Thursday, November 27, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Former Georgian ambassador Erosi Kitsmarishvili to Moscow said Wednesday that Georgian officials believed the United States backed the idea of Georgian troops moving to reclaim Abkhazia and South Ossetia provinces. These had been de facto independent and patrolled by Russian peacekeepers since the early 1990s.
Kitsmarishvili's allegations re-kindled the debate over what or who started the five-day war in August, which turned Georgia a basket case as a nation-state.
He said Georgian officials told him President George W. Bush gave his blessing for such a use of force when he met Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili in Washington in March. Kitsmarishvili told a news conference.
Saakashvili's entourage has tried to form an opinion that the U.S. administration would support the use of force. In reality, it was not like that.Thousands of civilians remain displaced and homeless at the start of winter. An estimated 35,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) are living in collective centres run by the Georgian government. Food supplies are another critical issue, as many of the returnees are small farmers who are now unable to support their families.
This post is a third in a series. See Part I and Colin Powell.
Monday, November 24, 2008
A friend in need is a friend indeed.
President-Elect Barack Obama was in need in 2008, but Joek Liarberman
Now that Barry is not in need, Joek wants to be his friend.
Back in 2006, Joek Liarberman was in need. He was losing to Ned Lamont in the Connecticut primary. He was then grateful to the Freshman Senator from Illinois for his support.
What Lessons can be drawn from this historical recollection?
Perhaps a note of caution to Harry Reid: there's a joker in your deck and it's still a wild card.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
My writing, email informs me, has gone to the dogs. Trophy Wife translates: "Chill Out". Actually and seriously, occupying oneself - myself - with Dawg has proven to be one of the best ways for me to chill out.
The photo of Ballou, above, was taken by Trophy Wife at the local Elings Park. (You have to click on it to fully appreciate it.)
Locally we enjoy three almost contiguous off-the-leash "bark parks". Elings, as well as the Douglas Preserve and Hendry's Beach, are generous in acreage and variety, featuring an ample amount of undeveloped hilly paths, developed athletic fields, and beaches.
Running an athletic, spirited and trained dog off-leash in one of these surroundings is a lot like good blogging. Your dog meets up with other friendly or not-so-friendly canines, and bounces-off, runs along with, or otherwise skirmishes. Give-and-take-and-go is the best way to describe it; and going on to smell and sniff out things that denote the canine news of the day.
Ritual and routine have a lot to do with it. Ballou never communicates to me what's she's read and learned. She is no less communicative than Bando was before her, nor Schatze and Sienna before him. Dog and man are equally not communicative about their respective surfing and blogging, and who's to say which of us is more effective in our daily seeing of the big picture. However, it can be said that neither of the two of us is really 'blogged-out' when the day's blogging time runs out. Both of us want to rap with one more dog before turning away, back into our respective leashed worlds.
I have found that a daily romp of substantial length for man or dog in their respective spheres chills out both of them amicably. Civilizes both, actually.
Ballou went through a dry spell recently. 45 minutes - half way into a robust outing at Elings last month - I noticed her pausing to lick her front leg where she was missing about 1½ inches of skin. Her vet was on our way home and she diagnosed it as a laceration rather than a bite. The wound was totally understandable as road rash because Ballou often moves faster than her legs can carry her. I have seen her crash and burn from down-slope face-plants. It's always ugly to witness, actually; kind of like the stock market crashing, as she is driven by 'irrational exuberance'.
As a consequence, Ballou had to be confined to her own yard and was only permitted a short leash on sedate walks around the hood. But, worse, she also had to wear two Elizabethan cones, 24-7. Trophy Wife and I grew every bit as impatient as she.
Once I suffered an error of judgment. Very early on one morning, I allowed her off leash in the front yard. One nano second she was doing the wee-wee on top of the hedge and the next nano second she was gone a full 150 yards down the block after a cat. Covering that distance with her characteristic speed, Ballou resembled - with her two cones - a fifty-pound butterfly, flitting to and fro, maybe actually brushing the ground two or three times. But butterflies don't obey you; Ballou flew right back to me when I called.
I have been going through a dry spell recently myself. It's a post-election slump. I am not alone. Without mentioning any names, I have noticed other of my blogging acquaintances have been affected differently. Some have become more shrill than ever; others seemingly aimless. In my case, it's like I've run out of things to say. I'm happy. After unhappily enduring the occupation of my country by the unconstitutional Bush and Cheney regime for the last eight years, I can finally anticipate liberation. I have less outrage to communicate. It's not that I no longer feel outrage; it's just that I don't feel expressing it does me much good. I also can't muster much effort as far as supervising our new President-Elect. It's like Bill Maher and my friend Mad Mike have commented: we are trying to prepare ourselves for living with a leader who is smarter than we are.
In the meantime, I am experiencing adjustment problems not unlike Ballou's. Last night at dinner with old friends from the 90's, I went off on the gentleman who had started to explain to me why he had voted for McCain. (I couldn't help it. The dude is such a slump.) Overbearing and boorish is how I would characterize my behavior - not unlike Republicans for the last eight years. 'Uncontrolled barking' is how Trophy Wife described it.
I get one chance to redeem myself tonight, dining with two more Republicans. If I don't improve, Trophy Wife says I'll be wearing a short leash, cones, and a bark collar.
- John F. Kennedy (22-Nov-1963)
- Martin Luther King (4-Apr-1968)
- Robert F. Kennedy (6-Jun-1968)
Los Angeles Times that this day, 45 years ago, was
"was the single most significant day in the history of the Vietnam War."
In 1961, JFK had inherited from the Eisenhower administration an insignificant commitment in Indo China, limited to military supplies and advisors. A steady military supply of equipment from Hanoi coming down the Ho Chi Minh trail was designed to overthrow the Saigon regime and unify Vietnam and complete its national transition from a French colony.
During his first years in office, Kennedy's advisors pressured him to send in American ground troops. Civilian 'hawks', Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, and National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy steadily argued for American military intervention in the Vietnam civil war. According to Goldstein, they estimated that to prevent the national unification of Vietnam under the Communist regim in the north, it would take more than 200,000 pairs of American boots on the ground.
Goldstein weighs in on a controversial issue for historians. He believes that, had he lived, Jack Kennedy would have withdrawn from Vietnam early after winning re-election to a second term. To his advisors,
Kennedy was not receptive. Long before becoming president, he had spoken out in Congress against the disastrous French experience in Vietnam, citing it as a reason the U.S. should never fight a ground war there. In the summer of 1961, he said he had accepted the conclusion of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, who counseled against a land war in Asia, insisting that even a million American infantry soldiers would not be sufficient to prevail. He would offer military aid and training to Saigon, but he would not authorize the dispatch of ground forces.
Over the three years of his presidency, Kennedy sometimes invoked hawkish rhetoric about Vietnam. He also increased the military advisors and training personnel there to roughly 16,000. But McNamara and Bundy both came to believe that Kennedy would not have Americanized the war -- even if the price was communism in South Vietnam.
Kennedy realized that the inability of the United States to shut down the Ho Chi Minh Trail -- the lines of infiltration and resupply from North Vietnam -- would make it impossible to defeat the insurgency. "Those trails are a built-in excuse for failure," Kennedy told an aide in the spring of 1962, "and a built-in argument for escalation." Kennedy was so dubious he declared to White House aide Michael Forrestal that the odds against defeating the Viet Cong were 100 to 1.
In early 1963, Kennedy told Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield, who opposed increased U.S. involvement in Vietnam, that he would begin withdrawing advisors from South Vietnam at the beginning of his second term in 1965. Kennedy disclosed the same plan to Roswell Gilpatric, his deputy secretary of Defense. But the tragedy in Dallas in November 1963 changed everything.
. . . . . If Kennedy had lived, he would have enjoyed enormous advantages in 1965. In a second term, Kennedy would have been invulnerable to the electorate. . . . He had established a firm practice of overruling his advisors when necessary. And he would have entered his final four years as the champion of the Cuban missile crisis, a national security accomplishment that would have dramatically strengthened his hand. Bundy retrospectively argued.
So he does not have to prove himself in Vietnam. He can cut the country's losses then. He can do it by refusing to make it an American war.That Kennedy as commander in chief was not provided the opportunity to determine a different fate for the United States in Vietnam deepens the tragedy of his loss and also underscores his profound legacy, still richly relevant 45 years later. . . . .
Besides a profound sense of historical tragedy, what lessons can we draw from remembrance of how this trail of tears started 45 years ago today?
