Why Murtha Matters [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

Andrew Fletcher

12-02-2005, 11:46 AM

"Is it just me, or is the national media mostly missing the real story about Pennsylvania Congressman Jack Murtha? It doesn't matter that he is a decorated veteran-- that's not why his statements against the war are so important. Plenty of people who served in the armed forces, including people who were in Iraq, oppose the war. There is another reason.

To people who understand Pennsylvania politics, it should be pretty obvious. Murtha has long been a tireless advocate for the military perspective on Capital Hill. He is their point man on a number of issues. In exchange for that support, the military establishment has helped Murtha bring thousands of jobs and millions of dollars to communities across PA.

Murtha talks with high-level commanders on a regular basis. When he speaks, it means that he is speaking not only for himself, but top military officials. Murtha's reversal on the war is an indication that senior members of the military establishment believe success in Iraq is impossible. In short, Murtha's statements imply that Bush has lost support from high-level military officials and therefore has no alternative but to admit defeat."

Discuss

BCPVP

12-02-2005, 12:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In short, Murtha's statements imply that Bush has lost support from high-level military officials and therefore has no alternative but to admit defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]
And if some/many/most? high level military officials still support Bush?

12-02-2005, 12:18 PM

Let the swiftboating begin!

From Crazy Legs Coulter:

"And unlike Murtha, who refuses to release his medical records showing he was entitled to his two Purple Hearts, we know what North did. (These Democrat military veterans are hardly shrinking violets when it comes to citing their medals, but they get awfully squeamish when pressed for details.)"

Risking one's life for freedom is not good enough for Crazy Legs if you don't agree with her.

"The only Republican congressman who did not offer to have sex with John Murtha on the House floor was Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio. While debating Murtha's own proposal to withdraw American troops from Iraq in the middle of a war waged to depose a monstrous dictator who posed a threat to American national security, Schmidt made the indisputably true remark that Marines don't cut and run. (She was right! Murtha voted against his own proposal.)"

That was not his bill they were voting on, it was a republican bill designed to fail in the first place.

twowords

12-02-2005, 12:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Murtha's reversal on the war is an indication that senior members of the military establishment believe success in Iraq is impossible. In short, Murtha's statements imply that Bush has lost support from high-level military officials and therefore has no alternative but to admit defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sucess? Defeat? What the Hell? If sucess is kill every insurgent and terrorist before the US can leave, then I agree that sucess is impossible and therefore we lose and should admit defeat.

If sucess is a stable democratic regime (not a liberal democracy) in place of Saddam, then if we withdraw over six months and Iraq remains fairly stable then we will have essentially won. Therefore we would not be defeated, we will actually have completed our mission of regime change sucessfully.

Mertha points out that the presense of foreign troops is much of the reason for the insurgency, and our troops are not helping the state of Iraq by remaining. An unholy alliance between Shiites, Sunnis, and Foreign terrorists could never be maintained without a US presence; they all hate each other and would have completely diferent goals after the repulsion of the US. Many Sunnis and Shitites especially would be able to negotiate with the formal government, when mush of the collaborationist label is removed as US troops go. And seriously, if the government has hundreds of thousands of trained security forces, how the hell will fragments of the insurgency be able to take control of the country if we leave? What about foreign intervention? Well that can be deterred under Mertha'a plan by a base in Kuwait, with thousands of marines ready to intervene on Iraq's behalf, acting as a deterrent.

Sounds like a plan to suceed in Iraq, where the hell do people get "admitting defeat", "cut and run", or "sucess is impossible". What the hell.

andyfox

12-02-2005, 01:05 PM

"in the middle of a war waged to depose a monstrous dictator who posed a threat to American national security"

How can we be in the "middle" of such a war? The dictator was deposed long ago. If that's what the war was waged for, we won and it's over. Time to bring our boys home.

Then again, logic, truth, and Ms. Coulter are strangers to one another.

