Bolten's response to Reid

Wednesday, September 06, 2006


Yesterday the Democrats came up with their usual lame unserious attempt at Iraq war policy, calling for a new direction.

Bolten responds on Bush's behalf:

Three of the key proposals found in your letter, then, are already reflected in current U.S. and Iraqi policy in the region.

On the fourth element of your proposed “new direction,” however, we do disagree strongly. Our strategy calls for redeploying troops from Iraq as conditions on the ground allow, when the Iraqi Security Forces are capable of defending their nation, and when our military commanders believe the time is right. Your proposal is driven by none of these factors; instead, it would have U.S. forces begin withdrawing from Iraq by the end of the year, without regard to the conditions on the ground. Because your letter lacks specifics, it is difficult to determine exactly what is contemplated by the “phased redeployment” you propose. (One such proposal, advanced by Representative Murtha, a signatory to your letter, suggested that U.S. forces should be redeployed as a “quick reaction force” to Okinawa, which is nearly 5,000 miles from Baghdad).

Regardless of the specifics you envision by “phased redeployment,” any premature withdrawal of U.S forces would have disastrous consequences for America’s security. Such a policy would embolden our terrorist enemies; betray the hopes of the Iraqi people; lead to a terrorist state in control of huge oil reserves; shatter the confidence our regional allies have in America; undermine the spread of democracy in the Middle East; and mean the sacrifices of American troops would have been in vain. This “new direction” would lead to a crippling defeat for America and a staggering victory for Islamic extremists. That is not a direction this President will follow. The President is being guided by a commitment to victory — and that plan, in turn, is being driven by the counsel and recommendations of our military commanders in the region.


Let us imagine that Harry Reid as the following choices to make, which would he prefer to see come about:

A} Iraq stabilizes and becomes an ally to the United States in the war on Terror. Bush gets the credit.

B} The United States abandons Iraq, it collapses, hundreds of thousands of people die and it becomes home base to terrorists from all over the world. Bush gets blamed.

Now class, tell me which is the correct response?

13 comments:

Luther McLeod said...

Terrye

The correct answer to your question is an amazing thing to contemplate, is it not. I still, even after the last few years, occasionally find myself disbelieving that the Dems could be so obtuse and wrong.

But, yes, dead on and correct answer from Ambassador Bolton. Where are we at on the confirmation process anyway? He is needed more than ever.

terrye said...

luther:

I hear he will be confirmed this month. High time.

loner said...

It's Bolten...


Sincerely,

Joshua B. Bolten

Chief of Staff



The President will be in office until January 20, 2009 and until then, one assumes, he'll take whatever credit and reject whatever blame his Iraq policy engenders. One also assumes that his policy, such as it is, will not change.

...and so it goes.

terrye said...

loner:

Thanks, I keep doing that. over and over.

Luther McLeod said...

As usual, I am confused

This is the person I am talking about.

Where did Joshua B. Bolten come from?

Luther McLeod said...

Never mind... I'm slow OK.

terrye said...

luther:

You ain't the only one.

terrye said...

loner:

Considering the fact that the Democrat's policy seems to basically be about hiking their skirts and running for the hills I don't know that there are a lot of alternatives. I guess we could break Saddam out of jail and give the place back to him. Let him get back to whatever he was doing before Bush so rudely interrupted his ass.

chuck said...

Terrye,

You saying the Democrats are skirting the issue?

loner said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
loner said...

Terrye—

You're welcome.

No alternative while the President is the President and there is no reason to think he won't be the President for another 28+ months. Then the President will be someone else.

terrye said...

chuck:

I am saying they are two steppin like little Shirley Temple, just tap dancing all over the place.

terrye said...

loner:

True. Sooner or later someone else will have the job and then I guess we can start whippin up on whoever he or she might be.

Sometimes the only way to get through a thing, is to just do it.

I know that sounds banal, but it is really is true. I have seen enough sickness and injury to know that.