Friday, November 21, 2008
They tell me that Hillary Clinton, in playing hard to get, is playing Barack Obama. What has happened to the Obama PR machine? asks the San Jose Examiner. The Obama campaign has run an extremely tight ship, until recently. No leaks. All of a sudden the Obama transition team looks like my hose. I'm getting sprayed from a number of unexpected quarters.
I recognize, as some have suggested that strategic leaking is a method of beta-testing a number one candidate on a short list. In this case it shouldn't seem to pertain because Hillary is a thoroughly vetted alpha-
But this is going on for an unseemly amount of time. I just have to think if maybe the chick is just playing hard to get? Is she asking how big the ring on her finger will be? Or, how short will the leash on Joe Biden be? This possibility of HRC bargaining with the President-Elect is not appropriate and does not bode well for the eventual chain of command.
I have to wonder if Obama, having turned open an offer for Secretary of State, seeing the hose leaking as it is, might be thinking of slowly turning off the spigot. When an all-star baseball player has an offer extended to him, there's always a time limit attached to it for acceptance. Totally appropriate in both cases. Time's flying. Alternative plans must be made. to fill positions and budget payroll.
Barack can still freeze Hillary out, of course.
He could minimize her hurt feelings of being jilted by having his Senate minions sweeten her pie(s) in the legislative branch. Hillary's feelings were disclosed in the NYT by a close friend who insisted on not being named:
Her experience in the Senate with some of her colleagues has not been the easiest time for her. She’s still a very junior senator. She doesn’t have a committee. And she’s had some disappointing times with her colleagues.It's not that elections have consequences so much as it is that shoddy, dirty, and negative campaigns do. Nevertheless, it's my hope that if Joke L. can be given what he is not due - Committee on Homeland Security - this Clinton can get some kind of recognition. Maybe she's thinking she should get two committees?
Whatever. Give the lady her due. But let's move on, huh?
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Gotta get it out of my system. I'm so 'old politics'. Forgiving Joe Lieberman is akin to forgiving Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Wolfowitz, et. al. Have to move on, of course. But I'm not into forgivin' or forgettin'. I'm into indicting, prosecuting, convicting, and interning. My country has been occupied for the last eight years, and Joe Lieberman has been the quisling-in-chief.
Anyways ... I'll promise not to feature him in another post. I will undoubtedly mention him again, though. Maybe by using a agnomen. Maybe in code. Something like,
- Angry Joe
- Backrub Joe
- Bush-shill Joe'!
- Ho-Joe's (also, Ho Lieberman
- Holy Joe
- Jellystone Joe
- Jihad Joe
- Joe-nan the Bar-Lieberman
- Joe E. Brown-nose
- Joe Lipschitz
- Joe Naderman
- Joe Rolloverman
- Joe Stalin'
- Joe Woe
- Joechille Lauro
- Joedmund Fitzgerald
- Lonesome Joe
- Shameless Joe
- Sloppy Joe
- Slow Joe
- Trader Joe
- Traitor Joe
- Weepy Joe
I'll make every effort to keep this promise to what few faithful readers I have left, keeping in mind that Joe-what's-name never made a promise he kept.
Monday, November 17, 2008
It's Time for Joe to Go.
Tomorrow, 19 Senators Democratic Senators on the Steering and Outreach Committee vote to determine committee chairs. They need to hear from us to ensure that they relieve Joe Lieberman of his Homeland Security Chairmanship -- and not to give him another Committee chair.
Lieberman has not investigated one meaningful scandal in his role as chairman during the Bush Administration, and he is certain to cause problems for an Obama Administration.
