32 online
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 6 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Bush Better Send 50,000!

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   40 comments
Message JB Williams
It took us eight and a half years, from April 19, 1775, when the shot heard round the world was fired, until November 25, 1783, when the last British forces evacuated New York, Brooklyn and the colonies, to begin the process of securing America's status as a free sovereign nation.

In 1776, we announced our national intentions to be free and independent at any cost. A rag-tag militia made up of ill-equipped and untrained farmers, shed blood for six years, eventually defeating a better armed and better trained British Army by 1783. It took another five years for nine states to agree on the language that would establish our Constitutional government in 1788. In March of 1789, our First President George Washington took his oath of office under the new Constitution.

That's fourteen years folks. And 230 years later, 300 million Americans still can't agree on what America even is...let alone what our Constitution means and how to implement it.

Clearly, we are not in the mood to be so patient with Iraq's efforts to accomplish the same.

We have been in Iraq since March of 2003. It took only days to defeat and depose the most brutal regime in recent world history, also the most threatening and powerful army in the war torn Middle East, liberating not conquering, 25 million Iraqi men, women and children in that process.

Four months later in July of '03, the newly appointed interim Iraqi government met for the first time to begin forming its own free sovereign government. Eleven months later in June of '04, the coalition occupation ended when the U.S. led coalition handed full sovereignty and complete control of Iraq's future over to the confirmed interim Iraqi government functioning under Prime Minister Allawi. From this moment forward, Iraq had the power to demand America and coalition forces leave its country. They did not, of course; quite the contrary.

Six months later in January '05, with the continued security support of U.S. and coalition forces, some eight million Iraqi citizens, Shia, Sunni and Kurd alike, braved a gauntlet of terrorist firepower, and walked to polling places all over Iraq to cast the first free ballot of their life, holding up those purple fingers with great pride as if they were a badge of honor for a job well done under the most difficult of circumstances, which is exactly what they demonstrated.

In August of '05, both Shia and Kurdish representatives endorsed the first draft Constitution of Iraq. Minority Sunni representatives declined to endorse. However, in October '05, the Iraqi population once again retuned to the polls to overwhelmingly approve their Constitution, which set up the groundwork for not a U.S. or western styled government, but an all Iraqi designed and chosen Islamic federal Democracy.

On December 15, '05, the Iraqi people returned to the polls once again, this time in record numbers, to freely elect their first full-term government and parliament of the new free sovereign and self-governed Iraq.

Do the math... March of '03 to December of '05 is a miraculous timeline of events in a part of the world where most thought freedom, individual liberty and eventual peace were not possible. That's a bit over two and a half years to accomplish what America took fourteen years to start in our own land, a government still hotly debated here 230 years later.

Now fast-forward to November 2006 and the U.S. mid-term election of desperation for Democrats, that resulted in a marginal return to congressional power for folks who had spent every day of the last two and a half years, successfully working around the clock to drive all public support for Iraq and our troops mission, out of existence.

Then forward on to January 2007, as these Democrats now take control of the U.S. Congress and sit at the helm of every national committee.

New Speaker of the People's House Nancy Pelosi, who just returned from Iraq, told NPR that "what is happening in Iraq is chaos," adding that after all this time, "We just have to end it."

Pelosi proceeded with her main message, "Everyone that we spoke to [in a brief Iraq visit] said that this escalation that the president is engaged in is the one last chance."

*(Escalation - an inaccurate word carefully chosen from Vietnam era war protest propaganda, like quagmire, used to erroneously define a troop surge, in an effort to undermine any potential benefit from a supportive increase in troops strength intended to squash remaining terror camps in and around Baghdad.)

**(One last chance - the new mantra of the Democratic Party in their effort to drive the last nail in Bush's coffin, causing complete failure in Iraq and the broader war on terror by continuing to undermine all efforts to win, while setting a new deadline for victory, putting our enemy on notice to stay the course while demanding Bush retreat.)

New Leader of the People's Senate Harry Reid told CBN News "Winnable is not definable anymore. I don't think we can put this in the category of winnable."

"I think if we got out of there, there would be less violence, there would be less excuses for doing some of the terrible things that they're doing to other human individuals," he said.

New Chairman of the House Committee on Defense John Murtha states his position this way, "We are causing the problem." - - "We can't win this." - - ''We can go to Okinawa. . . . We can redeploy (hide) there almost instantly.'' - - "We have to say to the Iraqis, 'This is your war. This is no longer our war. You've got an elected government. This is up to you now to settle this thing."

Other Democrat leaders are going even further in their efforts to lose in Iraq, Russ Feingold announcing an initiative to stop all troop funding in Iraq, Joe Biden, new Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, passing a non-binding resolution down partisan lines, condemning the mission in Iraq to failure, Presidential wannabe and Hollywood favorite Barack Obama, demanding cut-n-run in more certain terms than the usual nuanced liberal drivel.

We have excessively liberal President in waiting and media darling Hillary Clinton, serving notice to Bush to "find a way out of Iraq before leaving office"; the implication being that she doesn't want the responsibility of winning in Iraq in her assumed-to-be administration.

New Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Jay Rockefeller, made his position clear in his reaction to Bush's State of the Union address, "Instead of a plan to end our occupation of Iraq, we have been presented with an escalation. I'm afraid the President's troop surge plan oversimplifies the situation on the ground, places more of our soldiers in harm's way, and detracts from our ability to successfully carry out the real war on terrorism."

***(Yes, the same Jay Rockefeller who made a secret private trip to the Middle East four months after 9/11 and a full year before Bush ever mentioned the word Iraq, for the sole purpose of advising our enemies in the region to dump those WMD because Bush was on the way. He is again in charge of our nation's intelligence oversight.)

These are the folks you elected to win in Iraq and keep our nation safe from further international terrorism. These folks have no commitment to winning in Iraq as you can see, and as you will soon learn the hard way, they have no intention of winning the broader war on international terrorism either.

They all know exactly how high the stakes are, but they know how high the stakes are for their nearly dead political party as well, and one must have priorities, especially concerning political survival!

On this basis, I make these recommendations to President Bush.

1. If you think you need 20,000 more troops to complete the task at hand in Iraq, you had better send 50,000. Democrats have been clear; this is your LAST CHANCE to bring these brave folks home in VICTORY!
2. You had better not even blink an eye toward any enemy right now, not in Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela or Syria, not even your enemy across the political aisle because all of them have knife in hand, just waiting for you to blink. Better take no prisoners either.
3. Don't use a troop surge similar to the troop surge you recently used on our Mexican border, in which you sent plenty of soldiers, but gave them orders to not engage the enemy under any circumstance, then sent two to prison for doing their job.

Usually, I take nothing a sniveling liberal says seriously. However, if you believe nothing else, believe this!

Democrats will make certain that this is indeed our LAST CHANCE for victory in Iraq or anywhere else.

Make it count!
Rate It | View Ratings

JB Williams Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

I am a Christian, a husband, a father, a son and a brother, a conservative, an entrepreneur and a writer, in that order. I don't vote for (R)'s or (D)'s, but instead for individuals. Not on the basis of what they promise to do for me, but on the (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact EditorContact Editor
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Bush Better Send 50,000!

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend