Now that Bush has made it a point that Kerry insulted Poland (although Kerry never mentioned Poland, only Bush did) a lot of right wing pundits have also made it a point to inform everyone how insulted Poland's president felt. "It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral," said Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski.
Yes, Bush proved that we really have a coalition, because it isn't just Britian- hey, what about Poland? As Bush said, "What about Poland? He forgot Poland."
Kerry's point was that we were carrying the burden mostly by ourselves, and talk of a "coalition" was crap because we are pretty much on our own.
Bush: "What about Poland?" And the right-wing blogs are all over it.
Yet, today, we hear this:
(CNN) -- Poland may reduce its commitment of forces to the war in Iraq by 40 percent by January 2005 and have all its troops out by the end of that year, Polish officials said Monday.
Currently, Poland has 2,500 troops committed to Operation Iraqi Freedom, but would reduce that number to 1,500 January 2005, and the remaining troops would leave Iraq by December 2005.
A Defense Ministry spokesman said Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski told the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza that Poland planned a 40 percent reduction in January, followed by complete withdrawal by the end of the year.
So I guess our grand coalition is Britian and... the Ukraine? Bulgaria?
Watch as the right-wing tries to make this Kerry's fault too. Or blame Clinton, they sometimes like to do that. But notice the tough position Bush is in - he made it a point to recognize Poland in the debate, insinuating that their contribution was really helpful, and now that they are leaving and he has to try and show it doesn't really hurt us.
Fact is, it won't hurt us that much - because they weren't helping us that much. We are pretty much on our own, something Kerry has been saying all along.
Spin away right-wingers. Spin away.
Then there is this: http://www.speakeasy.org/~joshudan/gopconstrm.mov
Pretty much says it all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
From CNN (perhaps not as reputable as source as your friend Chrenkoff):
Polish President Aleksander Kwasnieswski said a withdrawal is in the discussion stage but could not be finalized until after Iraqi elections scheduled for January.
"I hope the election will happen. Then the election will give (Iraq) a new government with a strong mandate, and then we will speak with the new Iraqi government about the presence of international forces -- including Polish forces -- in the year 2005," said Kwasnieswski, who was in Paris for a meeting with French President Jacques Chirac.
"That's the reason why we are speaking with the Iraqis, with our coalition partners, with the United States about reduction (in) the first of January 2005, and maybe to finish our mission to the end of 2005, but both elements are question marks because the discussions are ongoing," he said.
Ok, Vrangel, how wrong I was. The president of Poland (who was meeting with "our enemy" France) just confirmed what his Defense Minister said, that Poland may reduce its commitment of forces to the war in Iraq by 40 percent by January 2005 and have all its troops out by the end of that year.
Is that clarification enough?
Oh, and there there is this from MSNBC:
The Dominican Republic followed Spain and Honduras in saying it would be withdrawing troops soon. Ukraine, meanwhile, told the Bush administration that it wants members of the U.S.-led military coalition to have more influence in decisions on nonmilitary issues.
Also from MSNBC:
In Warsaw, Prime Minister Leszek Miller told the Polish news agency PAP that “we will not make any rash gestures” about Polish troops in Iraq.
“The final decision about the pullout will be agreed and thought over, but the problem exists,” he said, adding that "we cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that Spain and others are leaving Iraq.”
Well, gosh, Vrangel, that sounds like they are considering a pull-out to me.
Later, after I am sure frantic phone calls from the Bush administration, with threats and bribes, came this from a government spokesman, who said Poland was "not considering a pullout":
“Poland will be in Iraq as long as it necessary, until the situation there is stabilized,” spokesman Marcin Kaszuba told The Associated Press. “Poland has not and is not considering a troop withdrawal.”
Kaszuba said Miller only meant to restate the government’s position “that the government is not considering increasing its contingent” in Iraq.
Hmm, is that a flip-flop? From "We are planning to pull out" to "we are discussing a pullout" to "we are not even considering a pullout." All in the course of a few hours?
I wonder what Bush is offering Poland to say that. But even then they haven't said they would stay, but that no final decision will be made until after the elections in Iraq (which, conveniently enough, is AFTER the elections in the United States).
Man, I sure hope Moldova and Kazahkstan don't pull out their soldiers - that would be two platoons! (25 each). Macedonia is a much more loyal ally, sending a much larger contingent. (28 soldiers).
But look out, South Korea is on the way! (3,000).
With a huge amount of support from countries like Azerbaijan (150), Bulgaria (455), and the Czech Rep. (92) we can alleviate the strain on the US Army any day now. Don't forget Estonia (55) and Georgia (150), and certainly not Latvia (120) or Lithuania (105). How dare Kerry not mention them! With the help of Mongolia (180) and Tonga (44) how can we lose.
Of course I didn't mention all of our allies - there are just too many to list. Oh, actually, there aren't, here they all are (below), including the huge contingents of overwhelming force I mentioned already (but damn, we lost Costa Rica (no troops) and now we are losing the Dominican Republic and Honduras. But at least we still have Tonga to help us to victory.
And Kerry says we need more help and that he would seek it out and get it. What is he thinking?
The entire vast coalition (totaling a whopping 25,027, but less than 17,000 are allowed to participate in combat operations):
Britain 8,530
Albania 70
Australia 850
Azerbaijan 150
Bulgaria 455
Czech Rep. 92
Denmark 510
Dominican Rep. 300
El Salvador 360
Estonia 55
Georgia 150
Hungary 300
Italy 2,700
Japan 1,000
Kazakhstan 25
Latvia 120
Lithuania 105
Macedonia 28
Moldova 25
Mongolia 180
Netherlands 1,263
New Zealand 60
Nicaragua 115
Norway 150
Poland 2,400
Portugal 120
Romania 730
Singapore 200
Slovakia 105
South Korea 675 (3,000 on way)
Thailand 460
Tonga 44
Ukraine 1,700
Man, what an astounding force. Who needs more help than that? After all, the coalition in the first Gulf War was only 32 nations, providing a measly... well, France provided 17,000 troops, 350 tanks, 38 aircraft and 14 ships. Syria provided 19,000 troops and 270 tanks, and Germany provided five minesweepers, three other ships and eight aircraft. Plus the large British contribution of 30,000 troops, including 221 Challenger 1 Main Battle Tanks and 316 Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicles. The entire coalition numbered almost 700,000 troops, just to kick Iraq out of Kuwait and with no intention of occupation.
So Kerry doubts we have a real coalition this time? Even when we have those 44 guys from Tonga? How foolish of him.
Post a Comment