Ah - yes - very nice Condi. Why have benchmarks that have consequences - then if you don't do your job there are consequences...

Actually thats more honest than I expected. Though its kind of like saying - why have grades in school - then if you fail you don graduate.
Or why have performance indicators in your job - if you don't reach them you might be fired...

Brilliant Condi, just Brilliant ...

Funny, on Jan. 11, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the Bush administration would not “stay married” to its Baghdad security plan if the Iraqis do “not [live] up to their part of the obligation”:

SEC. RICE: I will tell you this, the benchmark that I’m looking at — the oil law is important, the political process is extraordinary important — that the most important thing that the Iraqi government has to do right now is to reestablish the confidence of its population that it’s going to be even-handed in defending it. That’s what we need to see over the next two or three months, and I think that over the next several months they’re going to have to show that.

SEN. OBAMA: Or else what? Mr. Chairman –

SEC. RICE: Or this plan — or this plan is not — this plan is not going to work.

"The problem is, why tie our own hands? And that's the problem with having so-called consequences for missing the benchmarks"

And who determines whether the benchmarks are being met?

The prez.

And we all know he's been so honest about the war so far. NOT.

So what's to prevent him from just saying the benchmarks are being met, stay in Iraq?

ThELefTYFoOL

(Oh, and excellent point, kblack77)

"Then if you fail you don graduate."

Well written, yet again, Dr. Dumbass.

Go ahead, rushfan385@aol.com, send me another e-mail...

Willemena's back--everyone say hello to Willemena...

What's brilliant kblack is your analogy....riiigght!

Good for Condi for having the foritude to stand up for what she believes is the "right thing to do."

Benchmarks, timelines...they'll become one in the same with the left.

Unlike any war in which America has been involved, the left now deems it necessary to incorporate "benchmarks" and "timelines" into a bill they know will never elude veto ink. So why bother? Because the left continues to dredge up anything they feel will embarrass the Bush Administration, therefore, unless they're willing to expurgate such ludicrous verbiage from the bill...no deal.

Dirty Harry, Murtha, Piglosi and those that voted for the war and then turned their backs on America should be tried for treason and sentenced to twenty years in Cindy Sheehan's underwear. Silly, but worse than Pelican Bay.

Condoleeza Rice has been wrong about pretty much everything, on top of telling an occasional lie or two.

So for someone who continually misses the mark, she is merely reflecting the reality of the Bush Administration.

I mean everyone does a "heckava-job" when they are in truth crashing an burning.

So from moving goal posts to totally eliminating them is simply par for the course.

A lot can be said about Condi Rice but her brillance can't be denied and shouldn't be mocked. The fact that she sees the world's threat more clearly than most Americans shouldn't suprise anyone. If you walked in her shoes and achieved her success, your point of view would certainly reflect it. I don't think she gets the credit she deserves or the respect she has earned by any Democrat or the general public -- especially woman's groups & the Congressional Black Caucus. I think she should be credited for reaching a milestone that creates a positive path for others in the future.

The Iraqi parliament just announced they're taking a few months off this summer, because time is irreleant. Why should they feel any pressure to reach any sort of solutions to their problems? We will happily send money and soldiers until the stars burn out. if our troops return home alive, the trrorists have won.

The answer to Condi's question is simple. The democrats want al queda to win in Iraq.

"The problem is, why tie our own hands? And that's the problem with having so-called consequences for missing the benchmarks" -Condoleeza Rice

I think Rice is talking about the flexibility that is needed in a time of war. This war really is like no other war that came before. We need the time and flexibility to be able to pursue a particular strategy, evaluate the results of that strategy positive or negative, and then reformulate or develop a new strategy all together to achieve the desired goals. If a particular strategy, with a particular goal with a particular timeline is locked in by law that means there is no ability to correct that strategy and achieve the goal if the original strategy does not accomplish the desired goal in the desired timeframe. We need flexibility to deal with this complicated war.

