web analytics


By ATWadmin On November 13th, 2006

795151-547291-thumbnail.jpgI was amused to hear the BBC talk about some dynamic"fresh thinking" coming from the Bush administration on the Iraq war. The BBC attributed this "fresh thinking" to those newly invigorated Democrats such as Sen Carl Levin. Now then, what sort of idea could ol’ Carl have in mind? Well…

"Democrats, who won control of the U.S. Congress, said on Sunday they will push for a phased withdrawal of American troops from Iraq to begin in four to six months, but the White House cautioned against fixing timetables. "First order of business is to change the direction of Iraq policy," said Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who is expected to be chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee in the new Congress.

Democrats will press President George W. Bush’s administration to tell the Iraqi government that U.S. presence was "not open-ended, and that, as a matter of fact, we need to begin a phased redeployment of forces from Iraq in four to six months," Levin said on ABC’s "This Week" program.


Four to Six months to cut and run, to abandon Iraq to the Jihadi and the Saddamites, to betray solemn pledges given to the Iraqi people struggling to sustain a stable democracy in the teeth of such inhuman violence.


Should Bush go with this madness from Levin – and should the US and Coalition forces scarper from Iraq – then the war on Islamic terror will indeed have come to an end.

We will have lost. And then – they will come for us.  The Jihadists could not defeat us in Iraq – but thanks to the unrelenting anti-war attitude of the MSM and poor leadership by the President – they may be about to defeat us at home. Truly shocking. Listen to the Iraq Study Report findings PUT TO MUSIC.

21 Responses to “LEVIN IS FOR LEAVING…”

  1. I just read that Ahmadinejad says that time is running short for Israel. So, I guess Israel is first… and then, Europe and America.I don’t understand why so many choose to ignore the threat of islamic totalitarianism.The islamists are not keeping their plans secret, and they do seem to be making progress.God help us.

  2. And what exactly is the ATW team’s solution to the Iraq situation? Let me guess.."stay the course", whatever the hell that means.

    The situation is worsening by the day, soldiers and citizens are getting blown to pieces, the country is now, according to many, already embroiled in a brutal civil war, never mind the talk of ‘on the verge’, and the region has been destabilized. Why don’t you enlist yourself David, and stride down the main street in Baghdad John Rambo-Style, with your oiled biceps glistening in the winter sun and your dome festooned in a union-jack bandana, and a big red hand painted across your chest with the words ‘no surrender’ on it, while a brigade of sweaty prats with bowler hats march in behind you holding their King Billy flagpoles aloft. I’m sure that’ll make the insurgents see sense and throw down their weapons straight away.

    I don’t know if a gradual withdrawal of troops is a good or bad idea but I can certainly sympathise with people who want to see the troops home when they have been there for 3 years and nothing whatsoever about the situation seems to have been improved, and the whole escapade was based on a bare-faced lie about Iraq having WMD in the first place. Not a failure of intelligence, but a LIE. I can only imagine how angry those families are. After all, why should they have to sacrifice their loved ones so that the rest of us can feel safe in our beds at night?

  3. GrassyNoel,

    For a start the troops for whom you seem so concerned, are keen to stay and win. Unlike the cut and run brigade, they KNOW the right thing to do,

    As for what the ATW line is – it’s not stay the course. Can you guess what it is? Clue – read what Churchill said in an earlier post.

    As for your ridicolous notion that "nothing has changed" — erm, apart from the fall of Saddam, the largest expression of democratic in the Middle East, the end of genocide against the Kurds and Marsh Arabs…

  4. David,

    Out of curiousity, what were the "solemn pledges given to the Iraqi people" by whom and when?

  5. Muslims have every right to be enraged. There are thousdands of muslims in Iraq being killed by …. well, their fellow muslims, so more rage etc.

    Bush et al believed that "islam is a religion of peace" and the rest of that BS. Here now is clear proof that it is not. Hopefully, some sections of the US power-brokerage will learn from this shocking violence.

  6. Wrong, David. I didn’t say nothing has changed. My exact words were ‘nothing…seems to have been improved’.

    Now, maybe the news reports I see every evening are just propaganda films being shot in a studio somewhere by a bunch of’cheese-eating surrender monkeys’ as I’m sure the right-wing neo-con brigade would term them, but it looks to me and to a lot of other people like Iraq is falling apart and even British and American soldiers of very senior rank have gone on record as saying the situation is next to hopeless, and that the presence of coalition forces there is merely worsening the situation.

    I also said I didn’t know whether it was the right thing to do to withdraw ther troops, but I would imagine that the politicians who are suggesting such a course of action are doing so because their constituents are telling them that that’s what the people want them to say and do, i.e. democracy, the will of the people etc is at work. But like I say it’s very easy to sit at your computer and paint all these people as cut-and-run merchants and cowards.

  7. GrassyNoel,

    So the removal of a genocidal tyrant and terror enabler is "not an IMPROVEMENT"? Really?
    That’s what comes of watching liberal defeatist trash on your TV each evening.

    You mention whay senior Military Officers say. Any thoughts on what the soldiers on the ground think?


