take the output of the partisan attack machine as an argument that will stand on its merits.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: daveshel
But the question was really for those who had criticized Kerry for announcing he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

I suggest that you do a little more research and understand the basis for the criticism of Kerry's announcement.

You're absolutely right. Niave of me to take the output of the partisan attack machine as an argument that will stand on its merits.

The criticism was not leveled for Kerry 'wanting to get the troops out of Iraq'. When you understand that you will see how this:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning? "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cannot be equated in the manner that you are attempting.

At this time in the election cycle, almost everything is being politicized, and it would be prudent to think about the implications of an issue, before vocalizing it.

Kerry has been put through the wringer and demands have been placed upon him to voice his position on certain issues. He needs to learn when to keep his mouth shut.

Have a nice day.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What happened to those bases we were going to setup in Poland as a reward for them helping us in Iraq?

IIRC those bases are still a go. The troops will be shifted from Western Yurope into Eastern Yurope and central Asian places like Azerbaijan.

Zephyr

 

[cpumaster]

I don't mind moving our troops out of W. Europe since those place doesn't pose any serious threat to us like in the past. Plus shifting them to Eastern Europe would probably save us a lot of money. However, moving troops from S. Korea or Japan would send a wrong signal to N. Korea and China in term of our resolve to defend both S. Korea and Taiwan...

 

[Monorprise]

Originally posted by: daveshel
Link

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush this week will announce a major reduction and re-positioning of U.S. forces deployed overseas, according to Pentagon and senior administration officials.

To those who criticized Kerry's announcement of a plan to get out troops out of Iraq as compromising the war effort there, how that that position square up with our Commander-In-Chief going public with information that exposes areas that will have decreased security after the re-positioning?

I support the President; this is a war, no time for changing top leadership in the middle. Besides the Top US General of our times. General Tommy franks, an independent retiree now, says he fully supports the Presidents efforts and leadership. So why do we need to risk in the middle of a war time situation a radical change in leadership?
I just don?t get it, I though we should be aiming to win wars, and that meant staying the course long enough to do that?
Well I just like to say Kerry?s Record scares me,
This is a complete listing of all his votes in congress, best indication of what kind of leader he would be, in reality
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=S0421103

Here his what some site list, I don?t know its reliability thou sorry but seems consistent which what I?ve seen and read on the prior
http://www.issues2000.org/John_Kerry.htm

Scary extreme lefty, even more so that he has clamed to take the opposite direction here in the campaign, which tends to make one wonder, can this guy even be trusted at all to his word?

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Scary extreme lefty, even more so that he has clamed to take the opposite direction here in the campaign, which tends to make one wonder, can this guy even be trusted at all to his word?

He's the most liberal member of the US Senate.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040301-085725-5267r.htm

Imagine the damage he'd do to the Supreme Court.