Republicans Criticize Bush 'Mistakes' on Iraq

[Epitome22]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._usa_policy_dc


By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Leading members of President Bush (news - web sites)'s Republican Party on Sunday criticized mistakes and "incompetence" in his Iraq (news - web sites) policy and called for an urgent ground offensive to retake insurgent sanctuaries.


In appearances on news talk shows, Republican senators also urged Bush to be more open with the American public after the disclosure of a classified CIA (news - web sites) report that gave a gloomy outlook for Iraq and raised the possibility of civil war.


"The fact is, we're in deep trouble in Iraq ... and I think we're going to have to look at some recalibration of policy," Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska said on CBS's "Face the Nation."


"We made serious mistakes," said Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), an Arizona Republican who has campaigned at Bush's side this year after patching up a bitter rivalry.


McCain, speaking on "Fox News Sunday," cited as mistakes the toleration of looting after the successful U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and failures to secure Iraq's borders or prevent insurgents from establishing strongholds within the country.


He said a ground offensive was urgently needed to retake areas held by insurgents, but a leading Democrat accused the administration of stalling for fear of hurting Bush's reelection chances.


The criticisms came as Bush prepared this week to host Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and focus strongly on Iraq after stepped up attacks from Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites).


After the CIA report was disclosed on Thursday, Kerry accused the president of living in a "fantasy world of spin" about Iraq and of not telling the truth about the growing chaos.


McCain said Bush had been "perhaps not as straight as maybe we'd like to see."


"I think the president is being clear. I would like to see him more clear," McCain said. He said Congress was expected to hold hearings on Iraq soon.


Sen. Richard Lugar (news, bio, voting record), an Indiana Republican and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also criticized the administration's handling of Iraq's reconstruction.


Only $1 billion of $18.4 billion allocated by Congress for the task has been spent, Lugar said. "This is the incompetence in the administration," he said on ABC's "This Week."


GROUND OFFENSIVE


A ground offensive was essential to clearing insurgents out of strongholds such as Falluja, McCain said. He joined other lawmakers from both parties who said Iraqi elections scheduled for January would be impossible unless this were done.


The New York Times reported on Sunday that the U.S. military intended to retake Falluja by the end of the year.


"We've got to take out the sanctuaries. We're going to have to sustain, tragically, some more casualties. Airstrikes don't do it; artillery doesn't do it. Boots on the ground do it," McCain said.


"And the longer we delay ...the more difficult the challenge is going to be and the more casualties we will incur," he said.





Sen. John Kyl, like McCain an Arizona Republican, said, "Allowing the Iraqis to make the decisions not to go into some of these sanctuaries, I think, turns out to have not been a good decision, which we're going to have to correct now by going in with our Marines and Army divisions."

Democratic Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, speaking on ABC, accused the administration of delaying an offensive out of concern it would hurt Bush's bid to win reelection on Nov. 2.

"The only thing I can figure as to why they're not doing it with a sense of urgency is that they don't want to do it before the election and they want to make it seem like everything is status quo," Biden said.

But Kyl said on CBS that time was also needed to train Iraqi troops to help secure areas recaptured from insurgents, and he disputed accusations Bush had not been open about the difficulties in Iraq.

McCain also called for enlarging the U.S. Army by 70,000 soldiers and the Marines by 20,000 to 25,000.

Kerry and other Democrats have said Bush plans to call up more part-time National Guard and Reserve troops after the November election to compensate for thinning ranks in the full-time military due to Iraq. The Bush campaign denied this.

Biden said disappointment with Bush's policies was bipartisan. "Dick Lugar, Joe Biden, Chuck Hagel, John McCain -- we are all on the same page. It is us and the administration. This has been incompetence so far," he said. (additional reporting by Sue Pleming)

[Chiwas]

I guess very few people, or none at all, are still thinking that the war on Iraq has been flawless.

[razap]

Amazing that CBS is getting hammered for receiving bad intelligence by neocons everywhere yet Bush gets a free ride going into Iraq on some "bad Intel". Secondly I am not surprised how you partisan hacks simply ignore these Republican Senators saying what Liberals have been saying for a while. Yet the predominant visited messages on this board concerns these memos.. Don't any of you think the President , yet again, is misleading the public about what is going on in Iraq?.