    By the US Government, by the British Government. When? Since 2003. Of course the cowardly gutless UN. EU et al sat back and watched the killing…(well the Un did stay for a little while before scarpering) and offered nothing but cut and run – the new Dem refreshing policy.

  8. "why should they have to sacrifice their loved ones so that the rest of us can feel safe in our beds at night"

    That sums it up, doesn’t it? If you don’t know the answer to that, then we might just as well all roll over and allow western society to be destroyed.

  9. Here’s a controversial idea: instead of continuing to apologize for "manifest destiny," and ignoring the fact that the progress of Western civilization occurred largely because of England’s colonial past, and the ideas and institutions she exported to her colonies – maybe America should pick up the baton, wholeheartedly, stop being a reluctant empire, and start being a vocal, proactive empire. Instead of leaving Iraq maybe America should set down semi- permanent roots in the Middle East, insist on law and order and institutions which support law and order. In other words, maybe America should colonize the Middle East, the old fashion way.

    Those of you who disagree, don’t worry. This will not happen. America will soon withdraw from Iraq. Iran and Syria will take over Iraq. This Islamic caliphate in the Middle East will then topple Afghanistan, followed by Pakistan. Nuclear weapons will be used against Israel.Israelis will evacuate and abandon the country to ruin. Spain and the rest of Europe will appease the Islamists, and live with partial shar’ia as dhimmis. After that, it’s a crap shoot what will happen.

  10. It’s a disgrace. Pelosi and Mogadishu Murtha (aka ABSCAM Murtha) are a disgrace.

    I really don’t know what’s going to happen. I’m bracing for the worst.

  11. Why don’t you enlist yourself then Mark, if you feel so strongly about defending western civilisation?

  12. Well Monica before you run and hide under your bed from the big bad wolf/bogeyman of the strange foreigner with the explosives strapped to his chest you may want to consider the following:

    1. You are about 400 times MORE likely to die in a plane crash than you are to be killed by some jihadi terrorist on a suicide mission.

    2. Since the beginning of this century, the number of people who have died as a result of NATURAL disasters – which many of the world’s bona fide scientists believe may be directly attributable to the effects of climate change (which right-wing neo-con warriors like Vance & McCann purport believe is a spook-story made up to justify higher taxes and certainly NOT something that requires our attention), VASTLY outweighs the number of people killed as a result of terrorist attacks.

    Don’t you ever consider that maybe, just maybe, you are being drawn in to some kind of global horror fantasy being pawned by a buch of half-crazed paranoid conspiracy theorists that you should perhaps be careful not to pay too much attention to?

  13. Notme – I don’t know where to start, mate. How do you manage to will yourself out of bed in the morning with that demented ‘everyone-is-out-to-get-me/us’ attitude?

    You’ve been reading Mark Steyn again haven’t you? Tsk, tsk. Well there’s no time to lose buddy! You better drop and start doing push-ups right now if you want to be fit & ready for the hand-to-hand combat fighting in the streets against the invading Muslim hordes that lays ahead of us all in your apocalyptic vision of the future.

    Or are you more the type who sits in the front row of the multiplex cinema of a saturday afternoon, munching your extra large butter popcorn and schzlurping your 1500ml (diet) coke, your pupils dilated in wonder and pulse racing as you watch James Bond, Jason Bourne and Ethan Hunt making the world safe from all those nasty ‘freedom haters’, dreaming of someday being a dashing hero yourself and saving the entire human race from tyranny and ultimate destruction, yet deep, deep down knowing, sadly, that it’s probably never really going to happen?

    I’ve got some second-hand Jean Claud Van Damme videos packed away somewhere in my garage if you’re interested…

  14. David,

    Here’s a couple of recent columns that offer different viewpoints on the Democratic victory.

    The first is from conservative columnist Jonah Goldberg who says "These are hardly indications of a sudden lurch to the left in American politics."


    The second is from Arab journalist Nicola Nasser:


    My favorite observation from Nasser’s piece is the following:

    "The Israeli-Jewish factor figured very high in the Democrats’ campaign: Rahm Emannuel and Chuck Schumer are the new brains of American politics who were credited for their victory; they are both Jewish and ardent supporters of Israel with strong Zionist convictions on the Arab-Israeli conflict."

  15. Grassy,

    Unfortunately I’m too old for that. When I was younger I thought about joining the navy, but didn’t for various reasons. However, the point I was making was that you don’t seem to understand why it is necessary for soldiers to die.

  16. Mark,

    Memorable Quotes from
    Patton (1970)
    Patton: Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.

  17. How noble and courageous of you Mark, to have THOUGHT about joining the navy. Sounds a bit like Bush himself. Never mind the various reasons..I’m sure you were very busy at the time.

    Have you got kids Mark? If you’re that old, maybe you have grown-up kids and could try and persuade them to take up the baton on your behalf, then maybe you can get the chance to experience what parents who have had to sit and watch their children get blown to pieces and being brought home in bags and boxes have had to go through, before pontificating about how ‘necessary’ it is for people to die to protect the likes of you & me.

