MIL Dems Promise to 'Eliminate' Bin Laden

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by gtcrispy, Mar 31, 2006.

  1. gtcrispy

    gtcrispy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,578
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    WA
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189421,00.html

    Dems Promise to 'Eliminate' Bin Laden
    Tuesday, March 28, 2006

    In the position paper to be announced Wednesday, Democrats say they will double the number of special forces and add more spies, which they suggest will increase the chances of finding Al Qaeda's elusive leader. They do not set a deadline for when all of the 132,000 American troops now in Iraq should be withdrawn.

    "We're uniting behind a national security agenda that is tough and smart and will provide the real security George Bush has promised but failed to deliver," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday.

    His counterpart in the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the Democrats are offering a new direction — "one that is strong and smart, which understands the challenges America faces in a post 9/11 world, and one that demonstrates that Democrats are the party of real national security."

    The latest in a series of party policy statements for 2006, the Democrats' national security platform comes seven months before voters decide who will control the House and Senate and as Democrats seek to cut into the public perception that the Republicans are stronger on national security.

    Bush's job approval ratings are in the mid- to high-30s, and Democrats consistently have about a 10-point lead over Republicans when people are asked who they want to see in control of Congress.

    With the public skeptical of the Iraq war and Republicans and Democrats alike questioning Bush's war policies, Democrats aim to force Republicans to distance themselves from Bush on Iraq and national security or rubber-stamp what Democrats contend is a failed policy.

    "The Democrats are going to take back the security issue," said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

    Republicans have vowed not to let that happen. They characterized the Democrats' platform as tough election-year talk that isn't backed up by the party's record.

    "This is more of the same from the party that opposes this president's effort to keep our country safe," said Tracey Schmitt, a Republican National Committee spokeswoman. "The bottom line is while this president campaigns against the terrorists, Democrats remain focused on campaigning against this president."

    Overall, the Democratic position paper attempts to make the case that the Bush administration's "inadequate planning and incompetent policies have failed to make Americas as safe as we should be."

    It covers party policy positions on homeland security, the war on terror, the military, Iraq and energy security, but it contains many of the same proposals Democrats have offered over the past year.

    The platform also lacks specific details of how Democrats plan to capture bin Laden, the Al Qaeda mastermind who has evaded U.S. forces in the more than four years since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

    For months, House and Senate Democrats have tried to craft a comprehensive position on national security, but they have splintered, primarily over Iraq.

    Republicans have sought to use that division to their own political advantage, claiming that Democrats simply attack the president and his fellow Republicans without presenting proposals of their own.




    Interesting promises. Pretty ambitious on their part. I'm not sure how they plan on doubling the number of special forces. This requires having enough people eligable to even try out in the first place.
     
  2. Socrates

    Socrates New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    7,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Springfield, MO
    Well, it sounds like a great plan. Nothing else I can really think of to say about it, other than anything they can do to capture Bin Laden has my vote.
     
  3. Insdav3

    Insdav3 Guest

    the republicans will hide him :mamoru:
     
  4. Accord

    Accord New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    10,869
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
     
  5. Accord

    Accord New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    10,869
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    Nancy Pelosi is a socialist dirtbag, the democrats will do or say whatever it takes to get elected. This is all a bunch of bloviating, they claim they want to increase the number of spies, yet they want to eliminate the patriot act which gives those spies the ability to perform their jobs to the best of their abilities. They want to double the number of special forces, exactly how do they plan to do that? The ridiculously high enlistment bonuses and aggressive recruiting campaigns such as the SEAL challenge contract, 18x program, etc. weren't able to increase manpower even 10%. Unless they slash the standards in half, there's no way they'll be able to double it.
     
  6. Socrates

    Socrates New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    7,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Springfield, MO
    Bingo.

    Just because you can sign up with a gaurentee of trying out for special forces doesn't mean shit, since most people still can't make it.

    I fucking hate that enlistment special forces contract shit, which is why I bitch about it everytime it is brought up.
     
  7. gtcrispy

    gtcrispy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2002
    Messages:
    5,578
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    WA
    You are right on that fact that is just a contract and nothing more then a piece of paper at first. The reasons are clear though. The need for SF, SOF forces is great and inorder to draw from a larger pool of people they offered
    the 18X contract so guys don't have to wait a min of 18months to get their
    E4 and try out. This isnt the first time the SF baby program has been around either. It was sucessful back in the 70's or 80's. It is sucessfull in that its bringing more SF qualfied people into service. As I understand it, the performance of the 18x's on teams has been pretty good as well.

    SOF Truths:
    Humans are more important than Hardware.
    Quality is better than Quantity.
    Special Operations Forces cannot be mass produced.
    Competent Special Operations Forces cannot be created after emergencies occur.

    If there were enough qualified and dedicated people that would try out then the numbers could be increased more but certainly not doubled. Another issue is keeping the others from retiring or getting out for alot more money in the private sector.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2006
  8. SoCaLlove

    SoCaLlove New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    I lol'd :rofl:


    Black Ops anyone? :coolugh:
     
  9. brackac

    brackac Fuck all of this. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Messages:
    105,391
    Likes Received:
    174
    Hilllary Clinton couldn't find Bin Laden in a Starbucks.
     

Share This Page