California Conservative

John Murtha appeared on CNN’s Late Edition, spewing his usual stuff. Here’s the opening exchange between Murtha and Wolf Blitzer:

BLITZER: I want your immediate reaction to what the new defense secretary, Robert Gates, said earlier today on CBS concerning some of the Democratic proposals to deal with the situation in Iraq. Listen to Gates.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SECRETARY OF ROBERT M. GATES: The concern I have is that if you have specific deadlines and very strict conditions, it makes it difficult if not impossible for our commanders to achieve their objectives and, frankly, as I read it, the house bill is more about withdrawal regardless of the circumstances on the ground than it is about trying to produce a positive outcome.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right, Congressman. What do you think?

MURTHA: Well, here’s the problem. They’ve mismanaged this war. They talk about us micromanaging. They’ve mismanaged the war so badly, they put the commanders in impossible positions.

These commanders are demanding more troops and yet the troops aren’t home for a year, they’re being extended, they’re being sent in without equipment, without…look, they’re going to ask for a trillion dollars, a trillion dollars in the next year between last year’s appropriation and next year’s appropriation. And we should have accountability. The contractors are falling all over each other. We need benchmarks. The Iraqis are not going to pay any attention to the threats because they keep making threats over and over again. We have a responsibility to the American people to get these troops out of there. The first step to redeploy, or the first step to stability is redeployment of the troops in Iraq.

Just in that brief diatribe, John Murtha shows that he’s willing to ignore the Constitution because, in his mind, the ends justify the means. He’s essentially saying that it’s ok to ignore the Constitution because the President’s plan didn’t work. It’s a sorry state of affairs when someone who’s sworn to uphold the Constitution says that he’s going to ignore the Constitution’s section on separation of powers.

Another laughable part of his opening diatribe is when he complains that President Bush will ask for “a trillion dollars, a trillion dollars in the next year between last year’s appropriation and next year’s appropriation.” Coming from the man who’s made pork-barrel defense spending his ongoing re-election tactic, that should ring hollow.

Then Murtha gives his usual misreading of the election by saying that “We have a responsibility to the American people to get these troops out of there” as part of his foolhardy redeployment. If the American people genuinely want us out of Iraq, there shouldn’t be any trouble getting defunding legislation passed through the House. Unfortunately for Murtha, that isn’t what voters said last November. What they said was that they didn’t like the way the war was being waged because they wanted a victorious ending to the war.

Then there’s this exchange:

BLITZER: All right, so, for our viewers who aren’t familiar with the details of what you would like to see happen, explain very briefly how quickly do you want to see combat forces start withdrawing and completely withdrawing?

MURTHA: Well, what our legislation says that they have to — if there’s no progress, and I’m talking about if their economic progress, oil production, electricity production, all the things we measure aren’t better by July 1st, they have to start redeployment.

BLITZER: July 1st of this year?

MURTHA: July 1st of this year. If they do get better, then March of next year they should start redeploying.

BLITZER: Because they’re saying there has been some…at least initial progress.

MURTHA: Well, that’s what they say, but they said this right along. This is part of the problem. Every time they say there’s progress, Wolf, it turns out there’s no progress, and then they have to backtrack. For instance they say everything is getting better, yet oil production, electricity production are all at below prewar levels. Incidents have increased outside Baghdad. They’re less in Baghdad but have increased, and you saw the latest casualty figures.
So it’s not necessarily getting better. All of us hope it’ll get better, but you have to do something dramatic if you want it to get better. And one of the things they haven’t done, every time something happens, they step in, send in American troops. And these American troops are being punished and it’s individuals.
Wolf, here is the problem we have. It’s not thousands of troops. It’s each individual troop who hasn’t been home. It’s each individual troop who hasn’t been trained, it’s each individual troop who doesn’t have the equipment they need to go into combat.

There’s a multitude of problems with Murtha’s statement. It’s impossible to honestly say that “there’s no progress.” Does John Murtha think that an 80 decrease in violence isn’t progress? Does John Murtha think that a 60 percent decrease in American fatalities in a month isn’t progress?

Murtha’s saying that casualties in Baghdad have shrunk but the “incidents have increased outside Baghdad” is proof that the surge is working. The first mission of the surge is to eliminate the sectarian violence in Baghdad, then to hold those areas, then finally to eliminate the insurgents as they try escaping. the fact that incidents have increased outside Baghdad is proof that the insurgents are fleeing Baghdad. At least they’re attempting to flee:

Coalition forces have detained about 700 members of the Mahdi Army, the largest Shiite militia in Baghdad, the top U.S. commander in Iraq said Monday. On Saturday, President Bush said he was sending 2,200 more military police to Iraq for detainee operations. A White House memo said 16,000 suspected insurgents are already being held by allied forces.

You’d think that Murtha would view the capturing of 700 Mahdi Army soldiers and 16,000 insurgents as progress but I guess he doesn’t.

BLITZER: Listen to Senator John McCain. He’s been an ardent supporter of the president’s strategy. In fact, he thinks even more troops should have been deployed and should be deployed. But listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.: Some argue that Iraq is already a catastrophe, and we need to get our soldiers out of the way of its consequences. To my colleagues who believe this I say, you have no idea how much worse things could get.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right. Do you want to respond to McCain?

MURTHA: Well, I think because they say it doesn’t make it so. Because the White House says it, doesn’t make it so. They’re the responsible for the mismanagement of this war. They’re responsible for the troop leaders having to ask for troops which they don’t have. And they’re depleting our strategic reserve.

Murtha is traveling a predictable path. He’s the buffoon who said that al Qa’ida would disappear if we left Iraq:

JACK MURTHA (D), PENNSYLVANIA REPRESENTATIVE: People tend to say, well, if we leave there’s going to be chaos. I don’t believe that. Seventy-eight percent of the Iraqis say that’s not going to happen, 78 percent of the Iraqis say it’ll be…we’re the ones that are causing this and al Qaeda’s going to be…al Qaeda’s going to disappear.

Only a fool would think that al Qa’ida would disappear if we left. Isn’t it time that we told this doddering old fool that we won’t tolerate his dishonesty anymore? Isn’t it time that we told him that we demand policymakers that rely of verified facts and coherent logic for their opinions?

Reality is that it’s long past time for us to demand that of our policymakers. We’ve let legislators like Murtha have too much say in policymaking.

Technorati Tags: John Murtha, Insurgents, al Qaeda, Slow Bleed, Defeatocrats, Baghdad, Wolf Blitzer

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

This entry was posted on Sunday, March 18th, 2007 at 12:10 pm and is filed under Author: Gary Gross, Iraq, Middle East, Military, Subversives, Terrorism, W. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.