Gay Patriot Header Image

Lieberman: We Need More Troops In Iraq

Thank God there is at least one sane Democrat who understands the stakes in World War III.

Why We Need More Troops In Iraq – Sen. Joe Lieberman, Washington Post

I’ve just spent 10 days traveling in the Middle East and speaking to leaders there, all of which has made one thing clearer to me than ever: While we are naturally focused on Iraq, a larger war is emerging. On one side are extremists and terrorists led and sponsored by Iran, on the other moderates and democrats supported by the United States. Iraq is the most deadly battlefield on which that conflict is being fought. How we end the struggle there will affect not only the region but the worldwide war against the extremists who attacked us on Sept. 11, 2001.

Because of the bravery of many Iraqi and coalition military personnel and the recent coming together of moderate political forces in Baghdad, the war is winnable. We and our Iraqi allies must do what is necessary to win it.

The American people are justifiably frustrated by the lack of progress, and the price paid by our heroic troops and their families has been heavy. But what is needed now, especially in Washington and Baghdad, is not despair but decisive action — and soon.

As the hostile regimes in Iran and Syria appreciate — at times, it seems, more keenly than we do — failure in Iraq would be a strategic and moral catastrophe for the United States and its allies. Radical Islamist terrorist groups, both Sunni and Shiite, would reap victories simultaneously symbolic and tangible, as Iraq became a safe haven in which to train and strengthen their foot soldiers and Iran’s terrorist agents. Hezbollah and Hamas would be greatly strengthened against their moderate opponents. One moderate Palestinian leader told me that a premature U.S. exit from Iraq would be a victory for Iran and the groups it is supporting in the region. Meanwhile, the tens of thousands of Iraqis who have bravely stood with us in the hope of a democratic future would face the killing fields.

In Iraq today we have a responsibility to do what is strategically and morally right for our nation over the long term — not what appears easier in the short term. The daily scenes of death and destruction are heartbreaking and infuriating. But there is no better strategic and moral alternative for America than standing with the moderate Iraqis until the country is stable and they can take over their security. Rather than engaging in hand-wringing, carping or calls for withdrawal, we must summon the vision, will and courage to take the difficult and decisive steps needed for success and, yes, victory in Iraq. That will greatly advance the cause of moderation and freedom throughout the Middle East and protect our security at home.

If only our Commander In Chief had as this much support in the American news media, the public would be as aware of the stakes as Senator Lieberman.  On the other hand, his fellow Senate Democrats like Christopher Dodd, John Kerry, Arlen Specter (yes, I know…) and Bill Nelson spent their holidays meeting with our enemy in Damascus

But Joe Lieberman is truly is an example of a Profile In Courage in our time.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

32 Comments

  1. Gee, only six months ago, Lieberman was saying we’d be reducing our troop strength by now. And as recently as November, he was saying we already had a “strategy for victory” so when is he going to tell us what it is? Like the rest of the neoCons, Lieberman has been repeatedly wrong on this issue. Why should he be takenly seriously now?

    Comment by Ian — December 30, 2006 @ 10:28 am - December 30, 2006

  2. Three cheers for Senator Lieberman. He has formulated his opinion based on very recent talks with Middle East leadership that are moderately friendly to the U.S. as opposed to his commie/terrorist
    sympathizer from his state, Chris Dodd, visiting our enemies. The very same advised President Uribe of Colombia to compromise the terrorist friendly guerillas FARC.

    Comment by Roberto — December 30, 2006 @ 10:53 am - December 30, 2006

  3. Joe Lieberman and John McCain are the only liberals who really want to win this war.

    Comment by V the K — December 30, 2006 @ 12:34 pm - December 30, 2006

  4. More troops is only part of the answer.

    We need to summon the will and the stomach to win. Our enemies are brutes and need to be dealt with as such. To hell with political correctness.

    We need to break their will to continue and we need to give the “bystanders” in the M.E. a stark choice: stop aiding and abetting the terrorists or suffer terrible consequences.

