Reid: "No one is calling for a precipitous withdrawal in Iraq"

[jgraz]

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/09/harry-reid-no-one-is-calling-for-a-precipitous-withdrawal-in-iraq

Reid: Feingold/Reid called for American troops to remain in Iraq to do counter-terrorsim…to protect our assets in Iraq. To train the Iraqis. There are estimates that that would still leave tens of thousands of troops to stay in Iraq. No one is calling for precipitous withdrawal in Iraq. No one…

Um, Harry? Exactly what group of Americans are you listening to?

[The Count]

1. I am! See me? Waiving here! Get the F...out!

[mod mom]

2. Me too! Let the Oil Robber Barons protect their own selfish interests, only NOT IN OUR NAME!

[ThomCat]

3. WTF? Yes, we are!

Get us out. NOW!

Geez. It's sickening how insulated our elected officials are once they reach Washington. The only voices they hear are lobbyists and other politicians. x(

[madokie]

12. thats it in a nutshell

[Phredicles]

4. Same here. And I like to THINK I'm somebody;

I've voted straight Democratic since 1984. Hey, thanks for representing me, Harry.

[jgraz]

5. Apparently Harry doesn't read the New York Times either

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/08/opinion/08sun1.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fEditorials&oref=slogin

"It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit."

[camero]

6. translation: Noone in the Senate is calling for that

That must be the group he is listening to because it sure ain't us.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Well why the fuck not?

It's the only idea that makes any sense, dipshit.

[Richard Steele]

8. Nobody...except two thirds of the US citizenry. That's all. nm

[jgraz]

10. I'm guessing no one is calling for impeachment, either

Eh, Harry?

Maybe he needs to have his hearing checked.

[madokie]

9. sounds like he's listening to the 'cons

tell me that's not so, please

[A-Schwarzenegger]

11. Listening to his squeakily reassuring words I almost forget

the streets are running with blood.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. He's mostly right

some people HERE are calling for a precipitous withdrawal, but nobody serious is.

Precipitous: hasty: done with very great haste and without due deliberation

[jgraz]

20. How much more precipitous can you get than this?

"It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit."

Now, I'm not the biggest fan of the New York Times, but you can hardly claim that they aren't "serious".



Looking up dictionary definitions is rarely a good substitute for actual argument.

[MonkeyFunk]

21. The NYT editorial

doesn't call for a precipitous withdrawal.

I posted the definition because people here seem not to know what the word means.

[jgraz]

23. So you said people here were calling for a "precipitous" withdrawal

Apparently this means the troops run naked toward the Kuwaiti border. Care to quote a single post that calls for something more "precipitous" than what the NYT is talking about?

[MonkeyFunk]

24. Yes

people who say bring the troops home TODAY are calling for a precipitous withdrawal.

[jgraz]

26. This discussion has gone around the bend

You're using an overly-literal, disingenous interpretation of people's posts to make a point that is almost completely without merit.

Do people who say "bring the troops home today" really need to include "as quickly as it is safe to do so?" Do you really think that someone who says "bring them home right fucking now" doesn't care how many troops die in a mad stampede out of Iraq? Or maybe they don't realize that there's a non-zero travel time between Iraq and the US.

Or maybe "right fucking now" mean only if you can catch them in flagrante.

This kind of literal, intentionally obtuse parsing has gotta be the worst, most boring, most intellectually dishonest debating tactic on DU.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. You started an OP

attacking Reid for his statement. I pointed out that his statement was right and reasonable.

Knock yourself out attacking me for actually knowing the definition of the word in question.

[jgraz]

33. And the parsing continues...

I'm not taking issue with the fact that Webster's gives you a hard-on. I'm calling you on the fact that you posted something that was dishonest, and then you hid behind more dishonest interpretations to cover your ass.

And you still haven't answered my challenge: point to ONE post that calls for a withdrawal like you describe.

And while you're at it, you might want to put down your dictionary and actually WATCH Reid's statement on C&L. Then tell me if he shares your definition of "precipitous" (hint: he doesn't).

[MonkeyFunk]

37. that's an overly-aggressive and profane

response to my point.

I thought Reid's statement was accurate and proper. You want to attack him for it.

Lay off the personal attacks.

