What a sad thing to watch. The most hawkish candidates (HRC & MAC) won yesterday - Antiwar voices

[Nimrod2005]

have been silenced? Seems like our country will continue on its path of self destruction.

Hillary is the most war loving on the Dems side, McCain's position speaks for itself!

[ursi]

1. Yep. I hope all those "mothers" who supported these two know what they are doing

that vote to support invading Iran is what frightens me the most.

[Uben]

2. And what makes you think Hillary is more hawkish

...than Obama? From what I have heard they are just about on an even keel regarding Iraq. Both want troops out of Iraq, but both want a contingent close by for quick strike capability. This scenario seems to me to be the most logical of all solutions.

on edit: this is the basic Murtha plan

[cali]

3. Because no matter how you twist it

she's more bullish on these issues. She's more of a hawk than he is. Doesn't mean she's going to pursue repuke like policies, but she's definitely more hawkish.

[Nimrod2005]

4. In way, during the general, the war issue is no longer important

They have about the same position.

[Uben]

6. That's what I am hearing as well

Both would make good leaders for out nation.

[Sweet Pea]

8. What?

The Murtha Plan called for a redepolyment to Okinawa! 4800 miles, to be exact. How does THAT quantify as a "close by for quick strike capability"?

Methinks you need to read up on Murtha's plan a bit metter!

[Uben]

9. MAybe you should

Murtha's own words, "What do I mean by redeployment to the periphery? Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Turkey and/or Qatar"

Not quite Okinawa!


source:
http://www.house.gov/murtha/news05-06/pr060407.html

[Sweet Pea]

12. Nice selective quoting.

You should think of doing it for a career.

The whole quote:

REP. MURTHA: Kuwait’s one that will take us. Qatar, we already have bases in Qatar. So Bahrain. All those countries are willing to take the United States. Now, Saudi Arabia won’t because they wanted us out of there in the first place. So—and we don’t have to be right there. We can go to Okinawa. We, we don’t have—we can redeploy there almost instantly. So that’s not—that’s, that’s a fallacy. That, that’s just a statement to rial up people to support a failed policy wrapped in illusion.

MR. RUSSERT: But it’d be tough to have a timely response from Okinawa.

REP. MURTHA: Well, it—you know, they—when I say Okinawa, I, I’m saying troops in Okinawa. When I say a timely response, you know, our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly. And—and—when they don’t know we’re coming. There’s no question about it. And, and where those airplanes won’t—came from I can’t tell you, but, but I’ll tell you one thing, it doesn’t take very long for them to get in with cruise missiles or with, with fighter aircraft or, or attack aircraft, it doesn’t take any time at all. So we, we have done—this one particular operation, to say that that couldn’t have done, done—it was done from the outside, for heaven’s sakes.

_end_

So...."our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly"

U'huh....how "quickly" can a "fighter" fly from Okinawa to Iraq? I'll let you figure that one out - and I'll give you a helping hint - distance, as from my previous post, is 4800 miles. "Fighters" can make about 1000 with external tanks and that takes around 2 hours, give or take a quarter hour or so.

"our fighters can fly from Okinawa very quickly".

Ummmm....yeah. Great military mind at work, there. I'm not even certain he knew where Okinawa was.

Don't get me wrong.....I just want some credibility in this whole deal and Murtha doesn't provide it with statements like that.

[Uben]

14. I was just comparing...

.....the stances that Clinton and Obama have taken, and Murtha's plan came to mind, since it was similar. Neither candidate has vowed to bring ALL troops home.

I think this is the most viable alternative to occupation.

[Krashkopf]

13. Do you mean OTHER than the fact that . . .

She voted in favor of the Authorization for Use of Force, has refused to admit that that vote was a mistake, and has voted in favor of fully funding the war every step of the way?

You mean other than that, right?

[sunonmars]

5. Thing is

when you looked at the entrance polls, Hillary has won the majority of voters on the iraq question. I don't think the IWR vote is a negative for her anymore, they dont seem to care.

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. Land of snap decsions/ Land of short attention spans,,,,,

... /Where nothing is ever savored long enough
/To really understand.

Joni Mitchell


>>>I don't think the IWR vote is a negative for her anymore, they dont seem to care.
>>>

If they knew what it was to begin with.

[RC]

10. Just how are people supposed to know where Hillary or Obama stand on the real issues?

The candidates say very little and the so called news media report even less. Bite size sound bites. No depth on any subject of even slight importance.

Jobs for Americans? What kind of jobs? More burger flipping? Busing tables? Pushing brooms? No mention is ever made on what kind of job or the wage scale paid.

A Living Wage? For whom? The teenager or his parents?

What do any of the candidates plan to do to get manufacturing back to this country and stopping the outsourcing? Manufacturing is the engine that used to drive the economy. Most of it has been outsourced. It is only a matter of time till our economy skids to a full stop.

Social Security. Does any candidate have any ideas on stopping the Congressional raids on it? Not that I have heard.

What about Iraq? What about the Iraqis and what we have done to them and their country? What are we going to do about that? :::crickets chirping:::

What about us, U.S., maintaining and expanding the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world? Why? This is insane. Pure unbridled insanity. Most of the other nuclear countries have nuclear weapons because of us, U.S., either because we threatened them or we gave them the capability - Or Both!

How about some talk or even better yet, a lot of action against the terrorist in our own White House? There is absolutely no excuse for letting things get this bad. Why do our leading candidates not even mention anything about this?

Blackwater: Why have none of the candidates said anything about them? A brush up on the history of pre WWII Germany should scare the hell out of people. They are being 'battle hardened in Iraq to come here to maintain the peace and order during "Emergencies" Katrina was a test for them.

[Smarmie Doofus]

16. Good points all. Start a thread with this. I'll recommend it. nt

[RC]

17. Here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4127692&mesg_id=4127692

[robbedvoter]

11. Ron Paul came in 2nd! And Hillary didn't sponsor the IWR - Edwards did

[mtnsnake]

15. The real hawkish ones are Democrats who reach out to Republicans during the Primaries.

Look out for those ones because not only do they reach out to Republicans but they continue to vote to fund the war while they do it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. This is such a load of bull. Clinton is no more hawkish than Obama and Edwards

I am tired of that lie spread and repeated as if truth.