Bush's withdrawal plan could draw votes

[Nambe]

The Associated With bush Press

President Bush's plan to call tens of thousands of U.S. troops home from Europe and Asia could gain him election-year applause from military families, but won't ease the strain on soldiers still battling violent factions in Iraq and Afghanistan. ..

Bush's speech comes as the U.S. death toll in Iraq is approaching 1,000 and National Guard and Reserve troops are serving extended tours of duty.

Aides to Democratic challenger John Kerry blamed a lack of postwar planning by the Bush administration for the increased burden the reservists are shouldering. They also noted that the Massachusetts senator has proposed adding 40,000 troops to the regular Army and expanding special operations forces.

Kerry has said he would try to withdraw some troops from Iraq during his first six months in office. That idea has drawn criticism from Bush, who says that simply would urge insurgents to wait until the U.S. presence was thinned before attacking. ..

[Brotherjohn]

1. Why on earth else would he be doing it? (EDITED to add quote)

ON EDIT, added:

To quote John DiIulio, who resigned from Bush's faith-based initiative in 2002, "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you've got is everything--and I mean everything--being run by the political arm."

That's so good I'm adding it to my sig line...

[LittleApple81]

2. Question: does this represent a cut in pay for soldiers? Do they receive

extra pay to go abroad? Just curious, because I don't understand all the connotations.

[atreides1]

3. Yes it Will Be a Pay Cut

Troops stationed overseas get extra pay, those that are unaccompanied
get family seperation pay.

Stateside duty gets you nothing extra, unless you're on jump status, and that only applies to certain units here in the states.

[Strelnikov_]

9. Beat Me To It

The numb nut who wrote this article should probably do some research first. The Troops are being pulled out of West Germany and S. Korea, both not half bad places to be posted overseas, and generally with their families. My understanding is that the future deployments to former Eastern block countries families will not be allowed (remote basing status?).

Overall, I think this move will lose, not gain, support from military families. I think the nature and timing of the announcement is to give the sheeple the impression that we are 'bringin um home'.

[lottie244]

15. Back door way to try to curb military spending which is bankrupting US

They are good at what they do. Must mean that N. Korea is not all much a threat since we will be bringing home troops stationed in S. Korea.

[happynewyear]

4. he should have "withdrawn" a long time ago

enough of these imbeciles!

:evilgrin:

:dem: :kick:

[happynewyear]

5. he should have "withdrawn" a long time ago

enough of these imbeciles!

:evilgrin:

:dem: :kick:

[maxrandb]

10. If only Poppy had withdrawn before depositing that little demon seed

}(

[happynewyear]

16. drat INDEED!

Time to rethink REAL eugenics IMO! :evilgrin:

:dem: :kick:

[shockingelk]

18. His Pa should have withdrawn

Or used a condom.

[Lithos]

6. What does it mean?

It means tens of billions of dollars now have to be spent relocating these troops and their families. Money that could have been spent on improving their pay and benefits.

As for making new jobs for spouses and the like, that is not true. Most areas where there are bases already have problems with high spousal unemployment. Dumping thousands more will NOT help the situation.

It also means billions of dollars of increased spending now required for force projection. Where do you think the troops in Iraq are being supported from?

And lastly, it sends the wrong signal to our allies such as S. Korea where we are already in a standoff with Pyongyang over nuclear disarmament. We support you, but oh btw, we are pulling our troops out.

L-

[LauraK]

7. QUAGMIRE....Why read anything else into it.

The Iraqi "police" are deserting and the "government" is failing. How long will these troops be in the US. Not long.

[Chango]

8. If I was in the military...

I would not be happy about this. Those kinds of overseas assignments are what many people sign up for - especially the family-accompanied tours in Europe. Bush intends to replace some of them with unaccompanied assignments to some relatively downscale facilities in Eastern Europe. While I agree with the move from a strategic standpoint and necessity - I don't think it's going to improve his image among military voters. And coming at this time, it reflects a weakness in our global defense posture, and our "enemies" can take satisfaction in having forced it upon us.

[Kolesar]

11. It's a gimmick. Bush is trying to run out the clock

He hopes to get a last minute score that will put him over the top in enough swing states. Bush has no plan. He is winging it and making stuff up as he goes along.

[DeepModem Mom]

12. According to Gen. Clark, it threatens national security...

and, presumably, they don't care --

STATEMENT BY GENERAL WESLEY CLARK ON TROOP REDEPLOYMENTS FROM EUROPE AND ASIA
Washington, D.C. -General Wesley Clark issued the following statement today.

"President Bush's decision to redeploy approximately 70,000 U.S. troops from Europe and Asia will significantly undermine U.S. national security. As we face a global war on terror with Al Qaeda active in more than 60 countries, now is not the time to pull-back our forces, and I question why President Bush would want to do this now.

"First, removing U.S. forces from the Korean Peninsula at a critical juncture in diplomatic efforts to dismantle North Korea's nuclear program will send a dangerous signal of weak U.S. resolve to Kim Jong Il.

"Second, withdrawing forces from Europe will further undermine already strained relations with long-time NATO allies, will be interpreted as the distancing of the U.S. from NATO, and will set back U.S. efforts to encourage greater NATO participation in Iraq.

"Third, bringing U.S. forces back to the U.S. will not enhance our ability to deploy U.S. forces quickly to key hot spots around the world -- all of which are more accessible from Western Europe than from the continental U.S.

"Finally, this redeployment will do nothing to ease the strain on our overstretched military forces. Worse, it will increase the burden on many military families as troops will be separated from their families during more frequent and unaccompanied deployments to Eastern Europe.

"This ill-conceived move and its timing seem politically motivated rather than designed to strengthen our national security."

Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee, www.democrats.org . This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

[Raven]

13. To me, this withdrawal means

that Bush will have all the more soldiers to send to Iraq or the next country targeted. If I were a military family, I'd be worried.

[irancontra]

17. yeah

something about this stinks bad. Iran comes to mind... Getting back at Germany comes to mind.. come on November ..ya can't come soon enough.

[radfringe]

14. it's a political stunt

as reported on NPR - this "plan" has been in the works for the past 2 years, and bush* inc. hasn't the foggiest idea as to where to post the troops it's withdrawing, NPR further reported that it make take another 2-3 years before actual withdrawal begins

question: so why announce a half-baked plan now?
answer: it's election year and bush* is in deep doo-doo



if the 'toon didn't show up -- http://radicalfringe.freeservers.com/
scroll to bottom right corner