[jgraz]

40. So you agree that we should leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq for an unspecified duration

Assuming I understand the definition of "accurate" and "proper", that is.

[MonkeyFunk]

43. Is that the way you see the choices?

a precipitous withdrawal, OR a never-ending occupation?

That's thick.

[jgraz]

45. You still haven't watched Reid's statement, have you?

Or if you did, you were too busy looking up words to understand the framing.

[MonkeyFunk]

47. God, you're obnoxious

can you disagree with the substance of my posts? Reid was right.

A non-precipitous withdrawal will take months. Nobody serious is talking about withdrawing troops this week.

I'm arguing simple facts, and you can't help but be obnoxious and profane.

[jgraz]

48. Give me some substance, I'll happily disagree with it

If you just keep quoting definitions at me, I'm going to be cranky.

And if you keep having these short-term memory issues, I may actually show you what obnoxious means (you might want to look that one up).

The NEW YORK TIMES has called for an IMMEDIATE withdrawal on their editorial page. Start right now, and get EVERYONE the fuck out as soon as safety allows. They guess this will take about 6 months if it starts today.

Reid is talking about something completely different. He says they are going to leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq for an unspecified period of time. HE is the one who is presenting those choices, not me. That's why it's annoying that you refuse to address either the editorial or the news clip and continue to pretend like we didn't just have the conversation we had 15 minutes ago.

[MonkeyFunk]

52. ok

you don't like definitions.

I think they're important. The Times did not call for a precipitous withdrawal, which is all Reid reiterated.

now go about your business and pretend you scored a point without actually making one.

[ClassWarrior]

14. He's framing.

"Precipitous" denotes hasty or risky.

precipitous
adjective
1. done with very great haste and without due deliberation; "hasty marriage seldom proveth well"- Shakespeare; "hasty makeshifts take the place of planning"- Arthur Geddes; "rejected what was regarded as an overhasty plan for reconversion"; "wondered whether they had been rather precipitate in deposing the king" (syn: hasty)
2. extremely steep; "an abrupt canyon"; "the precipitous rapids of the upper river"; "the precipitous hills of Chinese paintings"; "a sharp drop" (syn: abrupt)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/precipitous

Is there anyone here who'd honestly call for a risky withdrawal from Iraq?

NGU.

[The_Casual_Observer]

15. There isn't any other kind of withdrawal from Iraq.

The plain & simple fact is that no matter how long we occupy the place, the minute we were to leave, whatever fake government we imposed will collapse & the whole place would be in chaos for a while. After that some Saddam guy would emerge & things would be back to normal.

[lefador]

18. The well being of the Iraqis was never the point of this war...

... Americans at large could give a rat's ass about the well being of a bunch of brown people who we have bombed non-stop for the better part of a decade and a half.

What would happen if the US were to withdraw from Iraq is that the distribution of crude from that zone would become significantly more problematic, not only that... but withdrawing will seriously affect the bottom line of US defence contractors. Which by now are the only major manufacturing sector left in this country. The economy of this country, at least production-wise, ignoring raw materials mind you, is primordially focused on the military sector. The moment we stop dropping bombs the defence guys stop making money.

It is the naiveté of most democratic followers, which at this point still don't get the fact that the Dem leadership is for the most part aligned with the DLC and not Dean and Co, which is starting to put them right there at the bottom of the mental heap with them GOP hardcore followers.

This war was never about winning it, it was about fighting it... and a lot of people don't seem to get it. Heck people are still signing up for the fight, yet they don't stop and look at the elite and realise that no-one of their kids has signed up or is even remotely interested in fighting this war directly -They are however very interested in having someone else fighting the war so they can keep on billing the idiots doing all the war for the "privilege."

Winning a war means a sudden end to steady revenue for a large number of American corporations.

[The_Casual_Observer]

25. The economic effect of ending this thing is horrible to imagine.

Between the depression that would occur in the defense "industry" - the employer directly or indirectly of the vast majority of middle class college educated technical people and the shock of uncertainty of the world wide oil supply the hard times could very well be worse than the world has ever seen.

Prior to bush & 9/11 the economy was headed down a steep hill due to the tech bubble speculation. The terror war, "patriotically" artificially low interest rates & tax cuts have kept the whole cha-cha barely limping along. Ending this thing is going to be a real bastard. Had we never done any of this terror war stuff we probably by now would have adapted to the economic conditions. Instead we are faced with a bush hangover of monstrous proportions.

