Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush: early Iraq withdrawal would be 'catastrophic'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Barrett808 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:50 PM
Original message
Bush: early Iraq withdrawal would be 'catastrophic'
Source: AFP

FORT BRAGG, North Carolina (AFP) - President George W. Bush warned Thursday that a premature US military withdrawal from Iraq would be "catastrophic for our country", strengthen Al-Qaeda and embolden Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Bush said security had improved enough in Iraq to justify an ongoing drawdown that would see troop levels reduced by 25 percent from last year, but he gave no indication whether he supported even further troop reductions as General David Petraeus has indicated could take place.

...

"Withdrawal before success would send a signal to terrorists and extremists across the world that America is weak and does not have the stomach for a long fight," he told thousands of army paratroopers recently returned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina from 15-month tours in Iraq.

"Withdrawal before success would be catastrophic for our country. It would be more likely that we would suffer another attack, like the one we experienced on September the 11th," he added.

"It would jeopardize the safety of future generations and we must not and we will not allow that to happen."






Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080522/pl_afp/usiraqmilitarybush
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Huh. Wasn't he saying that four or five years ago? And wasn't in front of a military audience?
This sounds sort of . . . I dunno . . . familiar?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. I think we're about 4-1/2 years too late for an early withdrawal
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. always putting FEAR into the people doesn't he?
Edited on Thu May-22-08 12:55 PM by alyce douglas
shut the hell up?

aren't we already weak because of this shameless act of murder. this idiot is really really sick he is stuck in a time warp of the crusades. I hate this man.

"Withdrawal before success would send a signal to terrorists and extremists across the world that America is weak and does not have the stomach for a long fight," he told thousands of army paratroopers recently returned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina from 15-month tours in Iraq.


never fails he always mentions it:

"Withdrawal before success would be catastrophic for our country. It would be more likely that we would suffer another attack, like the one we experienced on September the 11th," he added.


What a sick SOB. This man needs to be arrested he is a war criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. Me: Bush is to be Blamed for being Catastrophic
Edited on Thu May-22-08 01:09 PM by fascisthunter
and all his own actions will be the result of more catastrophie until he is no more....

Sorry Bush. You are to blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bush_MUST_Go Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Is he really THIS stupid? Or just a bald faced liar? Probably both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Deluded... liars such as him with very low-self-esteem
twist and distort... what looks stupid to us, is this guy's habit of twisting reality to suit his messed up head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. Yeah, "catastrophic" for his stock portfolio...
And his oil buddies...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. What is EARLY? Sheesh. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. And what is SUCCESS?
Big Oil getting 80% (or more) of Iraq's oil?

$eems so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LakeSamish706 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Does anybody really pay any attention to this "shit for brains" anymore? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
9. He's been so right about
every thing else. Why wouldn't I believe him.:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
11. These are consequences of going in, not of getting out.
Another attack on US soil if we don't stay in Iraq forever? Hasn't Stupid said before that this was inevitable?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Career Prole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
12. What was catastrophic was when a group of chuckleheads
decided that what this country needed was a president they wouldn't mind drinking a beer with rather than one who actually had a clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beausoleil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
13. There's really no chance of another terrorist attack
in this country. Bush has presided over the destruction of the USA that is currently underway. The terrorists are saying "Mission accomplished! Thanks a bunch, George! King Abdullah sends kisses!"

Now if we were to ever leave Iraq, it would definitely not be a "victory" for Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater and all the other assorted profiteers and thieves and their political whores.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
14. Catastrophic is what has been wrought and is continuing to be wrought
and will be wrought for decades to come, all courtesy of fruition of junior's PNAC wet dream: the cost of gasoline and loss of purchasing power of the dollar are but two of dozens of catastrophes unfolding before our eyes. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 06:19 AM
Response to Original message
16. Indeed it would be...
For the profiteers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eringer Donating Member (338 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
17. Catastrophic -- a BIG word for a such a small mind
The word "catastrophic" appears to have become one of his favorites since he learned it last year. Gives him hope that there is life in the White House for him after 1/20/09. Read on....

Bush To Be Dictator In A Catastrophic Emergency
05-19-2007
www.roguegovernment.com
Lee Rogers






The Bush administration has released a directive called the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive. The directive released on May 9th, 2007 has gone almost unnoticed by the mainstream and alternative media. This is understandable considering the huge Ron Paul and immigration news but this story is equally as huge. In this directive, Bush declares that in the event of a “Catastrophic Emergency” the President will be entrusted with leading the activities to ensure constitutional government. The language in this directive would in effect make the President a dictator in the case of such an emergency.



The directive defines a “Catastrophic Emergency” as the following.

"Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

So what does this mean? This is entirely subjective and doesn’t provide any real concrete definition of what such an emergency would entail. Assuming that it means a disaster on the scale of the 9/11 attacks or Katrina, there is no question that the United States at some point in time will experience an emergency on par with either of those events. When one of those events takes place, the President will be a dictator in charge of ensuring a working constitutional government.

The language written in the directive is disturbing because it doesn’t say that the President will work with the other branches of government equally to ensure a constitutional government is protected. It says clearly that there will be a cooperative effort among the three branches that will be coordinated by the President. If the President is coordinating these efforts it effectively puts him in charge of every branch. The language in the directive is entirely Orwellian in nature making it seem that it is a cooperative effort between all three branches but than it says that the President is in charge of the cooperative effort.

The directive defines Enduring Constitutional Government as the following.

"Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

Further on in the document it states the following.

The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.

This directive on its face is unconstitutional because each branch of government the executive, legislative and judicial are supposed to be equal in power. By putting the President in charge of coordinating such an effort to ensure constitutional government over all three branches is effectively making the President a dictator allowing him to tell all branches of government what to do.

Even worse is the fact that the directive states that the Secretary of Homeland Security will serve as the lead for coordinating overall continuity operations. We already know that the Homeland Security department is not really working to secure the homeland. Instead the Homeland Security department is really working to enslave the homeland just like the Home Office over in the United Kingdom has made that country an Orwellian hell of closed-circuit TV spy cameras. If such an emergency is declared, we can only guess what sort of surprises the Homeland Enslavement department will have for us.

The directive itself recognizes that each branch is already responsible for directing their own continuity of government procedures. If that’s the case than why does the President need to coordinate these procedures for all of the branches? This is nothing more than a power grab that centralizes power and will make the President a dictator in the case of a so called “Catastrophic Emergency”.

It is insane that this directive claims that its purpose is to define procedures to protect a working constitutional government when the very language in the document destroys what a working constitutional government is supposed to be. A working constitutional government contains a separation of powers between three equally powerful branches and this directive states that the executive branch has the power to coordinate the activities of the other branches. This directive is a clear violation of constitutional separation of powers and there should be angry protests from our legislators about this anti-American garbage that came from the President.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 07:45 AM
Response to Original message
18. The last 8 years have been all about catastrophic.
Maybe we should try doing exactly the opposite of what "catastrophic" tells us to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
19. blah blah blah. He needs a new tune
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ckramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
20. Your Iraq war is catastrophic
Duh!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FVZA_Colonel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
21. What's catastrophic is the fact that we don't have the abbility to respond to any major threats
Edited on Fri May-23-08 11:19 AM by FVZA_Colonel
because we keep pissing away some of the best our country has to offer in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC