Lindsey Graham (R-SC): Iraq withdrawal plan would be "very overt rejection of Petraeus' leadership"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Democrats Fail to Pass Anti-War Bill

ANNE FLAHERTY | September 21, 2007 11:26 AM EST | AP

WASHINGTON — The Senate rejected legislation Friday that would have ordered most U.S. troops home from Iraq in nine months, culminating a losing week for Democrats who failed to push through any anti-war proposal. The vote, 47-47, fell 13 votes short of the 60 needed to pass.

"We're going to continue to lose lives and squander resources while they (the Iraqis) dawdle," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who sponsored the bill.

Republicans blocked the measure, contending it would have dire consequences for the region and usurp control of the war from seasoned generals. Last week, Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, recommended to Congress and President Bush that some 130,000 troops be kept there through next summer _ a slight decrease from the more than 160,000 troops there now.

"It would be a very overt rejection of Gen. Petraeus' leadership," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. The military commanders "have earned the ability to carry on their mission," he later added.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070921/us-iraq/

[tularetom]

1. Go sit in the crapper and tap your foot lindsey

This fuckin twit has moved up to third place on my list of politicians who I mute when they come on the TV behind only the chimp and joe loserman..

[babylonsister]

2. Yes, you asshat, now you're getting it! nt

[rodeodance]

3. gee, you are a smart one Lindsey!!

[tanyev]

He knew he was getting a good bargain on those rugs in Iraq.

[Botany]

4. if Gen. David Petraeus leadership keeps us were we are not wanted ...

.... and keeps the killing go on and on then fine reject his leadership.

BTW if Gen. David Petraeus is a leader why does the White House write his
speech to Congress?

[rurallib]

5. Uh - so what?

Sorry Lindsy ol' buddy. He ain't god.

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. Except it's the wrong mission and it's Bush's leadership

The military commanders may be doing their best to implement the Bush Administration policies, as our constitution demands of them, but it is Bush's leadership that is being rejected, not Petraeus. Wes Clark is right to say that George Bush is trying to hide behind a General. This is George Bush's war. If Bush had ordered Patraeus to arrange for the immediate orderly witdrawal of 50,000 troops instead of implementing a "surge", that is what Patraeus' "leaership" would have focused on, and no doubt he would now be doing his best to implement that if ordered also.

It is not the leadership of this General being rejected, it is the leadership of this President.

[AtomicKitten]

7. This was an IN-YOUR-FACE rejection of Petraeus' schmeadership.

Ms. Lindsey illustrating average GOP member size:

[Lerkfish]

8. so? did the widdy biddy general get his iddy biddy feelings hurt? did he pout?

meanwhile, our brave men and women are getting blown up with real pointy and explody things, instead of words.

[C_U_L8R]

9. Yes it would... and to take it a step further Lindsay...

it's an overt rejection of YOU and your party of nuckleheads.

What wrong with this "war" is that there are idiots running the strategery.

[tabasco]

10. General Petraeus = General Custer.

The republicans have led us into Little Big Horn multiplied by 1000.

Just because you're a general doesn't mean you're some kind of messiah.

[FrenchieCat]

11. Dear Lindsey,

I am writing to notify you to the fact that this is Bush's War, not General Petraeus'. Please hold the CIC accountable and give him the credit he deserves for 4.5 years of a failed policy in regards to Iraq. Even the best of Generals are only as good as their Commander-in-Chiefs and the real problems in reference to Iraq go far beyond the number of troups and the military tactics utilized.

In addition, Lindsey, you denied equitable rest periods for our troups with your recent vote against the Webb Amendment. So not only do you not know who the leader of this war actually is, but you don't even support our troups!

I suggest that you resign your senate seat immediately and instead volunteer to wear our country's uniform and go follow Gen. Petraeus' orders directly. And by the way, do not ask for any equitable rest time, cause you ain't getting any, as you get what you vote for!

Signed,
A card carrying member of MoveOn.Org

[partylessinOhio]

12. Well, who the H cares about Betrayus? It is not his personal war.

Why is it that Repugs and their water boys should never be questioned? But Democrats like President Clinton and presidential candidate, John Kerry, should be cut to bloody ribbons. For Lindsey Graham to defend Petraeus when he was one of the most vocal and hateful critics of Clinton is just beyond the pale.

[simmonsj811]

13. "It would be a very overt rejection of Gen. Petraeus' leadership,"

SO WHAT WHO CARES HOW THIS KISS-ASS FEELS AND FOR THIS PETER-PUFFER HE CAN'T STFU!!THESE ARE DYING FOR WHAT TO SAVE JR. ASS SO HE CAN BLAME THE NEXT POTUS FOR HIS BIG-ASS MESS HE AND HIS BUDDIES GOT US IN "WHY IS IT ALLOWED FOR A FEW TO CONTROL SO MUCH AND THE MASSES HAVE NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHAT AND HOW THIS SHOULD END.THIS MUST BE A DREAM RIGHT?? WAKE ME UP PLEASE???

[renie408]

14. Makes me proud to be a South Carolinian...NOT. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

15. Hey Gomer .... shove that sacred cow up your ass.

Why don't you mention Petreaus' boss' opinion?



You know ..... the guy who called him a suck-up?

Fuck you, Gomer.