[lefador]

38. Its going to be an interesting "morning after"

I think a lot of people figured out that going head to head with the mightiest military in the world would be suicidal. It is easier to have that mighty military machine eroded down, and not only that... you have your enemy borrow money from you while they waste away their military.

The day Americans realize that they are no where the top of the food chain, and that they no longer have their military to keep them relevant is going to be interesting to say the least. The temper tantrum of the rednecks will be legendary.

[ClassWarrior]

30. Yes, let's go out there and sell withdrawal by listing...

...all the bad things it'll make happen.

:eyes:

NGU.

[lefador]

32. Presenting reality does not equal to support for this war...

But by all means, live in denial... it has worked so well.

[The_Casual_Observer]

35. Might as well realize what's likely to happen. They sure as hell

didn't think about what was going to happen BEFORE they invaded the place.

[ClassWarrior]

39. Might as well do whatever it takes TO GET THE TROOPS OUT OF THERE.

And if that means carefully choosing our words to help people understand, so be it.

NGU.

[The_Casual_Observer]

44. This thing will be going on for the next 50 years in one form or another.

They have gamed the system to such an extent that the whole western economy would collapse if they left the place alone.

They'll throw out a bone or two to subdue the masses, but they'll still have 100K+ troops out there come 2009.

[ClassWarrior]

46. Yes, let's give up and watch the soaps.

:eyes:

NGU.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

17. Who is in favor of precipitously staying in Iraq?

[Joe Chi Minh]

19. In this case, haste is the best guarantee of maximal minimisation of the risk.

[ClassWarrior]

31. Okay, so let's use a scary-sounding word to describe that.

Brilliant!

:eyes:

NGU.

[Joe Chi Minh]

56. Don't quite get your gist. I was actually responding to the way in which

they were trying to make haste sound inevitably dangerous and scary, when in fact haste will be the best protection.

[jgraz]

41. Not according to Reid

If you listen to his statement, he apparently thinks that "precipitous" means any plan that doesn't leave tens of thousands of troops in Iraq on open-ended duty.

Asswipe.

Edit: Asswipe => Reid, not you ;)

[Norquist Nemesis]

58. Yes, and making the classic mistake in doing so

It's the Cons that have been framing it as "precipitous withdrawal". Harry, please...Don't Think of an Elephant.

[leftchick]

16. SOMEONE PLEASE!

Smack Harry upside the head!!!!

:argh:

[ClassWarrior]

34. Do you want to smack Feingold upside the head too?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

42. Progressive Patriot Feingold praises Reid on Iraq.

Hear it yourself:

http://www.wispolitics.com/1006/070629_Feingold.mp3

NGU.

[KoKo]

22. Tap Dancing Around the Cemetery....Whistling Past the Grave...!

[Peregrine Took]

28. And why the hell aren't they???????

[and-justice-for-all]

29. Really Reid!!??

I think the People Reid serves and who pay him think otherwise!

[lovuian]

36. I Am too get the Freak out of there

We want out Harry

[LittleClarkie]

49. So we want a mess retreat? Is that it? People climbing all over each other?

NOW! NOW! NOW! Right NOW?

[sendero]

50. Every time...

... I think harry has grown a pair or gotten a clue, he proves me wrong once again.

He's fucking hopeless.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Translation: "We politicians don't want to take any responsibility for a lost war."

Sorry, Harry, you voted for the war in the first place, you got it, and all the excuses don't mean shit.

[ClassWarrior]

53. Do Feingold's "excuses" mean shit?

http://www.wispolitics.com/1006/070629_Feingold.mp3

NGU.

[partylessinOhio]

54. Waffling again, Harry? Grow a backbone!

Withdrawal is the answer! No more war! No more lies! Never invade a sovereign nation again! Never!

Scratch your head, Harry, you're toast!

[ClassWarrior]

55. Would you call Feingold a waffler?

I believe Sen. Feingold's term for Sen. Reid, in this speech, was "steadfast" on Iraq withdrawl: http://www.wispolitics.com/1006/070629_Feingold.mp3

NGU.

[spanone]

57. Hey Harry, you want to be the last one to die for juniors' disaster?