12-02-2005, 02:14 PM

I think Murtha's play was more politics than substance, but it was a brilliant move for the Democrats. At a time when many people believe that a reduction of US forces (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/11/mil-051107-dod01.htm) in Iraq will happen anyway, Murtha got the Democrats out in front on the issue making them look pro-active. The Bush administration will look like it's responding to the Democrats call for a troop reduction simply by doing what they were going to do all along. A great play for the Dems before the 2006 mid-term elections.

12-02-2005, 05:49 PM

The resolution to vote to pull out of Iraq immediately showed two things about the Democrats:
1. the didn't have to balls to stand up for what they CLAIM to believe in.

2. the "bring our troops home now" mantra was a move to pander to their base.

Both points show a lack of integrity and also their true colors.

twowords

12-02-2005, 06:27 PM

C'mon progressive people can prevail over conservatives with fact. You don't need to make an account for the exclusive purpose of pretending to be a conservative to make them look like idiots. I mean the facts are pretty clear (http://mediamatters.org/items/200511220010) here.

BadBoyBenny

12-02-2005, 06:34 PM

twowords

12-02-2005, 06:37 PM

I suppose 26 years in the marines and a long record of military respect and support means nothing. Ever consider that he may think his plan is the best course for America?

andyfox

12-02-2005, 06:55 PM

Politically advantageous for what? Murtha is an old guy in the House.

BadBoyBenny

12-02-2005, 08:45 PM

You're right, I have no idea, what he needs a political advantage for. I don't really know much about Murtha at all (what district he's in.. etc.), so my post was over the top.

I still don't like the line of arguement that because he was a longtime service member and has made deals with high level military officials in the past that he speaks for many of those same officials here.

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:26 PM

You clearly know nothing about Jack Murtha besides what you read in the conservative blogs.

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:27 PM

It's not that he has cut deals with him. He is the voice of the military on Capital Hill in a very real way. He loves the Armed Forces and they love him back. That's why the attacks on his patriotism were so funny and misplaced. Did you notice that Bush went out of his way to praise Murtha after Schmidt attacked him on the House floor? Bush knows that Murtha speaks for the top brass.

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:29 PM

Murtha does what the military establishment tells him to do and in return they make sure jobs get into his district. All of his policies are based on that political reality. So, no, I don't think is saying that because he thinks its the best cource. Murtha doesn't come up with policy, he just listens to what military people tell him to do.

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:31 PM

The resolution was sponsored by Republicans and had nothing to do with what Murtha proposed.

You're missing the point of the OP. Murtha speaks for the military establishment IN Iraq, which has lost faith in the leadership and ability of President Bush. Any claims that attacking the war are also attacks on the troops is now rendered meaningless, thanks to Murtha. The people charged with fighting this war believe it cannot be won. They used Murtha to tell the country that sad reality.

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:32 PM

Good point

Andrew Fletcher

12-03-2005, 03:33 PM

They don't. Murtha wouldn't have said the things he said if this wasn't the broadly shared position of senior military officals. Period.

BCPVP

12-03-2005, 11:32 PM

Murtha's immune from acting like a politician?

BadBoyBenny

12-04-2005, 12:02 AM

You haven't convinced me of anything. Attacking the patriotism of someone with his record is silly, and made Schmidt look like an ass. But I still don't buy that he is speaking for the "top brass". Do you have any examples of how he has done this in the past? You really haven't shown anything other than that Bush knows that Murtha is a patriot who has a different position on the war than he does, should not be attacked with ad hominems.

Felix_Nietsche

12-04-2005, 09:58 AM

The only other explanation is he is in the pay of Al queda and is committing gross treason.

I have seen several active duty military officers (serving in Iraq) saying we should finish the job and yet I have not seen any active duty officers in Iraq say we should cut and run.

70%+ of US military voted for Bush43. Looks like they support Bush's policies and not Murtha's coward strategy. Game-set-match. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 11:03 AM

Why is this so hard for people to see what I'm talking about?

Murtha is a politician. All politicians are required to respond to their political base. So, it that sense, Murtha is doing what has base wants him to.

The key thing is that his base is the top-level commanders of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 11:05 AM

Nice try.