    Our enemies don’t respect us nor do they fear us. And that’s no way to win a war.

    Comment by Robert — December 30, 2006 @ 12:43 pm - December 30, 2006

  5. #4: I agree. The Ethiopians are kicking Islamist butt, mainly because they don’t have to worry about political correctness.

    Naturally, the UN is trying to stop the Ethiopians from defeating the Somali Taliban. Sooner or later, we’re going to have to recognize that the UN is pro-jihadist.

    Comment by V the K — December 30, 2006 @ 1:35 pm - December 30, 2006

  6. Don’t get too excited with the Ethiopians. They are not a pleasant bunch. This is a case of “the enemy of my enemy”, nothing more. They are doing their own bit of ethnic cleansing

    Comment by mrsizer — December 30, 2006 @ 2:37 pm - December 30, 2006

  7. If only our Commander In Chief had as this much support in the American news media, the public would be as aware of the stakes as Senator Lieberman.

    If only Bush had had this much support in his own Administration when Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shenseki got lamed-ducked by Wolfowitz and Rumsfield when he called for more troops before we ever set foot in Iraq in the first place.

    The mistakes of the Bush Administration are far to numerous to be all chalked up to media bias.

    Comment by Patrick (gryph) — December 30, 2006 @ 2:48 pm - December 30, 2006

  8. I support the President’s forthcoming plan for more troops too… because I want another Democratic sweep in 2008.

    So, stay the course, Mr. President! Because your pipe dream of democracy in Iraq will enable my much more realistic dream of a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic President.

    Keep up the good, and by good I mean bad, work, Mr. President.

    Comment by Chase — December 30, 2006 @ 3:11 pm - December 30, 2006

  9. #8 – I don’t understand. We’re not talking about pork projects here or yet another entitlement.

    We’re talking about the lives of thousands, perhaps millions, endangered by a malignant ideology (Islamofascism).

    What thinking person would want the president to fail simply to pave the way for a political victory in 2008?

    When Clinton was president, I had a lot of issues with his politics and his character but when he was tasked with protecting the country from murderous loons – he had my unwavering wish for total success. If only he’d been more aggressive. If John F-ing Kerry was president now, I’d hope for his success in the GWOT even if it meant a likely Hillary victory in 2008.

    The left needs to grow up.

    Comment by Robert — December 30, 2006 @ 5:32 pm - December 30, 2006

  10. Chase believes, Robert, that the recent election wins will allow him and his fellow DailyKos leftists to come out of the closet and proclaim what they truly believe.

    Chase alternates between here, where he supposedly opposes hate speech and fanatical partisanship, and DailyKos/Democratic Underground, where he encourages it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 30, 2006 @ 5:50 pm - December 30, 2006

  11. Ouch….. mark that a KO of Chase at the hands of NDT.

    Bravo.

    Comment by GayPatriot — December 30, 2006 @ 6:52 pm - December 30, 2006

  12. I think Chase just admitted what we have always said about his side, they want America to lose so that Democrats will win.

    Comment by V the K — December 30, 2006 @ 6:56 pm - December 30, 2006

  13. Actually, my favorite with Chase was his revelation that his brother, a Democrat who is even more liberal than he, works for the Secret Service and is allegedly in charge of preventing counterfeiting.

    That explains a lot about why North Korea is so singularly successful in doing it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 30, 2006 @ 7:08 pm - December 30, 2006

  14. I have to say it’s true. Chase has posed on GayPatriot before as a centrist – as someone who wants to win the War on Terror but just isn’t sure how, etc. But in #8, the mask drops.

    In #8, we see an individual who (1) believes deeply that Iraq can’t be won for democracy, and (2) truly hopes for American defeat – that America kills itself trying.