The case against Joe is long. Here is a summary, courtesy of ThinkProgress:
Said progressive economic plans would bring about a depression: “Lieberman compared Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama’s economic plan to former president Herbert Hoover’s approach, which he said ‘turned a recession into a depression.’” [10/24/08]
Said progressive bloggers add “vituperation toxicity” to politics: Sitting next to Rep. John Boehner, Lieberman complained about “the kind of divisiveness of the cable news coverage of politics, talk radio.” He said “the bloggers have added another dimension of vituperation toxicity to it. The majority of people are sick of it.” [4/30/08]
Suggested that bloggers would have bashed Moses: Defending Pastor John Hagee, Lieberman said, “Dear friends, I can only imagine what the bloggers of today would have had to say about Moses and Miriam.” [7/22/08]
Said progressive candidates would cower to terrorism: In an interview with Salon.com, Lieberman said, “I worry that whoever gets the Democratic nomination will have a hard time scampering back to assure people that they’re prepared to take on the Islamist extremists and [any] other nation that threatens our security.” [8/3/07]
Suggested that Obama could be a Marxist: When asked if Obama is “a Marxist as Bill Kristol says might be the case,” Lieberman replied, “Well, you know, I must say that’s a good question.” [4/14/08]
Linked Obama’s policies to socialism: “There are ways I suppose you can make an argument that there are some similarities between what Sen. Obama is talking about (‘spreading the wealth’) and classic, what used to be known as socialist theory…[but] I’m not going to use the name calling,” Lieberman said. [10/23/08]
Feared a 60-seat Democratic majority: Lieberman made clear that he firmly opposes Democrats gaining 60 seats in the Senate, saying that he “fears” for the survival of the U.S. if Democrats break the filibuster threshold. [11/04/08]
Criticized progressives for not using the term “Islamic Extremists”: Lieberman said, “They don’t use the term ‘Islamist extremism’ or ‘Islamist terrorism’ in the debates.” [8/3/07]
On Leading The Homeland Security Committee: ‘We Don’t Like Investigating.’
Lieberman on oversight duties: “We don’t like investigating”: Responding to criticism of his committee’s record, Lieberman said, “We like to do legislation,” Lieberman said. “We don’t like investigating … just to see who is at fault.” [7/15/08]
Held zero oversight hearings on Bush administration in 2007: Lieberman conducted zero “proactive investigations into Bush administration malfeasance” in 2007. [12/24/07]
Backed away from pre-election demands to investigate White House response to Katrina: Lieberman “quietly backed away from his pre-election demands that the White House turn over potentially embarrassing documents relating to its handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans,” Newsweek reported. [1/12/07]
Said investigating Katrina was like “playing gotcha”: Lieberman said he was not interested in “looking back, and assigning blame would be a waste of Congress’ time.” Lieberman said he was reluctant to mount an investigation of the failures of the initial response, saying “We don’t want to play ‘gotcha’ anymore.” [1/30/07; 1/30/07]
Refused to investigate Blackwater shootout in Iraq: After Blackwater came under fire for allegedly killing several Iraqi civilians in September 2007, Lieberman refused to hold oversight hearings on the matter. “You’ve got to set your own priorities, and it was clear to me that other committees were going to pick this up,” said Lieberman. [10/10/07]
On Energy: Drill Baby, Drill.
Called for increased offshore drilling: Echoing the Bush administration’s line, Lieberman said offshore oil drilling is a “sensible” way to “to try to lower prices.” Offshore drilling “would have a downward affect on oil futures.” He said, “I now view this kind of drilling as a bridge to the next chapter of our energy history.” [7/25/08]
Flashback: In 2005, Lieberman said we can’t “drill our way” out of the problem: “The second reason was that drilling for oil in ANWR perpetuates a dangerous myth, which is that we can drill our way out of dependence on foreign oil. We cannot.” [12/19/05]
On Taxes: ‘I Think It’s Wrong To Raise Any Taxes Now.’
Cited domestic priorities in supporting McCain: Lieberman claimed that the United States is going to “make progress on health care and the energy crisis and climate change” under a McCain administration. “John McCain is more ready to be president on foreign and domestic policy because of his extraordinary experience.” [6/29/08; 8/03/08]
Praised McCain’s pro-rich tax plan: “John McCain believes in tax cuts for business and individuals because when you’re in a recession, as we are, that’s one way to get us out of the hole,” he said. [10/6/08]
Said McCain’s tax plan and health care plan is “good for the middle class”: “And in fact, you know, Senator Obama has really been spreading falsehoods about John regularly since then about his tax plans, about his health care plans, which are good for middle-class America,” he said. [10/6/08]
Criticized raising the capital gains tax: “Lieberman claimed that Obama would take a protectionist policy towards trade and raise capital gains taxes. Obama’s plan would hurt stocks and retirement plans even more, he said.” [10/24/08]
Opposed lifting the Bush tax cuts: “I think it’s wrong to raise any taxes now,” Lieberman said. [10/24/08]
On Health Care: Supported McCain’s Tax On Employer Health Care.
