"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-B4ECDC.15363906092004@news.giganews.com...

I don't know if anyone else caught MTP yesterday. Pat Buchanan, not
exactly a bleeding heart liberal, ripped Dubya's foreign policy in
the Middle East to shreds. Sen Bob Graham and Newt Gingich were also
on the program. You can read the complete transcript at:

Pat Buchanan is and has always been a xenophobic, anti-semitic
isolationist. Why should his opinion matter to anyone?

"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-B4ECDC.15363906092004@news.giganews.com...

I don't know if anyone else caught MTP yesterday. Pat Buchanan, not
exactly a bleeding heart liberal, ripped Dubya's foreign policy in the
Middle East to shreds. Sen Bob Graham and Newt Gingich were also on
the program. You can read the complete transcript at:

Pat Buchanan is and has always been a xenophobic, anti-semitic

Why should his opinion matter to anyone?

"johac" <jhachm@ixpresremove.com> wrote in message
news:jhachm-B4ECDC.15363906092004@news.giganews.com...

I don't know if anyone else caught MTP yesterday. Pat Buchanan, not
exactly a bleeding heart liberal, ripped Dubya's foreign policy in the
Middle East to shreds. Sen Bob Graham and Newt Gingich were also on
the program. You can read the complete transcript at:

Yes, I caught it. I didn't think that I would ever agree with anything
Buchanan said, but buy, did I agree with everything he said there. It
almost made me want to buy his book.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5921259/

Below are two excerpts.

---
MR. RUSSERT: Pat Buchanan, in your book, "Where the Right Went
Wrong," you write the following: "In 2003, the United States invaded
a country that did not threaten us, did not attack us and did not want
war with us to disarm it of weapons we have since discovered it did
not have. ... Now our nation is tied down, our Army is being daily
bled in a war to create democracy in a country where it has never
before existed. ... With the guerrilla war, U.S. prestige has
plummeted."

You go on to write that Iraq was, "...the greatest strategic blunder
in 40 years, a mistake more costly than Vietnam."

MR. PAT BUCHANAN: Certainly, Tim, I believe it is an unnecessary war;
it is an unwise war. The United States, by invading that country and
taking over its capital, we have inflamed the entire Middle East and
Arab and Islamic world. American prestige and support for the
president and the United States has never been lower in that part of
the world. And Mr. Rumsfeld's question has been answered.

He asked, "Have we been creating more terrorists than we are killing?"
When he said that, some 5,000 insurgents were said to be in Baghdad by
General Abizaid. The latest count is 20,000. I believe this war
itself is creating a pool, a spawning pool out of which Osama bin
Laden can draw recruits. I think that there has been nothing that has
done more to put Osama bin Laden, if you will, in the mainstream of
the Arab cause of nationalism than what appears to the Arabs to be to
be a near-imperial adventure by the United States in Iraq.
---

and:
---

MR. RUSSERT: Pat Buchanan, we are now hearing on the wires that Mr.
al-Douri, the number-two to Saddam Hussein, has been captured. So we
now--and there he is on the screen. We now have a situation where
Saddam Hussein and his number two are in captivity. Is the world not
safer without them presiding over the country of Iraq?

MR. BUCHANAN: Well, certainly, the Iraqi people are probably safer as
a consequence of the American liberation and overthrow of Saddam
Hussein. The problem, Tim, is this: Now, that Saddam Hussein is
gone, what we have is a situation in Fallujah and Ramadi where Sunni
fundamentalists are in control and the Shias are rising up in the
south, and we--and Americans are dying, and we do not have enough
troops, in my judgment, in place to win this war. What you could have
here and what the risk is: that having overthrown this one devil, we
could have seven devils enter in his place. This could turn into a
failed state in chaos and civil war, where the United States is forced
out or either forced to double our troops in there. And if that
happens, Tim, we've got ourselves a hellish situation there. It was
not a problem. Saddam was a criminal and a thug and a brute, but he
was no threat to a country that flew 40,000 sorties over Iraq in 10
years. He did not shoot down a single one.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you send more American troops or would you
withdraw?