[jacktruth]

I agree. I wished a long time ago that they would have bombed the crap out of Fallujah.

Fallujah is what happens when you are in a war, but not in a war.

Which is exactly the reason that I don't want John Kerry as Commander in Chief.

[Drbio]

It amazes me that close minded hacks (I think that was your favorite term) can take four whole folks....wow....four? Really? and not consider the opinion of the remaining hundreds of senators and representatives. Golly gee....it amazes me that the hundreds and thousands of people who question the authenticity of certain memos are being ridiculed by those tens...maybe even dozens who insist they are authentic (when obviously they are not). Double standard for two please. Make mine to go.

You don't get it both ways....even though that is the dimacraptic way. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

[razap]

Originally posted by: Drbio
It amazes me that close minded hacks (I think that was your favorite term) can take four whole folks....wow....four? Really? and not consider the opinion of the remaining hundreds of senators and representatives. Golly gee....it amazes me that the hundreds and thousands of people who question the authenticity of certain memos are being ridiculed by those tens...maybe even dozens who insist they are authentic (when obviously they are not). Double standard for two please. Make mine to go.

You don't get it both ways....even though that is the dimacraptic way. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

Well you obviously got me..Comparing war mistakes to memos.. Dying GIs to possibly forged papers.. Now before you go off I think the documents are forged also but to compare reasons for going to war to partisan journalism does not make any sense.. I don't like Bush or any of his cronies.. whether he completed his guard duty or not..

[kg_veteran]

I'm not really happy with how the war is being handled at this point. Like Jacktruth, I think that we need to be more aggressive in bringing an end to the fighting by taking it to the "insurgents" in areas like Fallujah. But I'm sure not going to trust John Kerry to finish the job.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: razap

Well you obviously got me..Comparing war mistakes to memos.. Dying GIs to possibly forged papers.. Now before you go off I think the documents are forged also but to compare reasons for going to war to partisan journalism does not make any sense.. I don't like Bush or any of his cronies.. whether he completed his guard duty or not..

I'm curious. From all that you've posted on this board, I take it that you plan to vote for John Kerry. So what do you think John Kerry will do to handle the war in Iraq more effectively than President Bush?

[Drbio]

The better question is to ask how the inevitable flip-flop-ask-the-frenchies routine will make America safer or contribute to an independent democratic Iraq.


razap- it was a conceptual point, but thanks for clarifying your stance on the memos.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: razap
Amazing that CBS is getting hammered for receiving bad intelligence by neocons everywhere yet Bush gets a free ride going into Iraq on some "bad Intel". Secondly I am not surprised how you partisan hacks simply ignore these Republican Senators saying what Liberals have been saying for a while. Yet the predominant visited messages on this board concerns these memos.. Don't any of you think the President , yet again, is misleading the public about what is going on in Iraq?.

Amazing how blissfully and partisanly ignorant some people are. CBS is getting flak not for getting bad intel but for failing to properly vet the bad intel before they acted on it. This is totally different with the case for Bush. The Bush administration went to extradordinary lengths to vet the intelligence and found that most of the worlds intelligence services believed Iraq to have WMD's. In fact it has yet to be proved anywhere near conclusively that Iraq did not have WMD's. You are comparing apples and organces which you are unable to tell apart because of your partisan rose colored glasses.

[knowitall]

Kg, your always asking for that final answer. What's next KG? Are you going to ask us "what is the meaning of life".

How about we start from scratch. Eliminate those who made mistakes. They are likely to repeat them. You just don't get it.

[razap]

Originally posted by: kg_veteran

I'm curious. From all that you've posted on this board, I take it that you plan to vote for John Kerry. So what do you think John Kerry will do to handle the war in Iraq more effectively than President Bush?

He can internationalize the force currently is occuppying Iraq. He can increase the number of troops in Iraq. His admistration will mend alliances that Bush destroyed. Whether you like France, Germany or Russia that fact remains that they have military strength which we will need at some point. Bush said it himself that we cannot win this fight (war on terror) alone. Kerry will also admit that Bush made a mistake and that we are going to learn from it and move on. he will rally the world behind us again something Bush will never be able to do.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Kg, your always asking for that final answer. What's next KG? Are you going to ask us "what is the meaning of life".

How about we start from scratch. Eliminate those who made mistakes. They are likely to repeat them. You just don't get it.

Another non-quality oral diarrhea from the troll Ms. Howard Dean.

[Drbio]

He can internationalize the force currently is occuppying Iraq.

Bush offered them the opportunity. He cannot make them join.

He can increase the number of troops in Iraq.

If Bush did this he would be assaulted by the dimocraps, but it is now ok for them to increase troops? Kerry has all week ripped Bush for having a secret plan to increase troops and now you want to use it as a positive backing for kerry?

His admistration will mend alliances that Bush destroyed.

kerry has no alliances, so I guess he could be friendly with france et al and let them run our country.

Whether you like France, Germany or Russia that fact remains that they have military strength which we will need at some point. Bush said it himself that we cannot win this fight (war on terror) alone.

I don't like france. They are cowards of the highest order. I respect Germany and Russia but am disappointed in their response. HOWEVER, that is their right. Others have the right to disagree with them though. We will win the war on terror because we have a President with a set of stones who will not back down. Kerry offer neither stones nor dedication to anything other than appeasement.

Kerry will also admit that Bush made a mistake and that we are going to learn from it and move on.

kerry is a tard. It is not his place to speak on behalf of Bush. Thankfully, it will nto be his palce to speak on behalf of the US next year either.

he will rally the world behind us again something Bush will never be able to do.

Anti-American sentiment is anti-American sentiment. Kerry has no ability to do anything about it.

[dalmations202]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Kg, your always asking for that final answer. What's next KG? Are you going to ask us "what is the meaning of life".

How about we start from scratch. Eliminate those who made mistakes. They are likely to repeat them. You just don't get it.

This has got to be the dumbest, most illogical, stupid, partisan, non-thinking, post I have ever read on this board.

KG asks a legitimate question, then you bash that, and the say remove everyone involved, and that he doesn't get it..........WOW

[knowitall]

You don't like France. Your dissapointed with Germany and Russia. Why? Is it because they've shown superior intelligence by not engaging in foolish behavior? A real coward is one that refuses to admit their mistakes. Someone with power and the ability to affect so many lives should be brave enough to admit the truth.

[razap]

I don't like france. They are cowards of the highest order. I respect Germany and Russia but am disappointed in their response. HOWEVER, that is their right. Others have the right to disagree with them though. We will win the war on terror because we have a President with a set of stones who will not back down. Kerry offer neither stones nor dedication to anything other than appeasement.


Where do you get that a Dem would appease to terrorists? Iraq is not part of the war on terror and you must admit that. Having balls without common sense will get you killed. Kerry will defend our country and will not make grave errors with is judgement when committing our forces into battle alone without allies.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: razap
I don't like france. They are cowards of the highest order. I respect Germany and Russia but am disappointed in their response. HOWEVER, that is their right. Others have the right to disagree with them though. We will win the war on terror because we have a President with a set of stones who will not back down. Kerry offer neither stones nor dedication to anything other than appeasement.


Where do you get that a Dem would appease to terrorists? Iraq is not part of the war on terror and you must admit that. Having balls without common sense will get you killed. Kerry will defend our country and will not make grave errors with is judgement when committing our forces into battle alone without allies.

Kerry has mentioned Iraq as part of the war on terror, even you must admit that. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
You don't like France. Your dissapointed with Germany and Russia. Why? Is it because they've shown superior intelligence by not engaging in foolish behavior? A real coward is one that refuses to admit their mistakes. Someone with power and the ability to affect so many lives should be brave enough to admit the truth.

Ignorant Troll.

Ms. Howard Dean whiffs again.

[Chiwas]

I'll tell you what I would do it.

To pull back the troops and to hire the Israelies as consultants to make a mega plan to start a real war on terrorism, based on precise attacks and murder of the main leaders. They know how to do it, I assure you, to find them and to kill them at a very low cost; they are already doing it and keeping their movement relegated.

I don't care about people leaders and guerrillas that are defending their land. I'm talking about terrorists.

