Liberally Conservative

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free....... ~Ronald Reagan~

Monday, June 12, 2006

Russ Feingold - Cut, Run and then Expand

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Presidential hopeful has been asking for immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq for months. Now he has asked for more as he feels U.S. presence is needed elsewhere to fight terrorism. His premise is confusing as well as contradictory. Feingold writes in The Huffington Post:
xxx
The first step in creating a strong national security policy is recognizing that our massive presence in Iraq weakens our national security. Our Iraq-centric policies are diverting resources and attention from other places around the world where terrorist networks that threaten the U.S. are operating. We need to redeploy troops from Iraq so that we can focus resources on global terrorist networks and the conditions throughout the world that allow them to take root and thrive. I have repeatedly called for our troops to redeploy from Iraq by the end of 2006, and have filed an amendment to the Department of Defense authorization bill -- which the Senate will be taking up next week -- that would give that deadline the force of law. This strategy must focus on developing strong partnerships with countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, and Mali, focused not only on security assistance, but on the development of a strong rule of law, respect for human rights, and fighting corruption. A comprehensive strategy to fight terrorism must also address countries like Somalia. Failed states like Somalia are the breeding grounds for terrorism and instability. We know that this East African country is home to a range of terrorist and criminal networks that operate throughout the region. Yet, the U.S. government currently has no strategy to eliminate the conditions that allow these terrorists to train, equip, rest, and plan. We should redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year so that we can refocus on our true mission in the wake of 9/11: defeating the global terrorist networks that threaten us.
xxx
Feingold believes the terrorist network in Iraq is there because of "resentment" towards American "occupiers," so we should get out. However, he doesn't reconcile why terrorists are in other countries where American troop presence does not exist. Would redeployment to other foreign lands cause more resentment to the United States?
xxx
Pundits such as Feingold and Representative Murtha (D-PA) spew their negativity about the war on terror, wish to cut and run and then suggest redeployment to other foreign countries.
xxx
Next I suppose they would reinstitute the draft. They pretend to be anti-war, they are only anti-Bush. They blame U.S. military presence for terrorist buildup and call the U.S. occupiers. They don't have a real plan for solving terrorism, they only want power and higher office. They don't see the positive results in Iraq only the liberal media presentation.

You are viewing a post on the old Liberally Conservative site. Click here to find this post on the new site.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Alexnader T! said...

Jack Murtha wants higher office now??? When did this happen? Also, when did he call for immediate withdrawal of troops? Was this earlier today? As of yesterday, he sought neither higher office nor immediate troop withdrawal.
Feingold and Osama both blame the rise in anti-USA terrorism probably being related to US military presence in places where it really shouldn't be. I don't see where Feingold calls for immediate withdrawal, but I do see this: "I have repeatedly called for our troops to redeploy from Iraq by the end of 2006." Feingold is probably going to seek higher office at some point. I don't know why he'd want to invest so much in other countries' terrorism and have more troops in more places. I know he is focused more on diplomatic relations, particularly with Indonesia more than military deployment. At least according to everything he has written or said that I've read or seen.
Also, I don't see this as you say: "Pundits such as Feingold and Representative Murtha (D-PA) spew their negativity about the war on terror." Feingold seems to be talking tough on it and has in everything I've heard and read from him. I don't agree with him on everything, but I can definitely cite about 10 spoken examples alone.
I'm not a democrat for sure, but if you are going to make an argument, you might want to fact check yourself, especially when you are extraordinarily flawed in your statements while primarily referencing your above quoted piece from Feingold.

6/12/2006 08:16:00 PM  
Blogger Liberally Conservative said...

If you can provide 10 examples of Feingold talking tough on the war in Iraq/terrorism then do so. He voted against the war in Iraq, therefore, the removal of Saddam Hussein. This is the basis for Feingold's anti-Adminstration mantra.

Out of one corner of Feingold's liberal mouth he may say he supports the troops. To not would be political suicide. From the other corner Feingold is/was against the war in Iraq, aka, the war on terror.

Fact check myself? Hmmmm...I directly quoted Feingold and he is consistently against the troops in Iraq. He is consistently "out there" and has own my weekly Moonbat Award more than once.

Murtha has been asking for "immediate" withdrawal from Iraq for at least six months. That is a fact. The house called him on his statements by producing a bill for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq, which Murtha voted against, contradicting himself more than once with his action.

Don't criticize if you bring innuendo, conjecture and no facts of your own. This blog backs it's opinion(s), based on material facts, which are produced within the context of each post.

That's a fact!

6/12/2006 09:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Alexander T! said...

no, it doesn't it! that's a fact!
most of the facts were right there in Feingold's statement which you not only removed from context, but continually shifted the meaning from something clearly stated -- which I showed!
You directly quoted Feingold TWICE with single words... in this statement: Feingold believes the terrorist network in Iraq is there because of "resentment" towards American "occupiers,".
Also, equating the "war on terror" simply with the "war in Iraq" is wholly irresponsible and wrong.

6/13/2006 07:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Alexander said...

Also, Murtha has called for what people/liberal media (?) calls "immediate withdrawal" but that makes it sound like he wants to pull out NOW instead of over the next year. Everything I've seen from him calls for a plan for withdrawal over the next few months. I don't support Murtha, please don't confuse this, I am simply saying, don't misinterpret him and quote him.

6/13/2006 07:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Alexander T! said...

Also, I'm not trying to be a jerk. Sorry, I realize I came off that way last night. I'm just a fellow blogger curious about what people are saying and perspectives, I in no way was trying to offend you.

6/13/2006 12:13:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home