Harry Reid Is No Walter Cronkite

A handy gauge of how worthless Americans in general view politicians these days. Potentially similar to what Cronkite did regarding Vietnam, Harry Reid does his best to sound like a statesman with an opinion that anyone outside his caucus really couldn't care less about. I wouldn't look for it to have the same impact that Walter's did.

The war in Iraq "is lost" and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week," Reid said, on the same day US President George W. Bush was giving a speech at an Ohio town hall meeting defending the war on terror.

My gut tells me Reid's combat experience topped-out at fighting his way out of the clutches of some lobbyist-supplied Vegas hooker when he heard his wife was on her way into town.

Traitor ... scumbag ... loser ... your choice, they all apply.

Comments

[Kelvin]

Sadly, this determination only comes as news to you backward clowns.

PS, the war was lost years ago.

[Fred Beloit]

I believe that this war is won, and the surge put on by the terrorists is failing to drive the Coalition from the country and destroy the current Iraqi government, as is shown by the continued and building presence and effectiveness of Coalition forces in the face of the rabid, savage and inhumane acts of the terrorists.

[warrenb]

lol

[bloodrage bob]

even more sadly, reid won his next-to-most-recent election by a razor-thin margin; defeating ensign by about 635 votes.

for want of 636 more votes, this POS would be long-gone; selling his sorry ass for land, no doubt.

get off your ass & vote, people. spend some money. agitate. and yeah, the gop DOES suck: but not as bad as the party the asswipe reid (and kelvin) belongs to.

[Kelvin]

"I believe that this war is won"

Case closed. You guys are hopeless. Won, lol!

Oh Bob? In 2004 he won 61%-35%. I would be more worried about the GOP senators that are up in 08 if I was you. Harry isnt going anywhere for a long time.

[john]

Harry Reid rules. Only one with the guts to stand up for that petulant little twit occupying the white house.

Georgie is going to be soooooo mad now that the Senate Judiciary committee is making little Albert cry.

Oh yeah, and it's going great in Iraq. NOT.

[Fred Beloit]

Of course Zerodegreeskelvin presents, as usual, a very convincing argument that the war, which is clearly being lost by the enemy, is in some other reality being won by them. In this position he is supported deftly and eloquently by john. But I don't see any enemy victories. Where are they? Such are the opponents, Your Honor, the defense rests.

[Northerner]

I guess the right-wingers here believe that Vietnam was an American victory too, right? Sort of like a 4-year old, stick your fingers in your ears and yell very loudly what you believe to be the truth, and maybe reality will change into that truth.

I found out long ago (by the time I was 5, to be precise) that it doesn't work that way. Good luck in repeating my discovery, guys.

[Kelvin]

You 'freedom fighters' and 'liberators' have been bogged down in this 3rd world shithole for 4 years. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been squandered, hundreds of thousands have been killed and all you idiots have to show for it is an ongoing civil war.

You.lost.

[templar knight]

Dan, two of your worst trolls have been exposed over the past few days. Hard Right got BobthehairygayguyinStamford today, and Phoenix got Legalize a few days ago. The trolls are falling like flies around here. Must be that April thing nova was referring to. The rest of you trolls had best take note.

[bloodrage bob]

cheerio, northy! and exactly how would you describe her majesty's marines excellent adventure vis-a-vis the iranian "navy", then? was that a victory, TOO?

oh...THAT'S right....you brave europeans prefer not to fight back when confronted by islamofascists. still, revoking their "30% off" coupons WAS a bold move! admiral nelson would have been impressed. good show, old sport! capital!

[southdakotaboy]

Ried and his fellow travelers will get what they deserve when the next election roles around and the GOP gets back on its feet. When these guys are tied neck and neck with George Bush they shouldn't be making any long term plans to stay in power. They will over reach and do something so stupid that they will get kicked to the curb. Karl Rove will come unglued on these knot heads.

[Fred Beloit]

Great comment, Nowherether. A mountain of evidence supported by a ciceronian presentation. You only left out a trifling detail. You forgot to show any victories on the enemy's part. I don't see them, do you?

[Fred Beloit]

Zerodegreeskelvin, a bigot of tremendous dimensions, says we lost in a new country he has insulted. He not only insults those who do not fully comprehend the bounteous powers of his analysis, he now insults entire countries. But, please, please have some pity for those of us who are not as bright as you and point to an enemy victory so we can begin to see the light.

[Fred Beloit]

The trouble is our fond friends here are just a little confused. They confuse war with lost war. They have shown that in their minds war=lost war and battles=lost battles. But even a child knows better. Any enemy we fight will win according to the thinking of these worthies. It is a wonder to behold.

[Northerner]

@ Fred Beloit:

The US not winning, not achieving their goals IS a victory for the enemy. That is the way they, and the majority of people in that part of the world, see the situation. They don't need major victories in combat, the fact that the US cannot do what they set out to do means that the bad guys have won. Probably to your surprise, that is not my preferred outcome, but it is the truth nonetheless.

@ bloodrage bob: the British marines got exactly the same result as the US troops in Iraq: zilch. Difference is, these Brits survived, unfortunately many US soldiers did not.

[Jay K.]

Speaking of traitors with no combat experience...Karl Rove was asked Wednesday whose idea it was to start a preemptive war on Iraq. His answer: "I think it was Osama bin Laden's." Now wonder these fools lost this war to Iran.

[mkultra]

I know right wing nut jobs love Iran - that's why they sold them arms in the 80's. Wingnuts heart Iran.

But their love for Iran is apparently so great, that these days they want US troops to fight Iran's war in Iraq for them.

Now, in some less polite quarters, those who want to fight for Iran would be called traitors. But that wouldn't be nice, now would it?

[Fred Beloit]

Ahha, now is his admirable modesty cast aside. I didn't know you spoke for "the majority of people in that part of the world", Nowherether. I don't know how you came to have this exalted position, but I certainly have newfound respect for you. However, I must confess this respect is a bit tainted by this statement of yours: "...The US is not winning, NOT ACHIEVING THEIR GOALS is A VICTORY FOR THE ENEMY [emphasis mostly mine]." because it is the same as saying war=lost war. And this is nonsense, as I think is self-evident.

[Martin]

Actually Rove is unintentionally right about that-it was indeed Osama's intent to provoke us into a no-win conflict in the Middle East, and Bush and the fools fell right into it.

[Fred Beloit]

mkultra, what are you attempting but failing to say? I'm sure it is some type of lame insult since you are the author. But could you please show me an enemy victory. No one else has come up with one.

[Fred Beloit]

Fools rush in, where Martin fears to tread. Know that one, Marty?

[Northerner]

In this case, war = lost war, but we'd already established that. I'm not saying that is always the case. Some wars were won by the good guys (WWII, 1991 Gulf war, to name but 2). This war, in my opinion, was doomed from the start. Not because the US couldn't win the war, but because they couldn't establish peace. Two different things. If you want to invade a country and make the people there believe you have won, you will first have to make sure that the fighting is over. That is not the case in Iraq.

But then, you will probably not agree with my logic because it is something you do not wish to believe. See my comment of 3.48pm.

[happywash]

It is an enemy battle victory when they kill nearly 200 people with a car bomb in Iraq, the very place where the "surge" is supposed to be doing any good?

What about all those chlorine attacks? Or the bomb inside the green zone, the "safest" place in Iraq? Wouldn't you say that those are enemy victories. They may be cowardly victories, but the did what they set out to do.

The war has not been lost, but there's been a hell of a lot of reasons for the insurgents to rejoice. It sucks, but it's the truth we have to face. This is a civil war that we've been stuck with.

Oil revenues are not going to be shared, people are quitting the cabinet, and the republican side of the administration refuses to talk to the very people that could have an effect on the Shiite majority. It doesn't sound like a recipie for success, does it? If the goal is to let Iraqis take control of their own security, then it's time for us to take off the training wheels (the US army being the wheels) and let them crash or ride. Right now they are leaning on us like a kindergartner scared to separate from mommy before the first day of school.

Gates said "The clock is ticking ..." Do we have to wait for the clock to explode in our faces? At least can we stop hitting the snooze button, allowing us just a little more time before we have to wake up and face facts?

[Fred Beloit]

N, to say that war=lost war is the same as to say soccer game=lost soccer game. You have only established that you are not thinking very clearly this afternoon.

[Fred Beloit]

Hap, I'm not going to answer a sock puppet except to say I'm not going to answer a sock puppet.

[Jethro]

There are some people who still think John Kerry's 1971 testimony was based on falsehoods. That's what makes John Hindrocket think the Swifties ads weren't self-discrediting. He's wrong, of course. Everything Kerry stated did happen in fact. Similarly, regular readers of this blog will believe that the Iraq war wasn't lost by George Bush before it started. And they'll believe the blame properly lies elsewhere because they'll never accept their own foolishness for buying the crap sold to them. They'll believe this all this 35 years from now. And they'll be wrong, of course.

[Northerner]

Fred, you need to learn to read. Now read my last post again (use index finger and mouth words if necessary) and then read your 04.32 post. If you still don't get it, maybe you need to take out the dictionary and look up the difference between "this case" and "always".

[ME]

I haven't seen a shred of proof from any of you that this war isn't lost. If violence in Baghdad were waning, I would think the surge is working and would support it. But as I predicted before, and as we are seeing now, it's not working.

Seriously... you guys have lost your case over and over. You have failed to explain:

1. how we can "win" in any meaningful way
2. why leaving that sh*thole even matters (and answering that with "Al quaeda will take over" is not a serious answer, it's emotionally-borne tripe from nowhere but your own imaginations that is contradictied by an overwhelming number of readily available facts)

[bloodrage bob]

aaaaaaaannnnd yet, jethro, kerry STILl has not

1) sued the swifties for libel, as they've taunted him to.

2) released his *entire* mil file, as he SWORE he would.

meanwhile, just 2 years later, folks like you are believing the "swifties lied!" lies.

[Fred Beloit]

N, I won't agree with your logic because it is illogical. The teams are on the field. One side has three goals (the Coalition), the other has zero (the enemy). But in a surprise move the enemy wins because SOME of the Coalition fans want to go home early, it is cocktail time in Washington? Must get back to printing and spending money. We lose, they win. There's your Viet Nam defeat and you want the same disaster now.

[Fred Beloit]

N, don't patronize me. I understand you errors perfectly.

[Northerner]

Poor Freddy, still can't read. Where did I say that I wanted the US to lose? In fact, I said the opposite (see my 04.07 post).

And it's obvious you don't know anything about soccer. Please explain to me which 3 goals the "Coalition" scored. What are they, who scored them and how do they count against the current situation?

[Fred Beloit]

Jethro, I'm afraid you're full of it, old boy. Kerry said the crimes he was talking about were a regular happening or words to that effect. That was, and is a lie.

[mkultra]

The last 6 months have been the deadliest 6 months for Coalition forces since the war started. Al Qaeda is stronger in Iraq than it was before 2003. Iran's hand in Iraq is stronger than it was before 2003.

Fred, based on your reasoning, the Allies should have stayed in Dunkirk in 1940.

[Fred Beloit]

I didn't say you wanted us to loose, N. This post is about Sen. Reid.

[Andy PHX]

the war was won a year into it. in that all of the objectives bush set out before the war were fulfilled. the war for oil profits is the one gw and all of his going to hell fellow travelers have been fighting the last 3 years+. the money is going to support gw's, and the gop's donors, his friends and their friends. the ONLY reason we're still in iraq is to support new oil exploration and to keep safe the wells being drilled. to keep the oil supply to getting to market safely. wake up righties. you're SO being played for idiots!! bushco has taken advantage of your good intentions for this country and its safety. hes and rove have been acting like pimps and treating you like you're their hos. wake up. you wanna know why the dow is approaching 13,000? look no further than the fact that most of the companies that represent the dow are defense contractors. war is, unfortunately, good for business. if bush wasnt pumping hundreds of billions of our hard earned $$ into the military industrial complex the economy would be in the toilet. no, wait, i mean the sewer. this pres and vp have been the worst plague on our country. worse than slavery, worse than the genocide of 25,000,000 of the native peoples. these fuckers have taken away many of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. have taken away the rights of individuals and given them to corporations. corporations are increasingly governing our lives. wake the fuck up!! our right to privacy is GONE. GONE! they have made you a wholly owned subsidiary of corporations. without our constitutionally protected rights there is no USA to protect. they will get their just reward when god sends them directly to hell to be tortured in the flames for all of eternity. my prayer is that you dont allow them to take you with them. wake up to the true teachings of christ!! christ would smote them down if he were here on earth right now. they are the goats. they will burn!!