Yes, a new one would show after every murder, but he would be killed as well. Once and again, once and again.

They, the terrorists, must be busy over there, trying to safe their life, feeling fear all the time, not having time to counterattack. If fundamentalism, if the hatred towards Occident will never end, the best we could do is to make the war on their heads.

I don't care if Bush or Kerry does it. But the actual war on Iraq (and Afghanistan) is erroneous if it's considered as part of the war on terrorism. Also, if it's a part of a economic or strategic plan, you, know oil and stuff, or the control of strategic territories and stuff, you don't need to fight a nation, you only need to fight -or "convence"- its leaders, religious and/or political.

But above all, you don't need to lose your soldiers or to kill civilians.


P.S. That's what I loved the attack of Reagan on Kadafi at Libya. It prevented a lot of terrorism, stopped a lunatic dude, and stablished a precedent. Without a single loss.

[razap]

Originally posted by: LRB

Kerry has mentioned Iraq as part of the war on terror, even you must admit that. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

duh now it is ..iraq is hot spot for american killers now thanks to bush. yes i blame bush for iraq.

[knowitall]

Didn't we all think Iraq was part of the war on terror? Bush's lies are responsible for that. A betrayal of the highest order.

[Drbio]

Where do you get that a Dem would appease to terrorists?

Kery has already said he would seek out the opinion of others before responding. His more sensitive war on terror is entrenched in appeasement.

Iraq is not part of the war on terror and you must admit that.

I'm not sure where you have been, but in the last week Collin Powell stated that there are clear links between Iraq, Saddam and Al Quaeda. The statement was that there was no clear link between Saddam and the 9-11 attacks per se, but that clear and obvious links were established between Al Quaeda and Iraq.

Having balls without common sense will get you killed. Kerry will defend our country and will not make grave errors with is judgement when committing our forces into battle alone without allies.

Kerry will harm our troops because he will weaken their resolve, reduce the equipment, training and support and empower the enemy with appeasement tactics.

No thank you.

[razap]

Originally posted by: Drbio

Kery has already said he would seek out the opinion of others before responding. His more sensitive war on terror is entrenched in appeasement.

I'm not sure where you have been, but in the last week Collin Powell stated that there are clear links between Iraq, Saddam and Al Quaeda. The statement was that there was no clear link between Saddam and the 9-11 attacks per se, but that clear and obvious links were established between Al Quaeda and Iraq.

Kerry will harm our troops because he will weaken their resolve, reduce the equipment, training and support and empower the enemy with appeasement tactics.

No thank you.

So you do not have anything that states he will appease? Did not think so. You mean actually thinking before you go guns a blazing into a situation ? I take a guy who will actually thinks before he acts. How will kerry weaken their resolve? I hear plenty of talking points but nothing to back up your claims. What I see is you reading into what he says and then interpreting it to suit your beliefs.


His more sensitive war on terror is entrenched in appeasement.


You mean not insulting our allies and alienating our country to fight this alone? he will not send our young people to die without exhausting all other avenues..something bush did not do..

[LRB]

Originally posted by: razap

duh now it is ..iraq is hot spot for american killers now thanks to bush. yes i blame bush for iraq.

I can certainly see why you support kerry so much. You're just like him. 1st you say Iraq not part of war on terror, and then you say it is.

[kg_veteran]

Originally posted by: razap

He can internationalize the force currently is occuppying Iraq. He can increase the number of troops in Iraq. His admistration will mend alliances that Bush destroyed. Whether you like France, Germany or Russia that fact remains that they have military strength which we will need at some point. Bush said it himself that we cannot win this fight (war on terror) alone. Kerry will also admit that Bush made a mistake and that we are going to learn from it and move on. he will rally the world behind us again something Bush will never be able to do.

Thanks for answering the question rather than engaging in rhetoric like Mrs. Howard Dean.

Doc answered these points pretty well, but I'll add my two cents:

1. What makes you think that Kerry can succeed at "internationalizing" the force to a greater extent than Bush has? Is John Kerry going to be able to convince any country to reverse their stance on the war in Iraq such that they will be willing to send troops? I personally doubt it. If you disagree, I'd be curious to hear which countries you think will respond to Kerry's appeal for them to send troops.