  18. I have stepkids, grassy, and I have encouraged them to join up. As for why I didn’t join the Navy, well that’s complicated and not really relevant. I have since regretted my decision. I know that’s easy to sit here and say, but it is true.

    The point I will make, again, is that I understand the need for people to die for our country. Yes, it must be horrific for the families of people who die in the service. I don’t know, I’ve never had it happen to me, but it’s necessary that we send people to war and that some of them will die, or return severely disabled.

    You said "I can only imagine how angry those families are. After all, why should they have to sacrifice their loved ones so that the rest of us can feel safe in our beds at night" – I think you misunderstand the kind of people who choose to join up. They consider it an honor (as do I) to serve their country. For them, the sacrifice is unpleasant, but ultimately a source of pride. They are not the kind of people who sit at home, afraid to go out in the big bad world and get hurt. They are not the kind of people who think no cause is worth dying for. I respect those people.

    You might get more respect around here grassy if you could reduce the ad hominem aspect of your posts from 75% to 0%.

  19. Yeah Mark except I don’t see George Bush’s daughters enlisting. Or Tony Blair’s kids. Or Donald Rumsfeld’s. You get my point. And the elephant in the room, which John Kerry CORRECTLY alluded to with that remark he made the week of the mid-terms, except it’s still not acceptable to say it on prime time TV in America, is that it is usually the poor and the ideologically naive who end up going to war. A glance at the history books will tell you that. WW2 was an exception in this regard, but WW1 was a classic example.

    Yes, of course the soldiers who go to war are brave. But it is a fact that presumably, most if not all of the soldiers currently in Iraq originally went there believing in their mission, and now many of those same soldiers are demoralised and cynical, and would like to come home.. I made the point to David earlier that a lot of senior ranking military officers in both the US and UK armies have spoken out against the war in the last 12-18 months. David knows this is true, yet then he dismisses the views of the officers and asks me ‘oh but what about the soldiers on the ground’ as if he knows better than the officers, who have actually BEEN in Iraq for the past 3 years, directing operations.

    Channel 4 news was won awards for its coverage of the situation in Iraq since 2002 and there is no doubt whatsoever they are better informed and more reliable as a source than Mr Vance (who of course again dismisses any sense of negativity in the portrayal of the Iraq War as ‘defeatist liberalism’ from the comfort of his drawing room) on this topic. And they have reported that a lot of the soldiers on the ground on the ground in Iraq privately and publicly agree with the officers who have spoken out against the mission in Iraq. Many are questioning why they even joined the army now, let alone why they were sent to Iraq. Sample pages from military newsletters and military blog sites have been produced to corroborate this. Of course I know there are causes worth fighting for but this idea that ‘we have to send troops out to the middle east to make a stand in the middle of the desert or otherwise the jihad will come to all our front doors’ is just nonsense, but the trauma of 9/11 is still fresh enough in people’s minds to get caught up in it, either willingly or unwillingly.

    As for winning ‘respect’ on this blog, Mark, I could care less to be perfectly honest. All I’m trying to do is engage in informed, intelligent debate about matters that should be of some concern to us all. But unfortunately there are too many people on this website given over to hysterical, ideological ranting and don’t like it when they are challenged with factual, reason-based argument.

    Hopefully though, Slugger O’Toole will be back in decent working order soon and I won’t be bothering you anymore.

  20. Grassynoel.

    No one forces you to post here, you know.If you can’t stand the heat here then I suggest you crawl off to wherever else is more accommodating of your drivel.

  21. I never suggested that anyone did force me to post here David, I come here entirely of my own volition, I have no problem admitting that. After all, I’m the one who, it’s been suggested twice now, should p*ss off, just because people don’t agree with my argument…so who exactly ‘can’t stand the heat’?

    I notice at the top of the site you’re on about the ‘great war to come’ and trying to promote the idea of bombing Iran into submission rather than engaging them in diplomatic communications. I just can’t understand how you think running around the globe trying to take on all these countries is really going to serve any useful purpose. You seem to be completely dismissive of the whole notion of conflict resolution, believing it to be ‘appeasement’, ‘wimping out’, ‘surrender’, whereas I believe that in the 21st Century it has more value than you might think. Given your view on the NI situation maybe it’s not that surprising perhaps but surely in NI has taught us anything it’s that these conflicts can drag on and drag on for generations if serious efforts to resolve them are not made, and who the hell wants that kind of a stalemate?

    I don’t see what is to be gained by carpet-bombing countries where a few vocal religious leaders have made threatening statements about waging war against the west. Is it the prospect of an all-out global war of conflicting ideologies á la Huntingdon et al that excites you? You surely can’t believe that every muslim person in Iran, Syria or the middle eastern region wants to wipe out Israel and destroy the west. That’s just not reality. So why not try to engage constructively with these leaders and try to get them to understand that the west is not the great satan that the Ayatollas and Imams portray us as? Where this bleak, doom-laden view of the inevitability of constant conflict comes from, I don’t know but just because people hold the view that it’s better to get along with those we share the planet with than to be constantly threatening hostility and violence doesn’t make them ‘wimps’ or mean they’re always willing to lie down and surrender to any threat of hostility themselves.