[ET]

none of these lefties have ever grasped the big picture. they don't understand the geopolitical implications of our engagement in Iraq. Let me try to explain.

1. We decided to go on the offensive after 9-11. That means preemptive war, if necessary, to weaken our enemies and keep them at bay. Successful? no attacks in the US since 9-11. Answer - yes.

2. But Iraq never attacked us!! Once again, you are not listening. We aren't going to wait for the next attack. I'm pretty sure Iraq won't attack us now, aren't you? Success? yep.

3. Bush lied about wmd's!! Wrong again. He never lied. He agreed with all of the intel community and the vast majority of American politicians that Iraq was pursuing wmd's, and most likely had stockpiles ready to go. Bush is guilty of relying too strongly on WMD as the reason to take down Hussein. there were many others he neglected to emphasize. The invasion was consistent with our strategy of taking the fight to the enemy.

4. But what about bin laden??!! He is totally neutralized, shitting in a cave in the hills. The taliban has been displaced. We now have Iran surrounded (look at a map).

5. But people are dying!! Yes, many brave Americans have given their lives in this noble cause. Some Iraqi civilians have also been killed (hundreds of thousands killed by Americans?? BS). War is, indeed, hell. That doesn't mean we give up and go home because our collective ADD says it's time to move on (.org). We need to stay until the Iraqi govt can stand on its own.

By the way, didn't the left criticize Bush for his use of the archaic concepts of victory and defeat with regard to Iraq. He was, to them, too ignorant to understand that the situation was too complex for such simple terms. Now, of course, the cause is "lost" according to comrade Reid. Apparently the left only understands defeat and not-so-secretly wishes for it.

The truth is, lefties don't care about America's survival. They take for granted that the govt will keep them safe, even as they sabotage its efforts to do so. This won't change until some terrorist poisons santa monica bay or drops a bomb on stamford, conn. Even then, the lefties will blame their misery on Bush and cry for more handouts. Liberals suck.

[Fred Beloit]

Don't be silly mk. Dunkirk was a defeat and a retreat, though a rather successful one, for the Allis and a victory for the Germans, though a rather meager one. Now show me a victory by our current enemy. Packing a truck with explosives and blowing up a bunch of civilians is a war crime not a victory, except in minds like Sen. Reid and those of you who buy this BS.

[ME]

This is rich:

"But in a surprise move the enemy wins because SOME of the Coalition fans want to go home early"

Actually the enemy wins because we failed to establish basic order upon our arrival. Incapable of creating basic order in Iraq, but capable of propping up a government, we spend billions in blood and treasure hoping that (in what would be the biggest historical anomaly ever) the insurgency will give up or get killed off before we go home.

What you right wingers completely fail to understand about this situation can be explained through the fable of the rabbit and the fox.

Fox goes looking for food... sees the rabbit, chases it for a long time, but finally gives up when he can't catch the rabbit. The rabbit gets away. The fox asks why he couldn't catch the rabbit, and the answer he gets is:

You were running for your dinner. The rabbit was running for it's life!

[ET]

wow, andy. you are truly fucked in the head.

[hahahaha]

Right wingers talking about "combat expereince". F'ing wonderful.

Bush... none.
Cheney... none.
Wolfowitz... none.
Rove... none.
Fieth (or however the heck you spell it)... none.

Every lying, crazy winger like you... none.

I bet you feel like a REAL TOUGH GUY posting this. Compensating for something ;)

[happywash]

Fred, why are you ignoring me? I gave you examples of enemy "victories," and your response was that I was a sock puppet?

And by the way, you can try to throw imaginary premises like "We're winning big, but we're gonna lose if you do x." You can't be real about it.

