Joseph Lieberman: The Last Functioning Democratic Brain?

[quote]BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 23, 2005 (AP Online delivered by Newstex) – U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman told Iraq’s prime minister Wednesday that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq until their mission is complete, despite growing unease in Congress about the progress of the conflict here.

We cannot let extremists and terrorists, a small number, here in Iraq deprive the 27 million Iraqis of what they want which is a better freer life, safer life for themselves and their children” Lieberman said after his meeting with Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari.

The Connecticut Democrat, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the cost of success in Iraq would be high "but the cost for America of failure in Iraq would be catastrophic _ for America, for the Iraqi people and I believe for the world."

Lieberman, who ran unsuccessfully for vice president with Al Gore in 2000, arrived in Iraq on Wednesday to meet with Iraqi officials and spend Thanksgiving with American troops.

Lieberman told a group of reporters that he was convinced progress was being made in building a democratic Iraq despite rising U.S. deaths and the continuing insurgency.

He acknowledged growing concern within Congress over the Bush administration’s Iraq policy but said there was little support in the Senate and the House for Rep. John Murtha’s call for an immediate pullout of U.S. troops.[/quote]

pajamasmedia.com/newsml/html/200 … to.shtml

I always liked Joe. He doesn’t much like bullshit.

Anyone want to lay odds on him for being on the Dem. Presidential ticket in 2008?

The Dems hate Joe. He is a voice of reason.

Once the American people find out that Joe’s interpretation of “until their mission is complete” means for the next sixty years they might take issue with your view that he “doesn’t much like bullshit.”

Do you also have a problem with the many troops that are still left in the German quagmire? Japanese swamp? Korean mire? Turkish miasma? Greek fiasco? What?

Joe Lieberman is an honest, decent man. He deserves better. Perhaps, some day, intelligence and discipline will come back to the Democrats. We could use something like this with the way the Republicans have been running amok on financial matters. Ah well. Can’t have everything.

Once the American people find out that Joe’s interpretation of “until their mission is complete” means for the next sixty years they might take issue with your view that he “doesn’t much like bullshit.”[/quote]

I doubt it will be so soon. And anyone who didn’t think this was going to happen before the war was a kidding themselves. Took the Brits what, 150 years to get the hell out of Hong Kong…

The American and British people aren’t entirely at fault because they’ve trusted George Bush and Tony Blair. The Coalition of Wankers has contributed mightily to the overall confusion with its deliberate evasiveness, ambiguity, refusal to give straight answers to simple questions, fear-mongering and outright lies.

And comparisons to the occupations of Japan, Germany and troops stationed along the DMZ are more of the same as the occupation of Iraq is completely unlike them. Three years after the occupations of Japan and Germany began, for example, how many Allied soldiers were being killed weekly by hostile insurgents?

Zero – for the history impaired.

[quote=“spook”]The American and British people aren’t entirely at fault because they’ve trusted George Bush and Tony Blair. The Coalition of Wankers has contributed mightily to the overall confusion with its deliberate evasiveness, ambiguity, refusal to give straight answers to simple questions, fear-mongering and outright lies.

And comparisons to the occupations of Japan, Germany and troops stationed along the DMZ are more of the same as the occupation of Iraq is completely unlike them. Three years after the occupations of Japan and Germany began, for example, how many Allied soldiers were being killed weekly by hostile insurgents?

Zero – for the history impaired.[/quote]

OK, but how closely were the Allied overseers working with the German and Japanese governments? Or did they simply assume complete control over the territories?

hmmm?

I think that if that criticism applies to one side of the debate, then it applies to both.

I mean, the standard of debate in the US over these issues has been lousy.

I agree that Lieberman is an exception and a decent guy. McCain, too, I think has handled himself well. The shrill antics from most US politicians has been B-O-O-O-O-R-I-N-G in the extreme.

I agree with the Economist when they describe the Bush WMD lies charge as a “farrago of nonsense.” And I also think that some Dems too often sound like schoolkids arguing that “war is bad.” When you add to this their protectionist leanings, its a real turn off. (In this regard, Nancy Pelosi is the absolute worst.) Also, after seeing John Roberts’ performance in the Supreme Ct hearings, where he made Sen. kennedy look like an absolute fool, I cannot imagine how so many dems could have voted against such an obviously intelligent, sensible, and qualified person.

On the other hand, the Dems are simply employing tactics similar to what the Reps did (under Gingrich?) to the Clinton administration.

So, I guess what goes around comes around.

Nevertheless, in my eyes it makes some senators all the more admirable. Those senators, that is, like Lieberman and McCain, who appear to have sensible philosophies which they are able to articulate clearly and publicly, even though it might be against the grain of their own party’s public message.

Hillary Clinton is only too aware of the turn-off factor and is making incresingly more centrist pronouncements. However, in her case i think it is a more cynical, politically calculating manouver. in the case of Lieberman, i think it is more sincere.