    Comment by Calarato — December 30, 2006 @ 7:34 pm - December 30, 2006

  15. You have “sane” and “WWIII” in the same sentence? There are places for people who make up their own realities.

    And, seriously, you people that go on and on about democracy in Iraq apparently know nothing about how democracy emerges, how it is sustained, what its conditions of possibility are. Why don’t you start finding out that you can’t force democracy on people, no matter how well-intentioned you are or how much those having it forced on them claim to want it, by reading Harvard government professor Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. You’ll find, as even Tocqueville saw, democracy depends on long standing traditions of voulntary civic associations, etc. The blue/purple finger pics are cute; but they don’t get at why this excursion in Iraq will not work.

    And now the comments on this blog are about insulting other commenter’s siblings? (#13)

    I’ll let you get back to your 101st Fighting Keyboardists tasks now….sorry for the interruption.

    Comment by sean — December 30, 2006 @ 8:38 pm - December 30, 2006

  16. And, seriously, you people that go on and on about democracy in Iraq apparently know nothing about how democracy emerges, how it is sustained, what its conditions of possibility are.

    What we do know is that people like you, Sean, are coming up with every reason and excuse for why the Iraqis should have stayed under Saddam’s brutal dictatorship, rather than to attempt democracy.

    What I find amusing is that you don’t quote Putnam’s theory to explain why democracy in Kosovo was doomed to fail, or in Eastern Europe post-communism, since they were placed in the same situation as the Iraqis coming out from underneath brutal and repressive regimes.

    The reason why is simple; denying democracy to the non-white is much easier to rationalize to a Democrat than denying it to white Europeans.

    Winston Churchill said it best; “Democracy is the worst system of government….except for all the others.”

    Your rants prove nicely why we can say with all confidence that liberals supported Saddam Hussein.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 30, 2006 @ 8:54 pm - December 30, 2006

  17. There are places for people who make up their own realities.

    Like DailyKos and 9-11 Truther conventions.

    Comment by V the K — December 30, 2006 @ 8:55 pm - December 30, 2006

  18. #4:

    we need to give the “bystanders” in the M.E. a stark choice: stop aiding and abetting the terrorists or suffer terrible consequences.

    What you seem to be suggesting would constitute a war crime. It’s just this sort of “total war” tactic that got Saddam hung by his neck. Some would argue that by waging aggressive war under false pretenses, Bush and his cronies have already committed indictable war crimes. You seem to wish to remove all doubt about it.

    Comment by Ian — December 30, 2006 @ 9:23 pm - December 30, 2006

  19. What we find amusing, Ian, is that for all your rhetoric about “war crimes”, you and your s seem to exercise an astonishing degree of blindness when it comes to people actually committing them.

    Salient point:

    Further investigation revealed that the kidnapping victims were relatives of Iraqi policemen in nearby cities.

    And also, since you’re here, what kept you and your fellow leftists from indicting and bringing Saddam Hussein up on war crimes charges, especially after his invasion of Kuwait — which by all accounts was an aggressive war waged under false pretenses?

    Oh, that’s right; you were too busy bashing the United States.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 30, 2006 @ 9:36 pm - December 30, 2006

  20. #19; My. you’re sounding very “screechy”. If you’d respond to the points made instead of veering off-topic into your own petty tirades, you’d garner a little more respect. The original commenter – and he has plenty of company among the 101st Fighting Keyboardists – is calling for collective punishment to be wreaked on civilians when the insurgents attack our our the Iraqi government’s troops. This is no different from the criminal act that sent Saddam to the gallows. Now if you support such tactics, why don’t you and the rest of the war mongers stop being coy and actually come out and proudly profess your desire for our troops to commit war crimes.

    Comment by Ian — December 30, 2006 @ 11:47 pm - December 30, 2006

  21. The original commenter – and he has plenty of company among the 101st Fighting Keyboardists – is calling for collective punishment to be wreaked on civilians when the insurgents attack our our the Iraqi government’s troops.

    Look at what was said, Ian (added emphasis mine):

    we need to give the “bystanders” in the M.E. a stark choice: stop aiding and abetting the terrorists or suffer terrible consequences.