51% of the general public voted for Bush and now they've changed their minds. Are military personal immune from changing their minds as well?

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 11:07 AM

Also, the fact that you would even suggest that Murtha could be on the pay role of Al Queda shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.

I love people who read a lot of right-wing (or left-wing) blogs and then think they know what's going on.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 11:09 AM

First off, nothing has ever stopped Bush and his allies from attacking patriots and other critics of the war. Why is Murtha different?

Look, Murtha is one of the most important point person on Capital Hill for the U.S. Military. Period. Anyone who tells you anything different is just plan wrong.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 11:16 AM

He actually didn't serve for that long or ever obtain a particularly high rank.

BCPVP

12-04-2005, 11:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Why is this so hard for people to see what I'm talking about?

Murtha is a politician. All politicians are required to respond to their political base. So, it that sense, Murtha is doing what has base wants him to.

The key thing is that his base is the top-level commanders of the U.S. Armed Forces.

[/ QUOTE ]
Top-level commanders of the U.S. Armed Forces are probably not even close to a majority of Murtha's base.

But let's pretend they do. Why aren't these top-level commanders speaking out themselves? Don't give me a "They'll lose their job if they do." line. If that's the case then they care more about their job than the lives of the men they command and I don't believe that's the case.

Is it really so unbelievable that Murtha could be representing the Democratic base that voted him in (or even certain political groups) as opposed to these shadowy "top-level commanders"?

Felix_Nietsche

12-04-2005, 12:34 PM

If you have evidence that military support for Bush has dropped.....then post a link. I will look at it.

I have posted links on the 70%+ military support for Bush43 SEVERAL times on this site.

Felix_Nietsche

12-04-2005, 12:44 PM

Also, the fact that you would even suggest that Murtha could be on the pay role of Al Queda shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
************************************************** *****
I have not said Murtha is in the pay of Al qaeda but I will say if he was.....then his actions would be exactly the same as his current actions. He is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. And he is the number#1 draw on al jazeera TV..... He is the 'Axis Sally' and 'Tokyo Rose' on the war on terror.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 01:00 PM

Do you know anything about Murtha's base? Or the district he represents?

Based on your comment, I suspect you do not.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 01:03 PM

I think you are most likely correct that 70% of the military supports Bush. It makes sense.

I am not talking about the general population of the military. I'm talking about top-level commanders. That's not that big of a group but they are in charge of the actual mission.

I'm sorry, but since you seem to know nothing about Jack Murtha and his relationships, you really have no legitimatcy in talking about his statements and what they mean. Sorry.

BCPVP

12-04-2005, 01:10 PM

I know very little about the district he represents other than it appears to be split between Bush and Kerry counties.

So unless an incredible number of "top-level commanders" happen to live in those counties, why should I believe that they are his base?

And please answer my question about why these commanders he represents don't speak out.

Andrew Fletcher

12-04-2005, 01:20 PM

The commanders he represents will get fired if they speak out. There are numerous examples of military personal and other officals getting fired by Bush when they speak out. I'd suggest a google search, but somehow I think you'll refuse to believe anything I link unless it comes from Townhall or Little Green Footballs.

Your political base can actually be different from the people who live in your district. A lot of people get money from outside of their district.

Also, Murtha's district is actually pretty Republican. I worked for Kerry in Johnstown and most people were supporting Bush.

BCPVP

12-04-2005, 01:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The commanders he represents will get fired if they speak out.

[/ QUOTE ]
So these men care more about their job then the lives of the men that serve under them? Why should we care about the unspoken opinions of these men who care more about their job then their men?

[ QUOTE ]
I'd suggest a google search, but somehow I think you'll refuse to believe anything I link unless it comes from Townhall or Little Green Footballs.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't read either. Don't bother trying to stereotype me it doesn't work. The only example I can think of off the top of my head was some general, but if I remember correctly he was on his way to retirement anyways. Whatever, it still doesn't seem to answer the follow-up question I wrote above.

