I certainly defer all things phony to Newt's immense expertise and life experiences in such matters.

I have never understood why being conservative came to imply that one must endorse Bush's war.  And conservatives bristle when they're called locksteppers or goose-steppers?

Among other things, it's the wrath you bring upon yourself from the GOP when you dare dissent on this war!

I think Newt's a loon in some respects, but he seems confident enough to break ranks.

I think this further signals his intent to become an official presidential contender.  He's extremely bright, and this was an extremely smart move.  He's got the brains to be president, but, as I've said before, he comes across as cold, smug and arrogant.  He will need to humble himself if he is able to avoid the fall that invariably comes after pride rears its ugly head.

I'm not sure what Gingrich means when he says "we can defeat them", because he doesn't mention what the "costs" will be. At least not in that speech. In other speeches, sure, but you'd have to be following him to know that.

What Gingrich's "real" war would look like should be exposed for what it is: the establishment of a Fascist State on the ashes and rubble of our Representative Democracy. The use of military force against criminal enterprises. Unless the criminals are corporate (and domestic) in nature (of course).

That being said, he has correctly identified the problem, but misses the boat entirely on the symptoms and cures.

.

To answer your second "question", the Republicans (as a party) are incapable of admitting an error in judgment for their support (of the war (especially in Iraq), and of the President). They cannot "move on" (so to speak) when their entire platform is based on saying everyone else is wrong. They're trying to on the edges, but it hasn't gained any traction. Honestly, with the inability of the mass media to point out their "flip-flopping" and contradictory past positions, I wouldn't put such a move past them. They may try to use this "September report" to start the move, but not when people like Hannity is already claiming that it'll show "successes", and are attacking Dems and others on trying to kill the report before it comes out. (Yes, I listened to a few minutes of his show today, on the way home for lunch. Funny stuff.) Can you believe that loon is claiming that we may be able to "win" in Iraq now? Absolutely unhinged, of course, but damn convinced in his own delusions.......

My

He means "elect me, and in four years I'll lie to you again to get re-elected," Mattloch.

.

The only way to "win" in Iraq is to cut off the supply of arms and support being fed to the insurgents by their #1 supplier--the United States.

Yeah, the surge has knocked deaths down to a few truck loads of Iraqis a day, it must be working. A couple of more months of this, and we'll see Shiites and Sunis sitting at the same table singing the Islamic version of cum bay ya.....and drinking Pepsi of course.

And American casualties in Iraq are up 79 percent...looks like we succeeded in unifying the country, against us.

Random: "He means "elect me, and in four years I'll lie to you again to get re-elected""

Yea well, when you say it that way, you make it sound so..... cheap and demeaning.

Guess that's why he's in politics, and you aren't.

The only way to "win" in Iraq is to cut off the supply of arms and support being fed to the insurgents by their #1 supplier--the United States.

The Pentagon can't account for 190,000 weapons issued to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to an investigation carried out by the Government Accountability Office.
http://www.newsmax.com/arch...

As well as 200 years' worth of carbomb explosives we gave the insurgency at al Qaa Qaa at the start of the occupation, TSM.  That's what I was referring to.  That, and the billions of dollars "lost" in Iraq.  We forklifted the money at them.

.

Hey, I've got an Iraq plan myself, and I'm fairly sure it would win quite a few votes.  But I'd have to live in Washington.

That's what I was referring to.

It adds up.


and the billions of dollars "lost" in Iraq

It's not lost, you're just not looking in the right places. All you need is the banking records of Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater and the assorted Iraqi politicians we've supported over the last few years to find it. You might also want to check the banking records of some of the U.S. commanding officers and their direct subordinates for the loose change (which will add up to tens of millions of dollars).


But I'd have to live in Washington.

Why? Bush doesn't. He's spent most of his presidency on vacation and outside of Washington.

No, the banking records won't tell the whole story.  We're talking *CASH.*  Billions of dollars in missing cash, with a street value somewhere in the millions...

As well as 200 years' worth of carbomb explosives we gave the insurgency at al Qaa Qaa at the start of the occupation

I thought those were coming from Iran.

Or was it Syria?

Or Lebanon?

Which country does the administration has in its sights this week?

We're talking *CASH.*  Billions of dollars in missing cash

There's plenty of banks in Switzerland who'll take the money straight up for just a few pennies on the dollar as a service charge.

After all, they had no moral dilemma about taking money from the Nazis they knew to be stolen from the Jews and other persecuted groups.