home

Lugar Changes Words, But Not Position on Iraq

When I first heard about Lugar's "groundbreaking" speech on Iraq, I wrote:

I suspect that come September, Lugar will join the August group of Warner, Hagel and Smith and speak about change but go along with Bush.

I was wrong. It didn't take until September. Via Yglesias, Lugar has ALREADY said he is not changing his vote on Iraq:

However, [Lugar spokesman Andy] Fisher said the speech does not mean Lugar would switch his vote on the war or embrace Democratic measures setting a deadline for troop withdrawals.

What a joke.

< Two Views on Guantanamo: Which Is Yours? | Paris Hilton Released from Jail >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Yep yep yep yep yep (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:16:49 PM EST
    Just one more photo op and one more NOT MY BAD and one more group glance away from the only prize to be had in this whole mess, being as  responsible as we can for what we did to Iraq and ending the occupation of Iraq!

    Worse: threatening Bush on immigration (none / 0) (#1)
    by lilybart on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 10:05:55 AM EST
    Yesterday when I read that REPS were telling Bush that if he didn't support them on immigration, they would not support his war come September, my jaw dropped.

    This means they don't think the war is necessary at all, or they would support it no matter what. But if they are willing to deny Bush war support if he supports immigration reform they don't like....well what does that you?

    Watching Democrats eat this up (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 10:06:56 AM EST
    Is beyond depressing. Oh, and thanks for cutting through the candidate promotion crap at MyDD.

    Lugar willl come around (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 10:24:30 AM EST
    when the talex's get done with the arm twisting.

    Honest. Really.

    Maybe Not A Joke (none / 0) (#4)
    by talex on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:32:37 AM EST
    I just called two of Lugar's Indiana offices. I was unable to get through to the DC office.

    I asked about Andy Fisher's statement that the speech does not mean Lugar would switch his vote on the war. I commented to both offices that the statement is a bit ambiguous and did the statement also mean that the speech does not mean Lugar WOULD NOT switch his vote on the war.

    In both calls the staffer said while they can't speak directly for Lugar that the statement didn't necessarily mean he would not change his vote. That in other words he could go either way and that he is very concerned about Iraq and wants a change of course.

    This was not a hastily put together speech. According to a CNN article:

    Lugar's call for a course change -- which his spokesman, Andy Fisher, said was "months in the making, weeks in writing"

    At the very least Lugar is calling of a change of course - a Plan B as he says in his speech. Some here may take joy in down playing this speech as their pessimism and pet solutions out way anything else. But if one reads and then listens to Lugar's speech it is hard to come away with anything but understanding Lugar is being very serious here - and a phone call to his offices confirm that.

    Mr. President, the issue before us is whether we will refocus our policy in Iraq on realistic assessments of what can be achieved, and on a sober review of our vital interests in the Middle East. Given the requirements of military planners, the stress of our combat forces, and our own domestic political timeline, we are running out of time to implement a thoughtful Plan B that attempts to protect our substantial interests in the region, while downsizing our military presence in Iraq.


    Godot promised to meet you there in September? (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:43:54 AM EST
    Not even that.

    Dude, I wish you were right on this. But you must see you are not by now.

    Just wait till Petraeus and Crocker start spinning their BS in September.

    Almost no Republicans are going to vote for withdrawal, real withdrawal. Binding withdrawal.

    You've been played.

    Parent

    I don't think so. (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 11:49:35 AM EST
    He's doing the playing though.

    Parent
    I thought I woud try to give him (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:07:39 PM EST
    the4 benefit of the doubt today as Lugar is the perfect example of what his best case scenario is.

    And it was just proven that it leads to nowhere.

    Parent

    Heh! (none / 0) (#9)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:25:13 PM EST
    I know. I was just 'playing him'. He's too funny sometimes.

    Parent
    OT sort of (none / 0) (#10)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:29:15 PM EST
    But I love the title of Sirota's latest post. The post itself is even better.

    Parent
    Lugar: (none / 0) (#11)
    by talex on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:52:46 PM EST
    But seizing these opportunities will require the President to downsize the U.S. military's role in Iraq and place much more emphasis on diplomatic and economic options.

    So downsizing our military presence and role leads to nowhere? Goals are most often achieved in increments. And incremental success is better that an All or Nothing Strategy.

    I'd accept less death and maiming as a start come September. Apparently you would not.

    At least downsizing our military presence and role is heading in the right direction. And the Lefty think tank Center for American Progress' thinks so also.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/25/strategic-reset

    http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003515.php

    http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/strategic_reset.html

    Pessimists never achieve anything worthwhile. Failure is at the root of their pessimism.


    Parent

    Bush does not care what Lugar says (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 01:01:17 PM EST
    My optimism springs from the belief that Democrats will find the wisdom to end the Debacle - by announcing a date certain to not fund it.

    You are the pessimist.

    Parent

    You might consider (none / 0) (#12)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 12:55:20 PM EST
    not being so pessimistic, talex.

    Parent
    Or do you plan to hold a gun (none / 0) (#14)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 01:03:25 PM EST
    to Bush's head?

    When? As soon as you've assembled that elusive veto proof majority?

    How many have you flipped so far?

    Hard numbers will do. Or hard percentages. Whatever suits you.

    Hey, listen talex - I have a deal for you - let's  hold a gun to Bush's head TODAY, and tell him he gets no more money for the occupation. Period. Ever. He's got until September to bring them home.

    When he gets that pouty look on his face we'll nail the sorry little fu*ker to the wall, on camera, and say:

    "Are you Mr. President, and Mr. Secretary, prepared to leave troops in Iraq without adequate supplies?"

    And then we'll watch him squirm, and watch him dance. He will not be able to say "yes."

    You and me, talex! You in? Or are you out?

    This is what the media and the Democrats should have been asking, over and over again, to frame this debate properly.

    Parent

    We'll (none / 0) (#15)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    make him an offer he can't refuse.

    You in, talex?

    Or are you out?

    Parent

    And talex... (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edger on Tue Jun 26, 2007 at 01:13:43 PM EST
    If you're out, when are signing up and shipping out?

    If you're too old, I'm sure that for a man of your great wisdom and experience Blackwater will create a position for you.

    You might as well make a buck or two off the deaths of your fellow Americans and a few hundred thousand Iraqis after all.

    Right, talex?

    Parent