12-04-2005, 03:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They don't. Murtha wouldn't have said the things he said if this wasn't the broadly shared position of senior military officals. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is your opinion. It is not a fact. If you have evidence showing this is true please post it. If senior military officials thought the war in Iraq was unwinnable, they would say so to the press off the record.

cardcounter0

12-04-2005, 03:46 PM

How about Donald Rumsfield?

Rumsfeld’s comment that: “…this insurgency is going to be defeated not by the coalition – it’s going to be defeated by the Iraqi security forces, and that is going to happen as the Iraq people begin to believe that they’ve got a future in that country”.

While we are waiting for that to happen ...

“Lt. Col. Frederick P. Wellman, who works with the task force overseeing the training of Iraqi security forces, said the insurgency doesn’t seem to be running out of new recruits, a dynamic fuelled by tribal members seeking revenge for relatives killed in fighting. ‘We can’t kill them all,’ Wellman said. ‘When I kill one I create three’.”

12-04-2005, 04:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How about Donald Rumsfield?

Rumsfeld’s comment that: “…this insurgency is going to be defeated not by the coalition – it’s going to be defeated by the Iraqi security forces, and that is going to happen as the Iraq people begin to believe that they’ve got a future in that country”.

While we are waiting for that to happen ...

“Lt. Col. Frederick P. Wellman, who works with the task force overseeing the training of Iraqi security forces, said the insurgency doesn’t seem to be running out of new recruits, a dynamic fuelled by tribal members seeking revenge for relatives killed in fighting. ‘We can’t kill them all,’ Wellman said. ‘When I kill one I create three’.”

[/ QUOTE ]

Your quotes don't show that senior military officials think the war in Iraq is unwinnable. They show the importance of having US forces in Iraq training Iraqi forces.

The top brass of today's military are either Vietnam veterans or those who joined the military just after Vietnam. They remember how bad our post-Vietnam military was, and how much better it is now. If they thought that the war in Iraq was unwinnable and was slowly destroying our military, you would see stories quoting unnamed Pentagon sources about the need for a US exit from Iraq all over CNN/Fox/MSNBC, ABC/NBC/CBS news, and all the print media.

Felix_Nietsche

12-05-2005, 02:26 PM

you really have no legitimatcy in talking about his (Murtha) statements and what they mean. Sorry.
************************************************** ***********
I wasn't aware the 2+2 forum elected you the authority on Murtha. This may be a surprise but your opinions carry no more weight than anyone elses on this forum. Sorry.

Patriotism is love of country. Based on what Murtha and other Democrat 'leaders' are saying, I questioned their love of country.... Since Murtha has tuned himself into the media darling of Al Jazeera, I think it is accurate to call him the Axis Sally/Tokyo Rose of the war on terror. I think he is more senile than a traitor but his actions would be exactly the same if he was an al queda mole.

12-05-2005, 02:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Patriotism is love of country. Since Murtha has tuned himself into the media darling of Al Jazeera, I think it is accurate to call him the Axis Sally/Tokyo Rose of the war on terror. I think he is more senile than a traitor but his actions would be exactly the same if he was an al queda mole.

[/ QUOTE ]

Love of the COUNTRY, not the ADMINISTRATION. I hate Bush BECAUSE I LOVE THE U S of A:

Bush has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend and foe alike in the process;

He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive military spending and reduced taxation of the rich;

He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and state;

He has repeatedly "misled," to use a kind word, the American people on affairs domestic and foreign;

He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and foreign (Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida);

He has sacrificed American employment (including the toleration of pension and benefit elimination) to increase overall productivity;

He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress;

He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic's oldest problems, corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.

slamdunkpro

12-05-2005, 04:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Patriotism is love of country.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite - Patriotism is love of country and a willingness to sacrifice for it. Just giving lip service for the media as in “I love America” doesn’t make one a patriot. You actually have to do something.

As to Murtha, why is it that he gets all this press when Senator Lieberman goes the other way with his OpEd piece and gets almost no mention. Hmmmm…..?

Congrats on your joining the Pooh-Bah ranks - Welcome!