VDH:

By any honest assessment, the great majority of Iraqis are brave citizens who voted en masse for change, at great risk to their safety. Kurdistan is a stunning success. It belies stereotypes that Muslims can’t govern themselves peacefully, practice consensual government, or create vibrant economies. Tribal sheiks and clerics in Iraq hate al Qaeda as much as we do. They suffer far more losses in trying to rid their country of such killers. American soldiers testify to the friendliness and support of the Iraqi people.

But that American alliance with freedom-loving Arabs is not what is reported. [..] Fostering democracy in Iraq is called imperialism.

Benchmarks? In a war?

You must be joking. Those requiring definitive benchmarks in a war are being unrealistic!

Can anyone tell me the benchmarks that were set in the first Gulf War, Bosnia, Vietnam, Korea, WWII and WWI?

Were they met on time??? Any of them, if they existed at all??

And to the so-called "doctor", you are actually comparing the Iraq war with graduating and job performance?

You truly are a buffoon.

Parallel Legal System Developing in the UK... "Now Muslims Get Their Own Laws In Britain"

(Daily Express): MUSLIM radicals have established their own draconian court systems in Britain.

Controversial Sharia courts have been set up in major towns and cities to impose Islamic law and enable Muslims to shun the legitimate British legal system. Last night religious leaders and politicians expressed outrage that Sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in our society.

Critics insisted that the Govern­ment is allowing a two-tier legal system to flourish in the name of political correctness and that the authority of UK justice is being undermined. [..]

Non-Muslims are excluded from the secretive court which is registered as a charity to receive British tax benefits.

Tax benefits for Shari'a law...in Britain. When do we start setting "benchmarks" for reclaiming Britian's lost Western, democratic laws?

So what "benchmarks" are being set to defeat the 3 year Muslim jihad against the Buddhists of Thailand?

Two Buddhists, Beheaded Set Ablaze in Thai Muslim south.

PATTANI, Thailand (Reuters) - Suspected Muslim militants beheaded a Buddhist man, shot dead his nephew and set both bodies on fire in Thailand’s rebellious far south, police and soldiers said on Monday.

The 30-year man and his 14-year-old nephew were killed in a Muslim village in Pattani, one of the three southern most provinces hit by three years of separatist violence in which more than 2,100 people have been killed.

The head was found 5 km away at a government SCHOOL where three BOMBS were planted at the entrance, police Lieutenant Colonel Yuthakan Plienpoe told Reuters.

“They wanted to trap us with these bombs,” Yuthakan said by telephone. Mobile phone service was switched off in the area to prevent the bombs being set off by phone signals.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) advises more APPEASEMENT: "World Muslim body backs Thai policy on south."

BANGKOK, April 30 (Reuters) - The head of the world’s largest body of Islamic nations urged Thailand on Monday to stick to its soft approach to resolving a bloody insurgency in the Muslim-majority far south.

Breaking news: Leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq is dead. No detaials, just a news flash from an Iraqi news source. So there's a job opening in Iraq--any of you America-haters want to apply? How 'bout you, Dr. Rerun? You already know all the talking points, so you can star in a few propaganda videos, and get the word out to your fellow jihadists...

I don't think she gets the credit she deserves or the respect she has earned by any Democrat or the general public -- especially woman's groups & the Congressional Black Caucus. I think she should be credited for reaching a milestone that creates a positive path for others in the future.

As an African-American woman who has acheived a lot, she absolutely deserves credit. However, that has nothing to do with her being the public face of wrong and dangerous policies.

I'll throw my 2 cents in on this. I believe there ought to benchmarks set. And they need to be enforced, although on the same token there should be a certain amount of liency to enforce those said benchmarks considering the volitale situaltion there. I do not support a timetable on any level! Benchmarks are, in my opioin the best possible way to give the Iraqi government that "nudge" it needs to ready itself for security control. I'm ready to leave Iraq..I was ready to leave at least a year ago. But we went in there with a mission to bring democracy and a stable government to Iraq, and we shouldnt leave until we've reached those goals. We broke it, we bought it. If we leave prematurely, I believe THAT WILL have a profound effect on our credibility in the world. And not in a good way.

"As an African-American woman who has acheived a lot, she absolutely deserves credit. However, that has nothing to do with her being the public face of wrong and dangerous policies."