Defended McCain on health care. Lieberman declared that it is “not true” that the health care plan McCain put forward as a candidate for president will not do anything for those without health insurance. [8/03/08]
Opposed Requiring Access To Plan B For Rape Victims. Opposed requiring that publicly funded hospitals provide victims of rape with Plan B contraception, arguing that it just a “short ride” to get to another hospital. [3/13/06]
On Social Security: ‘Individual Control…Has To Happen.’
Defended McCain’s privatization plan: Lieberman falsely claimed that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) “is not for the private accounts to take the place of social security.” “He’s for what Bill Clinton used to call Social Security plus,” said Lieberman. [3/30/08]
Hinted at support for “private accounts” in 2005. Although Lieberman said “it’s important Social Security remain what it is,” a social insurance program that “provides a floor of income,” he would not rule out personal accounts. Lieberman added, “if we can figure out a way to help people through private accounts or something else, great.” [1/05]
Said we eventually will have “individual control” of Social Security: In a May 4, 1998, interview, Lieberman said “it doesn’t make sense” not to broaden the Social Security portfolio, and added, “Same is true of this idea of privatizing.” “I think in the end that individual control of part of the retirement/Social Security funds has to happen,” he told the Copley News Service. [5/4/1998]
On Alberto Gonzales: He ‘Deserves Our Appreciation.’
Voted to confirm Gonzales: Despite specifically referencing Gonzales’s failure to object to the Justice Department’s torture memos, Lieberman said of Gonzales, “I’m going to vote for Judge Gonzales and confirm his nomination, because nothing that I see in the record rises to a level high enough to overcome the presumption in favor of him as a nominee of the President.” [2/3/05]
Voted against a “no-confidence” resolution on Gonzales: Lieberman voted against a no-confidence resolution regarding Gonzales’s role in the U.S. Attorney scandal. [6/11/07]
Said Gonzales “deserves our appreciation”: Reacting to Gonzales’s resignation in the wake of the U.S. Attorney scandal, Lieberman remarked, “The Attorney General’s resignation removes a distraction from the important work of the Department of Justice,” but added, “As he leaves public service, the Attorney General deserves our appreciation for his work for our nation.” [8/27/07]
On The Christian-Right: Defended Pastor Hagee.
Lieberman defended radical pastor John Hagee: Last year, Pastor John Hagee stirred a controversy after referring to Catholicism as “The Great Whore.” When it was revealed that he also said that “Hitler was a hunter” sent by God to get “the Jewish people” to “come back to the land of Israel,” Lieberman defended Hagee, saying his comments were taken “out of context.” Lieberman spoke at Hagee’s Washington-Israel Summit in July and compared Hagee to Moses. Even McCain denounced Hagee’s comments. [7/29/08]
Campaigned Against Progressive Candidates.
Spoke at 2008 Republican National Convention: Lieberman spoke at the 2008 RNC, criticizing Obama for not being “willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party.” [9/2/08]
Penned op-ed for Norm Coleman during tough reelection race: In October 2008, Coleman came under fire for not adequately investigating reports of widespread abuses by Halliburton in Iraq. Lieberman wrote an op-ed, stating, “Any suggestion Sen. Coleman stymied Democrats’ investigations into Iraq-related matters is unfair and unfounded.” [10/13/08]
Gave at least $5000 to Sen. Susan Collins’ reelection: Lieberman donated $5,000 to the re-election campaign of Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). “I’m going to support Sen. Collins’ re-election,” he said in April 2007. “This is without regard to who the Democratic nominee would be.” [4/13/07]
On Torture: ‘The Person Is In No Real Danger.’
Refused to say whether waterboarding constituted torture: “It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological,” Lieberman said of waterboarding. “You want to be able to use emergency tech to try to get the information out of that person.” [2/15/08]
Voted against banning waterboarding: [Senate Vote 22, 2/13/08]
Flashback: In 2006, Lieberman lauded “persistent, long-term questioning”: In 2006, Lieberman said that “the most effective way to get information from a suspect is persistent, long-term questioning. ‘If terrorists are tried and convicted of committing a terrorist act, they should be subject to the death penalty,’ he said.” [9/18/06]
On Terrorism: Fear-mongering With The Radical Right.