Another Lieberman article. Similiar, but different.
From the WSJ - Opinion Journal.
As this is a ‘register’ site I am posting entire article.
Enjoy :slight_smile:

[quote]Our Troops Must Stay
America can’t abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

BY JOE LIEBERMAN,
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood–unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.

It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.
----------- ###----------
Before going to Iraq last week, I visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region, but it is now getting some welcome company from the Iraqis and Palestinians who are in the midst of robust national legislative election campaigns, the Lebanese who have risen up in proud self-determination after the Hariri assassination to eject their Syrian occupiers (the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militias should be next), and the Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Saudis who have taken steps to open up their governments more broadly to their people. In my meeting with the thoughtful prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, he declared with justifiable pride that his country now has the most open, democratic political system in the Arab world. He is right.

In the face of terrorist threats and escalating violence, eight million Iraqis voted for their interim national government in January, almost 10 million participated in the referendum on their new constitution in October, and even more than that are expected to vote in the elections for a full-term government on Dec. 15. Every time the 27 million Iraqis have been given the chance since Saddam was overthrown, they have voted for self-government and hope over the violence and hatred the 10,000 terrorists offer them. Most encouraging has been the behavior of the Sunni community, which, when disappointed by the proposed constitution, registered to vote and went to the polls instead of taking up arms and going to the streets. Last week, I was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it.

None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq’s duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America’s commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November’s elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America’s bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.

The leaders of America’s military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.
---------------###------------
Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration’s recent use of the banner “clear, hold and build” accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.

We are now embedding a core of coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in “clearing” and “holding” is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being “held” secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle.

Nationwide, American military leaders estimate that about one-third of the approximately 100,000 members of the Iraqi military are able to “lead the fight” themselves with logistical support from the U.S., and that that number should double by next year. If that happens, American military forces could begin a drawdown in numbers proportional to the increasing self-sufficiency of the Iraqi forces in 2006. If all goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.

The economic reconstruction of Iraq has gone slower than it should have, and too much money has been wasted or stolen. Ambassador Khalilzad is now implementing reform that has worked in Afghanistan–Provincial Reconstruction Teams, composed of American economic and political experts, working in partnership in each of Iraq’s 18 provinces with its elected leadership, civil service and the private sector. That is the “build” part of the “clear, hold and build” strategy, and so is the work American and international teams are doing to professionalize national and provincial governmental agencies in Iraq.

These are new ideas that are working and changing the reality on the ground, which is undoubtedly why the Iraqi people are optimistic about their future–and why the American people should be, too.
----------------###-----------------
I cannot say enough about the U.S. Army and Marines who are carrying most of the fight for us in Iraq. They are courageous, smart, effective, innovative, very honorable and very proud. After a Thanksgiving meal with a great group of Marines at Camp Fallujah in western Iraq, I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: “I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates.”

Thank you, General. That is a powerful, needed message for the rest of America and its political leadership at this critical moment in our nation’s history. Semper Fi.

Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.[/quote]

I’ve always been amused when supporters of Israel such as Senator Lieberman make the claim that “Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region . . . .” when half the people living under the control of the Israeli government – 3,000,000 – have no passport, no country, no national government, no say in the government which rules them, no right to travel freely, no civil rights . . . .

Somehow Joseph the Just and his fellow believers are able to rationalize this glaring dichotomy but it’s a mystery to me how they do it. :slight_smile:

I think, Spook, that you overstate your case more than Sen. Lieberman does.

I liked the Lieberman article.

The reason I liked it is that it was balanced, well-reasoned, and he didn’t allow past mistakes to be an obstacle to proper action today. he is not caught up in the ‘Bush lied’ nonesense.

No doubt Spook is dismayed by Sen. Lieberman’s broad-brush approach to the region, and would rather focus on details that may contradict it.

[quote=“imyourbiggestfan”]I think, Spook, that you overstate your case more than Sen. Lieberman does.

I liked the Lieberman article.

The reason I liked it is that it was balanced, well-reasoned, and he didn’t allow past mistakes to be an obstacle to proper action today. he is not caught up in the ‘Bush lied’ nonesense.

No doubt Spook is dismayed by Sen. Lieberman’s broad-brush approach to the region, and would rather focus on details that may contradict it.[/quote]

Maybe that’s the answer as to how you guys do it. You’ve convinced yourselves that three-million human beings are a mere “detail.”

Interesting title to this thread. As the current Republican administration have amply demonstrated that they are completely brainless, it suggests that Lieberman is the only person with a brain in Washington.

Was that your intention?

Its a well-know failing, actually, Spook - not being able to see the wood for the trees. Lieberman is not guilty of it, that is all.

You may want to justify your comments that nearly half the population of Israel has no civil rights. I think you are guilty of exaggeration. If Lieberman is similarly guilty, I think it is to a far lesser extent than you.