    What you are saying is that people who aid and abet terrorists should not be held accountable for their actions in doing so.

    Furthermore, you and yours are busy pointing fingers about “war crimes” allegedly being committed, while flatly ignoring the ones that ARE being committed by these terrorists and their supporters.

    Now, Ian, you will answer: was it a war crime to take the relatives of those Iraqi police hostage? And if so, why are you and your fellow global leftists not DEMANDING that the Iraqi terrorists who did so be indicted and brought up on trial, or sending your own leftist-allied “police” over to get them?

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 31, 2006 @ 12:51 am - December 31, 2006

  22. #16. Playing the race card now? LOL!!!

    The discussion isn’t about Kosovo or Eastern Europe. Close to 3000 Americans haven’t died for a failed attempt at democracy in those places. What may be racist is you thinking that democracy is better than tribal governance, but I really don’t know because I am not concerned with playing the race card with you.

    Finally, I didn’t quote Putnam at all. I asked you to read him yourself. But you of all people–why should you read anything at all when you are perfectly sure about everything? Seriously, people that use history to study these important questions–what the hell good are they when we have you? And Bush? And his administration?

    If you really think that democracy is the reason we are there now, I have some WMD to sell you.

    Comment by sean — December 31, 2006 @ 1:05 am - December 31, 2006

  23. PS When are the blog owners going to just give the Dallas lady her own posting privileges on here? Might as well…

    Comment by sean — December 31, 2006 @ 1:07 am - December 31, 2006

  24. What may be racist is you thinking that democracy is better than tribal governance,

    Unfortunately, that’s not what the Iraqis had under Saddam. What they had was unquestionably a dictatorship, built on complete control and suppression, with all command concentrated in the hands of one individual.

    The simple fact of the matter is, sean, that you and yours did everything in your power to perpetuate Saddam’s regime, and ever since it was toppled, have done everything in your power to disparage, denigrate, and otherwise exact revenge against those who did get rid of Saddam and those who are building a democratic Iraq.

    And let me remind you in light of your current claim that you “didn’t quote Putnam at all”:

    Why don’t you start finding out that you can’t force democracy on people, no matter how well-intentioned you are or how much those having it forced on them claim to want it, by reading Harvard government professor Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. You’ll find, as even Tocqueville saw, democracy depends on long standing traditions of voulntary civic associations, etc.

    i’ve read Putnam. And nowhere in there did I see your belief that the Iraqis are unfit for democracy, or that white European cultures that went to democracy under similar situations were “doomed to failure”, as you insist the Iraqis are; indeed, Putnam’s book lays out a framework for how societies like these CAN succeed.

    And as far as casualties go, ten-plus times the number of Americans died to “force” democracy in Germany and Japan in World War II as have in Iraq.

    But what this really boils down to, Sean, is a hatred so deep that you preferred the Iraqis be under Saddam rather than have a self-governing democracy.

    That hatred is, in my opinion, most likely racial in nature, although I do think no small amount of anti-Bush and anti-American thought plays into it as well.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 31, 2006 @ 2:26 am - December 31, 2006

  25. OMFG. (Or if you prefer, JHC.) sean really said, “What may be racist is you thinking that democracy is better than tribal governance”??????

    What is racist is: NOT thinking democracy is better than tribal “governance”!! (Condemning people to squalor and unfreedom, just because they aren’t European-descended!)

    And sean – Regarding Saddam’s WMD – Why don’t you try getting a little knowledge sometime? Say, just by reading the Duelfer Report? Try it – You might like it.

    The only catch is: You do have to actually read the thing, in order to see how jam-packed with WMD research Saddam’s Iraq was (and how badly the NYT and delusional Kos have misled you in this area).

    Reading it… That’s the challenge.

