Duncan Hunter Contradicts Petraeus
Posted by Michael Link on September 10, 2007 at 02:05 PM
Rep. Duncan Hunter, not very long ago:
General Petraeus is not just coming back not just as a guy who is going to give us his take on the Iraq situation, but as the leader of more than 160,000 American personnel in uniform in Iraq. And they're not only watching his testimony, but they're watching our testimony. They're watching how we treat them.
And General Petraeus, when he testified before the Senate back in January:
Senator, I seriously doubt that our troops are sitting watching C-SPAN 3 in Iraq right now.
Video coming shortly. (Update-Added)
Having trouble? Download it here.
Comments - 6 »
Comments - 6 «
Posted by PollM on September 10, 2007 at 02:43 PM
More scripted rhetoric to keep the war going. The only question becomes is what are representatives going to do? That has always been the question. This war needs to end for the sake of our troops and the Iraqi people who have repeatedly told us by majority to go away! We are not part of the solution. The government there is so corrupt nothing will get done. Blah...Blah ...Blah! Enough talk go to work at ending this!
Posted by virgo on September 10, 2007 at 06:27 PM
what a disgrace to the military to have this general sit there and lie through his teeth.
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO KNOCK DOWN THE DOORS TO OUR WHITE HOUSE AND DRAG THAT LITTLE DRAFT DODGING COKEHEAD CHIMP BASTARD OUT AND TAKE HIM TO BAGHDAD? WHEN? GIVE ME A DATE AND I'LL BE THERE!!
Posted by Sadie on September 10, 2007 at 09:14 PM
PollM: I did the link to the poll and put in my vote, the results stood at 88% NO, 12% Yes. I looked it over pretty good because I was looking for the "HELL NO!!!" button. ;-D
Posted by Butte on September 10, 2007 at 11:58 PM
We need to bring our soldiers back home. Another death is simply one too many. The Iraqis don't want us there. If the congress upholds any new requests for funding, they are dooming not just the soldiers but our very culture. What Afghanistan was to the Soviet Union, Iraq is to the USA. What purpose, aside from Haliburton profits, is being served by our continued presence in Iraq? BTW- awesome video.
Posted by JacobClark on September 11, 2007 at 12:59 AM
November, 2006 - Americans signal they've had enough with the Iraq war...give Democrats majorities in both houses. The message is clear - get us out.
February, 2007 - President Bush responds to Americans by saying "F**k you," and sends another 30,000 troops to Iraq.
September, 2007 - Elected Democratic leadership suggests they may be willing to "compromise" on Iraq, accepting limited troop withdrawals, effectively backing Bush's "F88k you" aria with a "F**k you" chorus for the American electorate.
September, 2007 - General Petraeus testifies before Congress and gives the military version of a "F**k you" sign to the American people. He suggests that the limited draw-down that elected Democratic leadership finds acceptable might be something like the 30,000 troops we sent in earlier this year, and it might happen sometime next year.
September, 2007 - Hillary Clinton gets huffy. Who gives a "f**k" what she has to say about the Iraq war anyway? Where is her credibility on the issue.
November, 2008 - another election year, troop levels in Iraq are just about what they were the last time they "sent a message" to Washington, and voters' fingers hover over Giuliani's or Romney's name, thinking "Maybe he'll be different than the rest of these liars." They look up one row and see "H Clinton" and say "No f**cking way."
Face it people. We're f**ked, and it's partly due to the fact that this party is f**king gutless and useless.
Posted by BaronScarpia on September 11, 2007 at 06:59 AM
« Hide Comments
Comments are now closed for this entry.