And finally, you're going to tell me that there were no attrocities committed in Vietnam? Yes, I'm sure there were only one or two incidents, as I'm sure you'll claim. Once again, you can say it's a lie, but that doesn't make it so. You can say "we're winning," but that doesn't make it so. If there were so many great things going on in Iraq, wouldn't people like McCain get on TV and announce how safe it is there? Oh, yeah, he did say that while surrounded by 100 soldiers and some helicopters. Sounds safe to me.

[hahaha]

ET, anything else you have to tell yourself before you admit your just wrong on every single thing about Iraq and Republicans are nothing but scum-sucking liars?

Pitiful.

[ME]

More Tripe:

"1. We decided to go on the offensive after 9-11. That means preemptive war, if necessary, to weaken our enemies and keep them at bay. Successful? no attacks in the US since 9-11. Answer - yes."

The absence of evidence != evidence of absence

More americans are dead as a result of the decision to into Iraq than from 9/11

Iraq didn't attack us and wasn't a credible threat... at least according to Condi Rice and Colin Powell in early 2001.

And your comment avoids mentioning London and Madrid, who clearly demonstrate that fighting them "over there" doesn't stop them from fighting us "over here".... unless your argument rests on the impassibility of oceans or something.... which would be kinda awkward for an Iraq-war-supporting righty.

Your logic gets so twisted when confronted with facts.

[Northerner]

You really amaze me, Fred. One moment you say one thing, the next moment you deny it.
For instance:

There's your Viet Nam defeat and you want the same disaster now.

Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 04:39 PM

and:

I didn't say you wanted us to loose, N. This post is about Sen. Reid.

Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 04:45 PM

You accuse me of "wanting the same disaster now" but at the same time you never said I wanted the US to lose (one o, by the way)? Explain that to me, please. And while you're at it, you haven't explained the three "goals" you say the Coalition scored yet (see your 4.39 post).

And you say I'm illogical and not thinking clearly? Forgive me while I laugh out loud.

[Fred Beloit]

Well, we have reached that point in every debate with the Left at which it is pointless to go on. Go home at your pleasure to darn your by now ragged and worn out socks, my friends.

[Northerner]

debate = lost debate, Freddy? Who's the quitter now?

[mkultra]

Fred said:

"Don't be silly mk. Dunkirk was a defeat and a retreat, though a rather successful one, for the Allis and a victory for the Germans, though a rather meager one. Now show me a victory by our current enemy. Packing a truck with explosives and blowing up a bunch of civilians is a war crime not a victory, except in minds like Sen. Reid and those of you who buy this BS."

Dunkirk was a successful defeat for the allies? Man, you really got yourself twisted around the axle on this one.

You are missing the point, of course. Right now, we are fighting (mostly) on the side of an Iranian backed Shia domainted government in a civil war. Victory - at least as wingnuts define it - means enabling this bunch of Shia thugs to control the whole of Iraq. We are proxies for the Shia thugs, who, in turn, are proxies for the Iranians. We are figthing Iran's war against the Sunnis.

There is no possible favorable outcome for the United States in Iraq. Either the Sunnis - who are killing us - win, or the Shia/Iranian thugs win.

My question to you Fred is this: Why do you love the Iranians so much? I know you will never answer the question, but I am geniuniely and sincerely curious: Why do right wingers love Iran, so much that they feel no regret about expending American lives in Iran's fight against Sunni Islam?

Please, please explain.

[southdakotaboy]

We also need to understand that there are two diferent wars going on here at the same time. The first is of course taking place in the real world. In that war the USA is winning because its been able to check off more things on its list of things it wanted to do. The other war is taking place in peoples minds. In that war the terrorists are sad to say winning. They have defined success as surviving. We might think this is not much of a goal but think about it. The worlds most powerfull millitary can not wipe them out. Hence everytime they are able to do any and that means any kind of damage they claim it as a victory. They have learned how our news cycles work and so shape the perception of the war to their advantage. They now have so worn down the American people that there was a change in government in the USA if that is not an important victory for their side what is.
We on the right need to do a better job of shaping the news cycles to our advantage. If that means that there needs to be heavy pressure put on the media to play ball then so be it. We did that in WWII we need to do it the stakes are to high to lose this.