Reid raps top generals; GOP response harsh

Source: AP

WASHINGTON – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid caused a stir Thursday when he said Gen. Peter Pace failed in his job of providing Congress a candid assessment on the Iraq war and that he was concerned Gen. David Petraeus might be guilty of the same.

Democrats typically have shied from stinging comments on military officers, instead focusing on President Bush and administration policies in Iraq.

Republicans responded vigorously to the charge against Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

“In a time of war,” White House spokesman Tony Snow said, “for a leader of a party that says it supports the military, it seems outrageous to be issuing slanders toward the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and also the man that is responsible for the bulk of military operations in Iraq.”

Mike Duncan, chairman of the Republican National Committee said: “Harry Reid doesn’t understand that there are some lines you just don’t cross.”



Read more: http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/nation/17371722.htm?source=rss&channel=journalgazette_nation

It's just so clear that the Rethugs think they can just push Reid around with rhetoric like this. I'm thinking they're right.

sigh...

:)

So if he was trying to make news, why didn't it happen the first time he mentioned it?

......(from IP):.......The majority leader stopped short of calling Pace incompetent and declined to confirm a report in “The Politico” that he had done so earlier in the week in a private phone call to a group of liberal bloggers.

can't have that while people are F***ING DYING

will someone please remind these buffoons that we are not really at war? That the 'war' is a PR slogan, not a real 'war'.

REID: Well, I guess the President, he's gotten rid of Pace because he could not get confirmed here in the Senate. Pace is also a yes-man for the President. I told him to his face, I laid it out last time he came in to see me. I told him what an incompetent man I thought he was. But he got rid of his Joint Chiefs of Staff chair, but he still hangs on to this failed Attorney General. And I guess he's gonna . We're gonna keep focusing on it. Every day that goes by, it seems he keeps giving. Now we've learned that the immigration judges are all graduates of Regent University I guess.

The he that got rid of his Joint Chiefs is Bush not Pace.

Sadly, the posts in this thread clearly show how so-called-democrats are so willing to throw Reid under the bus, thus giving large contributions to the corruption of truth. This thread should have been about how Reid's words were purposely twisted.

.........The switch in the Democrats’ focus began last week when they told Defense Secretary Robert Gates they would challenge Pace if he were nominated for a second two-year term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They cited his role as the president’s closest military adviser on a failing war.

Reid, D-Nev., went further Thursday when he said he was happy to hear of Pace’s departure. The majority leader stopped short of calling Pace incompetent and declined to confirm a report in “The Politico” that he had done so earlier in the week in a private phone call to a group of liberal bloggers.

But he essentially said as much when he told reporters that Pace “had not done a very good job in speaking out for some obvious things that weren’t going right in Iraq.”

Reid said he also was concerned about Petraeus, who told USA Today this week that there are “astonishing signs of normalcy” throughout the majority of Baghdad.

Yes, Reid did critize Pace. But the duplicitous and feigned outrage being thrown against Reid is that he called the general incompetent. That story has been parsed all over MSM.


http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28761

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jun/14/obtained_a_tape_of_reids_conference_call_with_bloggers_reid_did_blast_pace


It is imperative to this corrupt administration that democrats are perceived as hating the military. Since JEB fostered his illegal absentee voting campaign in the spring of 2000, and then had his fake hissy fit when democrats wanted to rightfully disqualify illegal absentee ballots, it has been clear to me that republicans will use every chance they can to thump this theme.

With the elections coming, any comments that disparage our military personel will be interpreted as an attack on our troops, and support for our enemies. Instead of criticizing ours Generals, we should promote an intelligent and effective alternative strategy that protects our national security and defends America's national interest over the long term.

Attacking our military is not a winning strategy in 2008. It seems like Hillary Clinton is the only Democrat candidate that understands the reality of terrorism and is willing to take a strong stand to fight this very real threat.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the track record on democratic apologizing is not very good, you've got to admit...

It's the fear of the upcomming apology - especially for nothing wrong that was not said as you have pointed out - is that what bugs us...

Only in much more polite terms. I was there for six months back in 2005 over in the Al-Anbar province when I was in the USMC. I was an Aviation Ordnanceman, and though I never was with the ground pounders, we had rockets coming at our base 2-3 times a month. And ever since then I've been more cynical of these so-called generals claiming normalcy in Iraq. It's not even one side against another, it's multiple sides with changeable alliances. Added to that, all of the competent military generals with the sac to say what is a good or bad strategy to this administration are retired. Nowadays, it's just yes-men who want to maintain their career or those who believe bush is on a holy mission from god.

So yeah, I think Reid has every right to state his opinion of these generals. It would be wrong not to criticize them. Would you have told those Vietnam Vets or politicians 40 years ago that it would be wrong to criticize Gen. Westmoreland on his body count analysis?

My son was in Al-Anbar in Oct 2005 USMC 3/7 out of 29 Palms. He got blown to shit but is ALIVE and getting out of the Marines next month. Again Welcome!

:hi: Harry is entitled to his opinion and IMO he's right. Petraeus made the rounds today backtracking on what he earlier had said just this week.



Petraeus: No 'substantial achievements' from Iraqi leaders amid troop increase


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- When he was being confirmed for his post five months ago, the top U.S. general in Iraq said the "objective" of the increase in U.S. troops was to help the Iraqi government make "tough decisions" and "move forward." But in an interview Sunday, Gen. David Petraeus acknowledged that has not happened.

"There certainly have not been real substantial achievements in that regard so far," he told Fox News Sunday.

But, Petraeus said, Iraqi leaders "are very much coming to grips" with issues involving oil revenues, and that there have been "smaller achievements," such as in creating a budget.

Petraeus' remarks came after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last week questioned his credibility, noting an interview in which Petraeus cited "astonishing signs of normalcy in Baghdad."


http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/06/17/sunday/index.html

Because the GOP has not, in the past, been terribly circumspect about critiquing the military and its efforts. Certain Senator Straight Talk McCain hasn't been. But the media will be distracted by the overwrought fake outrage from the GOP (again), and they will report on what they think the American people are thinking without really knowing (again). That is, they will posit that the American people will react as negatively as the Republican blowhards are reacting to any perceived or actual criticism of the military, whether warranted (as it is in this case) or not.

But keep in mind that this is the same media that still thinks Bush is a popular, war-time president that most folks would love to have over for a backyard barbecue and knock back a few cold ones with. They are incapable of assimilating what their own polls tell them about the public's distaste for Bush and this failed invasion, and it colors their reportage so badly that they can't make a credible statement on this issue.

"I guess the president, uh, he's gotten rid of Pace because he could not get him confirmed here in the Senate… Pace is also a yes-man for the president and I told him to his face, I laid it out to him last time he came to see me, I told him what an incompetent man I thought he was." link

"I think you're incompetent", "I think HE'S incompetent" and "I told him how incompetent I thought he was" are three different things. And at least Reid said it TO Pace rather than through a reporter in the role of a "senior-level Dem lawmaker who spoke on the condition of anonymity." Oh, and it's not slander if it's true.

:headbang:
rocknation

kind of like a serial rapist whining about jaywalking