    And if establishing democracy isn’t the answer to evil dictatorships that drive their desperate peoples to Islamo-fascism – What is? Kindly enlighten us with your superior left-liberal suggestions to actually ***HELP AMERICA WIN*** against Islamo-fascism. (Or if you prefer, against terrorism; we may consider the terms equivalent in this context.)

    Comment by Calarato — December 31, 2006 @ 3:54 am - December 31, 2006

  26. #21:

    What you are saying is that people who aid and abet terrorists should not be held accountable for their actions in doing so.

    Hardly. We already have the means and authority to hold those people accountable but the original commenter wants more. In fact he specifically demands “terrible consequences” which, in conjunction with the description here of what some on the right think are appropriate tactics, give me cause to believe that some here support the commission of war crimes by the USA.

    Comment by Ian — December 31, 2006 @ 2:33 pm - December 31, 2006

  27. We already have the means and authority to hold those people accountable but the original commenter wants more.

    Actually, what is made clear by the previous commentor is that we are going to use that means and authority to hold people accountable.

    What you are claiming, Ian, is that holding people who aid and abet terrorists accountable for their actions is a “war crime”.

    What we should remember is that leftists like you, Ian, do not hold terrorists who kidnap and murder the families of Iraqi policemen to be guilty of “war crimes”. Nor do you find leaders, such as Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, to be guilty of such when they order their forces to deliberately target civilian villages and cities. Indeed, according to leftist Democrats like Ramsey Clark and International ANSWER, Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic were innocent of the charges of “war crimes”.

    In short, your definition of “war crime” is “anything that the US might do to hold terrorists and their supporters accountable”.

    But go ahead and continue to make it public that you and your fellow leftists will try to block any attempt to hold terrorists and their supporters accountable. I suppose it’s about time the American public realizes it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 31, 2006 @ 2:53 pm - December 31, 2006

  28. [Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]

    Comment by Chase — December 31, 2006 @ 3:28 pm - December 31, 2006

  29. You people are trash, all of you. You make things up about people and then pretend they are the truth.

    Followed by:

    And Bruce, stay away from the Christmas cookies, it might help you get some sleep. Or perhaps it is just the weight of your bull crap that is collapsing your throat when you sleep?

    No irony deficiency there.

    You’d think, because one makes more money off of advertising the more readers one has, that you’d encourage all to read your blog and make it a hospitalable atmosphere. But when you cheer on someone else’s slander, you obviously have different intentions.

    You assume the following:

    1) GP and GPW do this to make money

    2) That people actually come here to read what you post

    The first is false; in fact, in order to keep some semblance of privacy and his blog operating, GP has had to incur sizeable legal expenses — all due to the actions of “gay activist” Mike Rogers, a paid Democratic Party operative who receives funds from several Democratic Party legislators and bureaucrats, who systematically harassed and threatened GP’s employer, partner, and associates.

    The second is partially true, if for no other reason than it never hurts for us to be continually reminded of how gay leftists are so willfully blind to the corruption and hatred that permeates their party — and so sensitive when the people to whom they turn a blind eye when their fellow leftists slander them as “self-loathing Jewish Nazis” make remarks about them.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 31, 2006 @ 5:33 pm - December 31, 2006

  30. Game, set, match. ND30 wins in straight sets (no pun intended).

    Y’all obviously don’t know the slogan “DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS.” Also, it seems, that the Iowa Hawkeyes didn’t either in last night’s Alamo Bowl.

    Happy New Year!

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — December 31, 2006 @ 7:21 pm - December 31, 2006

  31. OT, but it looks like those silly leftoids who claimed Bush wasn’t doing anything about North Korea appear to be wrong, yet again.

    Comment by V the K — December 31, 2006 @ 8:08 pm - December 31, 2006

  32. #27:

    What you are claiming, Ian, is that holding people who aid and abet terrorists accountable for their actions is a “war crime”.

    Well it is under any reasonable definition of the phrase “terrible consequences.”

    Comment by Ian — December 31, 2006 @ 9:50 pm - December 31, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.