MR. BUCHANAN: This is the question that, I think, should be put to
John Kerry and the president of the United States in the debates:
"Mr. President, if John Abizaid comes to you and says, `We can't do it
with the present complement, we need 75,000 more American
troops'--what would you do, John Kerry? What would you do, George W.
Bush?" If it were up to me, Tim, I think I would execute a strategic
withdrawal from Iraq. I think it was a terrible mistake. We're going
to pay consequences one way or the other. And my feeling is probably
it would be better for us in the long run if we withdrew.
---

It's not every day that I agree with Pat Buchanan.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782

-The ability to change one's mind, ideas, and opinions when confronted

with

new facts is the sign of the rational and intelligent. The inability to do
so is the hallmark of the dimwitted and the fanatic. This applies not only
to science and philosophy, but also to politics.-

johac wrote:

I don't know if anyone else caught MTP yesterday. Pat Buchanan, not
exactly a bleeding heart liberal, ripped Dubya's foreign policy in the
Middle East to shreds. Sen Bob Graham and Newt Gingich were also on
the program. You can read the complete transcript at:


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5921259/

Below are two excerpts.

---
MR. RUSSERT: Pat Buchanan, in your book, "Where the Right Went
Wrong," you write the following: "In 2003, the United States invaded
a country that did not threaten us, did not attack us and did not want
war with us to disarm it of weapons we have since discovered it did
not have. ... Now our nation is tied down, our Army is being daily
bled in a war to create democracy in a country where it has never
before existed. ... With the guerrilla war, U.S. prestige has
plummeted."

You go on to write that Iraq was, "...the greatest strategic blunder
in 40 years, a mistake more costly than Vietnam."

MR. PAT BUCHANAN: Certainly, Tim, I believe it is an unnecessary war;
it is an unwise war. The United States, by invading that country and
taking over its capital, we have inflamed the entire Middle East and
Arab and Islamic world. American prestige and support for the
president and the United States has never been lower in that part of
the world. And Mr. Rumsfeld's question has been answered.

He asked, "Have we been creating more terrorists than we are killing?"
When he said that, some 5,000 insurgents were said to be in Baghdad by
General Abizaid. The latest count is 20,000. I believe this war
itself is creating a pool, a spawning pool out of which Osama bin
Laden can draw recruits. I think that there has been nothing that has
done more to put Osama bin Laden, if you will, in the mainstream of
the Arab cause of nationalism than what appears to the Arabs to be to
be a near-imperial adventure by the United States in Iraq.
---

and:
---

MR. RUSSERT: Pat Buchanan, we are now hearing on the wires that Mr.
al-Douri, the number-two to Saddam Hussein, has been captured. So we
now--and there he is on the screen. We now have a situation where
Saddam Hussein and his number two are in captivity. Is the world not
safer without them presiding over the country of Iraq?

MR. BUCHANAN: Well, certainly, the Iraqi people are probably safer as
a consequence of the American liberation and overthrow of Saddam
Hussein. The problem, Tim, is this: Now, that Saddam Hussein is
gone, what we have is a situation in Fallujah and Ramadi where Sunni
fundamentalists are in control and the Shias are rising up in the
south, and we--and Americans are dying, and we do not have enough
troops, in my judgment, in place to win this war. What you could have
here and what the risk is: that having overthrown this one devil, we
could have seven devils enter in his place. This could turn into a
failed state in chaos and civil war, where the United States is forced
out or either forced to double our troops in there. And if that
happens, Tim, we've got ourselves a hellish situation there. It was
not a problem. Saddam was a criminal and a thug and a brute, but he
was no threat to a country that flew 40,000 sorties over Iraq in 10
years. He did not shoot down a single one.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you send more American troops or would you
withdraw?

MR. BUCHANAN: This is the question that, I think, should be put to
John Kerry and the president of the United States in the debates:
"Mr. President, if John Abizaid comes to you and says, `We can't do it
with the present complement, we need 75,000 more American
troops'--what would you do, John Kerry? What would you do, George W.
Bush?" If it were up to me, Tim, I think I would execute a strategic
withdrawal from Iraq. I think it was a terrible mistake. We're going
to pay consequences one way or the other. And my feeling is probably
it would be better for us in the long run if we withdrew.
---

It's not every day that I agree with Pat Buchanan.

No kidding. I think this is a 'first.'

I'd suggest sending; Puke, Fred, Shrub, Bremer, the Cabinet, and all the
neo-cons in Congress to take back some city with a standard weapons
load and the clothing they're currently wearing. After all, they want
to 'stay the course.' Give them their desire.