• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Veterans, "Don't pull the troops"

Sandhusker

Well-known member
WASHINGTON — Iraq war veterans from across the country carried a message Tuesday to Capitol Hill — don't pull the troops out until the mission is over.

Among the group was Carl Hartmann, a Marine corporal who has completed three Iraq tours of duty and now serves with a Reserve unit in Omaha.

Hartmann said politicians should not be micromanaging the war but listening to the commanders in the field.

"I'm not going to tell a brain surgeon how he should operate on one of his patients," he said. "I'm going to take his word for it when he tells me that he has to operate this way to make me feel better."

Hartmann and other Nebraskans joined hundreds of members of Vets for Freedom who descended on Capitol Hill as Congress heard testimony from Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker. The two reported uneven but significant progress in Iraq, an assessment that was greeted with skepticism by several Midlands lawmakers.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., for example, pressed Crocker during his appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Hagel said, "We're going to continue to see a bloody Iraq," ricocheting from one crisis to another, and questioned the seriousness of the Bush administration's diplomatic efforts.

Crocker pointed to diplomatic meetings at which Iraq's neighbors have discussed issues such as refugees and border security.

"There is activity," Crocker said. "Does there need to be more activity on the part of the region? Clearly, yes."

Crocker and Petraeus also testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, on which Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., serves.

Nelson has proposed requiring Iraq to pay back any money spent by the United States on Iraqi reconstruction. He asked Crocker why the U.S. shouldn't immediately start a tab for repayment.

Said Crocker: "There is very much an interest in moving the financing from us to the Iraqis," and the United States has already largely gotten out of the reconstruction business in Iraq.

When Nelson pointed to specific spending, Crocker said that was for aid programs important to stabilizing the country.

Nelson responded sharply. He said he wants the United States to look at requiring Iraq to repay the U.S. for all sorts of reconstruction services, including the training of Iraqi troops.

Nelson said he continues to support a transition of the U.S. mission in Iraq from providing security to patrolling the border and chasing down terrorists.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said Petraeus and Crocker were serving up more of the same Tuesday.

"The simple truth is that keeping our brave soldiers mired in the Iraqi civil war is breaking our military, bankrupting our Treasury and making our country less safe," Harkin said.

Hartmann and the other veterans urged lawmakers to be patient. They said progress was being made.

Hartmann recalled a January 2006 incident in which his unit was helping to sign up Iraqis for army and police forces. A recruiting station had been established at a factory in Ramadi when a suicide bomber hit the area where the recruits were.

Many were killed or wounded, Hartmann said, but the Iraqis insisted on reopening the recruiting station within a few weeks. When it did reopen, he said, twice as many recruits showed up as before the bombing.

"Al-Qaida wanted to destroy their spirit," he said, "but it had the exact opposite effect, and that in turn inspired us."

Armed with such anecdotes, the veterans worked the halls of Congress all day. They highlighted their positive experiences and progress made by Iraqi security forces.

Hartmann said the American people and Congress need to have patience and trust the military to get the job done in Iraq.

"It's a slow process, but it's working," he said. "This is something you can't rush."

Petraeus and Crocker will testify today before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., a member of that committee, said he was pleased to hear of progress in Iraq.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Some allowed the Libs and other whackos to dictate the timeframe of withdrawal in Vietnam. It was a grave mistake.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll in April 2003 found that, more than 70 percent of Americans supported the war, and a CBS poll revealed that 60 percent of Americans believed it had been worth the sacrifice even if no weapons of mass destruction were ever found. A month later, a Gallup poll found that 79 percent of Americans considered the war justified with or without conclusive evidence that Saddam Hussein had possessed weapons of mass destruction, and only 19 percent believed the discovery of such weapons was necessary to justify the war.

How can we allow the media libs to change our minds?

Iran does not want a stable Iraq with the U.S. as an ally, for fear that there will be a permanent base in Iraq from where to launch a strike on them as they proliferate nukes.

Stay the course. If need be, strike Iran.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I have to give Hillary credit for bringing up one great point in the hearings yesterday- and I hope its one she and "true" conservatives bring to the front and don't give in on.....