2. Increase the number of troops in Iraq? Kerry just ripped Bush for planning a "backdoor draft" the day after the election. I'm pretty sure that means he's against increasing the number of troops in Iraq.

3. What makes you think the alliances with France, Germany, and Russia need mending? They are still our allies, and they darn sure look to us when they need help. I don't see any reason to expect that to change. As for them helping us in Iraq, see No. 1 above.

[knowitall]

Lrb, when he says "it is now" he means because Bush has given birth to thousands of terrorist. A creation of Bush's stupid, selfish, personal agenda. We're stuck on a bus with a maniac at the wheel. You want him to continue because your dumb enough to think he's the only one qualified to drive. What a joke.

[jacktruth]

He can internationalize the force currently is occuppying Iraq.

How will he do it? France didn't get in because they didn't agree that we should be there, not because they didn't like Bush. The only way is to say, France, Germany, Russia, what can we do accomodate you. The only answer to that is to allow them to control our foreign policy and why would we take war advice from a country that has no backbone?

He can increase the number of troops in Iraq.

See Drbio.

His admistration will mend alliances that Bush destroyed.

You could easily make a case that the UN, France, Germany and Russia are the ones that broke alliances.

Whether you like France, Germany or Russia that fact remains that they have military strength which we will need at some point. Bush said it himself that we cannot win this fight (war on terror) alone. Kerry will also admit that Bush made a mistake and that we are going to learn from it and move on. he will rally the world behind us again something Bush will never be able to do.

What is interesting to me about Russia is that after the school masacre, they adopted a policy of doing whatever it takes to stomp out terrorism wherever it exists, anywhere in the world, which is the same policy that we have. My guess is that if Osama took down the Eiffel Tower, France my take a similar approach to the terror threat. Of course, Osama would never do that to France because France is not a threat and is darn near an ally to terrorism.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Lrb, when he says "it is now" he means because Bush has given birth to thousands of terrorist. A creation of Bush's stupid, selfish, personal agenda. We're stuck on a bus with a maniac at the wheel. You want him to continue because your dumb enough to think he's the only one qualified to drive. What a joke.

*sigh*
The internet troll Ms. Howard Dean rears her ugly head again. No substance. No Style. No point.

Pathetic.

[Dooby]

Kerry mentioned Lugar's comments in his speech today.

Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign relations Committee, after Kerry's speech, this afternoon:

As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator John Kerry has failed to participate in almost two-dozen bipartisan open oversight hearings. At these hearings, both Republicans and Democrats have offered timely criticism and helped President Bush to continue to shape, refine, and improve our policies and activities in Iraq. Without offering any alternative plans that our Committee and the American people could debate, Senator Kerry has tried to argue that President Bush is concealing the truth and the potential that events in Iraq will become worse. In fact, with the participation of the Administration, we have been publicly airing and examining all scenarios, including the worst outcomes. Through constructive bipartisan criticism, we believe that we have supported and strengthened the resolve and resources of our President, our troops, and the Iraqis. With our help, the Iraqis are pushing through terrorist obstacles to freedom, democracy, and a better life in a country that has suffered through decades of tyranny and has routinely committed aggression against other nations.
We look forward, this week, to the visit of Prime Minister Allawi of Iraq with President Bush, his speech to a joint session of the Congress, and opportunities for Senators to question the Prime Minister and advise him on ways that we can work more successfully together.”

I don't know how many people realize this, but Lugar has the temperment of the Pope. The guy is unflappable. And here he is-"flapped". For Lugar to lash out like this against Kerry, he must really be PO'd.

[LRB]

It's clear that Kerry has been remiss in his duties as a Senator. Why should we expect him to be anything other than remiss in his duties as President it elected?

[Drbio]

Lugar recognizes idiocy when he sees it.

[Chiwas]

[dude1394]

Although I welcome criticism from all sides on issues, the republicans need to understand that statements made publicly during this season will not be taken as constructive criticism but will be used by their opponents for political fodder. It will also be played in the worst light by the msm without exploring where the statement comes from.

Unfortunately they should just hush publicly when their statements question their party's strategy. Take it offline.