"Dangerous policies" are required in a global war on terror Jon, but it's how one defines "dangerous" that is the scary aspect of our time. War is "dangerous" and scary and we should all fear terrorism, but we should not allow ourselves to be intimidated either. Much like the Dems have.

When America decided to invade France on June 6th 1944 with the plan to invade Germany and defeat the Nazis, there was no exit plan...only an open-ended will to defeat them.
In short, a different type of war.

There are very few short-term solutions for war other than overwhelming force and fortitude, otherwise Truman could have saved thousands of lives by not dropping Little Boy and Fatman and the millions of deaths could have been avoided. But back then, Americans rallied behind our President because Americans, like my parents, had fortitude and a patriotic sense with regards to the term "freedom." Again, another area of concern for Democrats these days.

Here's a good quote of the day that addresses Rice's quote:

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

or this:

“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

Oops, sorry. Those were George Bush quotes from 1999.

Maybe carsick. But post 911 the "do nothing" mentality was no longer safe for America and to think that many politicians are immune from past partisan statements is also irresponsible, and each politician including GWB should be held accountable for their words.

With this admission, I would expect the left to stand up and take responsibility for their words too.

Words like:

"Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power," Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D., N.Y.) said while debating the Iraq War resolution in October 2002. "He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20,000 people."
"Hussein, Clinton added, "has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members."

Kerry and Edwards both made similar statements.

"Let me thank these three Democrats, and the 108 others who voted to remove Saddam Hussein, for their courage and support as America decided to liberate Iraq. What happens next over there is unclear. What we do know is that America's mission in Iraq is not just my war — it’s their war, too."

Thank you Deroy Murdock March 2nd 2007...thank you.

Their statements could just as easily be supporting stronger sanctions and thorough inspections while allowing the president to keep all options on the table. Little did they know that the option had already been picked.

I love that "oh, it was pre 9/11 thinking" excuse. It allows for no accountability because "everything is new!" No benchmarks, no comparisons. How convenient. Boy, will you be screaming when a democrat in the White House tries that tactic.

Actually carsick, if a Dem wins the WH, and they don't pull out of the ME, I'll have a new-found respect for him/her/she/it and I'll bet a steak dinner, that whoever it is, doesn't pull out as fast as they say today....just a hunch, but you know how politicians are. Remember the "first 100 hours?"

The current proposal doesn't even call for a complete pullout of Iraq let alone the Middle East.
Read the document before you claim you know what it says.

carsick,
Sec 1904 (a) thru (f) is filled with restrictive language that undermines our ability to be successful. For example: they've used the word "substantial" in place of milestones/timelines. A semi-clever way to re-define the term with semantics.

Certainly a good argument--depending on which side you're on--for executive line item veto power.

The proposal mentions substantial because our current policing duties require a substantial number of troops. Policing duties obscure our real goal of capturing or killing our international enemy al Queda. The proposal keeps troops in Iraq for going after al Queda and protecting American interests and training Iraqi troops. It does not have room in there for the Iraqi Parliament to take two months off while we "hold the fort."

The proposal also says absolutely nothing about leaving the Middle East beyond pulling those troops in Iraq who are standing in the middle of a civil war.

No pressure, no results. Maliki and his compatriots are laughing in our face with the extended vacation while their country continues to decline. If it's not important to them...

My mistake, I said, "...obscure our real goal..."
I don't know what the administration's "real" goal is.
I'd like to amend that by saying, "...obscure our necessary goal..."

Little did they know that the option had already been picked.

Bullcrap alert! Bullcrap alert!

They knew exactly what was coming. Hell, most of them claim they knew that Bush was intent on invading Iraq when he took office. How can you say "Little did they know...?"

You sound like Kerry, during the 2004 election, when he claimed that he didn't vote for "authorization to use force," but for "the authorization to threaten to use force."

carsick, if you're trying to prove that you're a moron, I have two words for you: Mission Accomplished!!!

keefer
Mission Accomplished right back at ya dude. You realize the sad reality of that quip right?
Probably not.
In the meantime, go check what the administration was saying to the world and American public during that period. Your 20/20 hindsight needs some correction.