Our authorization under UN mandate to be in Iraq ends in Dec- so the State Dept and Irag are negotiating a treaty agreement to allow the US to stay there....
And again GW is claiming that it does not need to be agreed to or approved by the Congress-using legal mumbo jumbo to get around the fact that it is a "treaty"-- further usurping Congressional power and Constitutional law....

Hillary brought up the fact that the Malakai government needs/ and is having any agreement reached to be approved by their Parliament- so if they need to have this treaty authorized by their Parliament-why shouldn't the US have to have it authorized by Congress?.... :???:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I have to give Hillary credit for bringing up one great point in the hearings yesterday- and I hope its one she and "true" conservatives bring to the front and don't give in on.....

Our authorization under UN mandate to be in Iraq ends in Dec- so the State Dept and Irag are negotiating a treaty agreement to allow the US to stay there....
And again GW is claiming that it does not need to be agreed to or approved by the Congress-using legal mumbo jumbo to get around the fact that it is a "treaty"-- further usurping Congressional power and Constitutional law....

Hillary brought up the fact that the Malakai government needs/ and is having any agreement reached to be approved by their Parliament- so if they need to have this treaty authorized by their Parliament-why shouldn't the US have to have it authorized by Congress?.... :???:

The UN Secretary General has said that the US led invasion of Iraq was against the UN charter and not legal to begin with. I guess they'll just have to put the U.S. and many other countries in jail now? :lol:

If the country of Iraq, at this time, has invited the US to stay.......which they have........there is no concern of the UN about it period.

Since the members of the U.S. Congress failed to read the Intelligence and make an assessment properly before their vote for authorizing force in Iraq, and whined about it later, they should not be allowed a say in the matter anyway.
 

Goodpasture

Well-known member
In fact, Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals for an unprovoked attack on civilians and the invasion and occupation of a non-belligerent foreign nation. Further, as they are the ones responsible for Gitmo and the torture of captives, they should be tried on those charges as well, as all the above is a violation of international treaties.
 

Steve

Well-known member
gp
and the invasion and occupation of a non-belligerent foreign nation.

maybe you forgot about the invasion of Kuwait and the ceasefire agreement Saddam and Iraq continually violated?

but I didn't..
 

Mike

Well-known member
Saddam classified as "Non-belligerent"? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Maybe so after he was pulled from his spider-hole. :lol: :lol:


Between 1999 and 2001, the U.S. and British-led air forces in Iraq dropped 1.3 million pounds of bombs in response to purported violations of the no-fly zones and anti-aircraft fire from Saddam Hussein.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Goodpasture said:
In fact, Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals for an unprovoked attack on civilians and the invasion and occupation of a non-belligerent foreign nation. Further, as they are the ones responsible for Gitmo and the torture of captives, they should be tried on those charges as well, as all the above is a violation of international treaties.

In that case, you're also going to have to try the lawmakers who voted to authorize Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Maybe Hillary and Nancy could be cellmates. Hillary would probably be safer from sniper fire if she was in a prison as well.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
There are several hundred thousand Kurds, who, if they had not been killed, would beg to differ that Saddam was non belligerant.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Goodpasture said:
In fact, Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals for an unprovoked attack on civilians and the invasion and occupation of a non-belligerent foreign nation. Further, as they are the ones responsible for Gitmo and the torture of captives, they should be tried on those charges as well, as all the above is a violation of international treaties.

Where is your proof to support your claim??
Or is this just another one of your unjustified statements?
Why do I even bother with you GREG, you were irresponsible as a child and now it is even worse.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Goodpasture said:
In fact, Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld should be tried as war criminals for an unprovoked attack on civilians and the invasion and occupation of a non-belligerent foreign nation. Further, as they are the ones responsible for Gitmo and the torture of captives, they should be tried on those charges as well, as all the above is a violation of international treaties.

Where is your proof to support your claim??
Or is this just another one of your unjustified statements?
Why do I even bother with you GREG, you were irresponsible as a child and no it is even worse.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
The billergent one in this whole conversation is GP, but then we all know how messed up his mind is.
R/E his response to regarding how STUPID I am!
RANT AND RAVE :roll: :roll:
Not to forget he has a different JESUS than the rest of us!!!
 
Top