Lent His Name To Fear-mongering “Documentary” About Muslims And Terrorism: On the promotional site for a new right-wing “documentary” entitled, “The Third Jihad: Radical Islam’s Vision For America,” Lieberman is pictured as a “major player.” In the film Lieberman warns, “It is definitely here…there is a danger of understating the problem of homegrown Islamist terrorism.” [10/10/08]
On Iran: Bomb Iran.
Escalated possibility of military confrontation with Iran: In Sept. 2007, Lieberman co-sponsored an amendment declaring Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization at a time when analysts warned that “the growing US focus on confronting Iran in a proxy war inside Iraq risks triggering a direct conflict.” [9/15/08, 9/26/08]
Glorified bombing Iran: Lieberman once asserted that there is “an appeal” to bombing Iran. Iran “ought to believe that we’re going to hit those training camps,” Lieberman has said. [6/10/07, 5/14/08, 4/09/08]
Fearmongered by saying Iran will attack the U.S.: Lieberman declared that Iran represents an “existential threat” to Israel and that Arab countries in the Middle East are “next” because “they’re worried about the Iranian [nuclear] program and want us to ask strongly to stop it.” Lieberman concluded, “And we’re next! Because Ahmadinejad in Tehran constantly leads the mobs in shouts of death to America. And they mean it.” [7/06/08]
Worried that Obama will not use military force against Iran: When asked if Barack Obama had “the right stuff to bomb Iran if it came to that level.” Lieberman added, “Well, I worry about that. I worry that Sen. Obama’s world view is naive.” [10/07/08]
Expressed support for Bush if he strikes Iran: When asked, “if President Bush announced he felt compelled to take military action against Iran, would you support him,” Lieberman replied, “Yeah, of course I would.” [7/13/07]
On Syria: Bomb Syria?
Said victory in Iraq runs through Syria: In a Wall Street Journal op-ed last year, Lieberman wrote that the U.S. “road to victory” in Iraq goes through Damascus, and urges Congress to “send a clear and unambiguous message to the Syrian regime.” [8/20/07]
On Iraq: U.S. ‘Did The Right Thing.’
We need to speak up, Democrats and Liberal Independents. NOW!
Claimed the U.S. “did the right thing” in invading Iraq: Lieberman said, “I know mistakes were made in the way the administration advocated for the war with an almost exclusive emphasis on WMD [weapons of mass destruction]. But I think they did the right thing in overthrowing Saddam Hussein.” [8/3/07]
Claimed critics of the Iraq war were engaging in a “kind of harassment”: Lieberman said, “Some people are genuinely against the war. And I say to them if you are genuinely against the war, then you ought to be fighting to cut the funding off instead of entering into a kind of harassment that’s involved now.” [4/12/07]
Urged critics of the Iraq war to try to cut off funding, then criticized them for trying to cut off funding: “Some people are genuinely against the war. And I say to them if you are genuinely against the war, then you ought to be fighting to cut the funding off instead of entering into a kind of harassment that’s involved now.” [4/12/07]
During his RNC speech, Lieberman criticized Obama for voting against funding for the war: “[W]hen others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, when Barack Obama was voting to cut off funding for our troops on the ground, John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion and support the surge, and because of that, today, our troops are at last beginning to come home, not in failure, but in honor!” [9/2/08]
Claimed victory in Iraq was imminent: “This is the third time I have been in Iraq since last December. And last December, Al Qaeda was winning — it’s as simple as that — and we were losing. Today, Al Qaeda is on the run. We are winning.” [11/27/07]
“A strategy for victory”: I “can report real progress there… Progress is visible and practical. … Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do.” [11/29/2005]
“A turning point”: “The last two weeks have been critically important and I believe may be seen as a turning point in the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism.” [12/17/2005]
Claimed critics of Iraq war are invested in “retreat and defeat”: Lieberman claimed that for progressives, “the guiding conviction in foreign policy isn’t pacifism or isolationism, it is distrust and disdain of Republicans in general, and President Bush in particular.” And said progressive critics of the war are “invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq.” [11/8/08]
Linked Iraq to 9/11: Lieberman explained his resolution praising the supposed success of the troop surge in Iraq saying, “Senator Graham and I are introducing a resolution recognizing the strategic success that the surge has achieved in a central front — the central front of the war on terror against the enemies who attacked America on 9/11/01.” [7/31/08]