In his prime time address to the nation on thursday night, President Bush talked about "the 36 nations who have troops on the ground in Iraq" fighting the War on Terror along with us. Basically he made it sound as if the U.S. was just one of 37 nations fighting the war. But its time for a fact check. There are 26, not 36, nations, including us, with troops(or a troop as it turns out to be) in Iraq, but lets take a look at troop numbers shall we?
-----United States: 168,000 troops
----U.K.: 5500 troops
---Australia: 1500 troops
--South Korea: 1200 troops
-Poland: 900
-Romania: 405
-El Salvador: 300
-Georgia: 300
-Azerbaijan: 250
-Fiji: 168
-Bulgaria: 155
-Albania: 120
-Mongolia: 100
-Czech Republic: 89
-Denmark: 55
-Armenia: 46
-Macedonia: 40
-Bosnia: 37
-Kazakhstan: 29
-Moldova: 12
-Italy: 8
-Turkey: 2
-Estonia: 1
-Canada: 1
-Iceland:1
-New Zealand: 1
So there you have it, the 26 nations currently in Iraq. I should note that if you add up all of the other country's troops, it doesn't even equal 7% the number of troops we have. It is completely irresponsible for the President to make it sound as if we're just one of many nations fighting the War in Iraq. There's a difference between those countries who have troops there for diplomatic reasons and the U.S., who is using their troops to police the streets of Baghdad.
Oh, and on a side note, I read something today about Iceland maybe pulling out of Iraq. Some body better break the news to the President that we're going to have one less ally, in fact, one less person, in Iraq.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Gingrich on 2008 Election, Hillary Clinton, and more
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had some very interesting and insightful comments on the 2008 election and the candidates running when he sat down with National Journal for an interview this week.
When asked about the Democrat's chances of winning the Presidency in 2008, Newt had this to say:
"I think that the country, after the last couple of years, has a bias in favor of change -- I think probably starting with Katrina and coming through Baghdad and the whole sense of too much spending. And you sense a lack of enthusiasm in the conservative base, and you sense a stunning level of intensity in the anti-war Left. And so you just look at the dynamics and you have to say the odds are probably 80-20...Now, it could change. If you had a Republican candidate who could break out and who could say, 'Obviously, we need to change pretty dramatically, and the party of trial lawyers, public employee unions, and left-wing ideologues probably can't change,' and could force Hillary or Barack Obama or whomever to be the defender of failed bureaucracies, then I think you could see a Republican win next year. But I don't think they can win by passively staying within the framework of where we have been."
When asked about who has the best chance at being the Republican nominee, Newt responded:
"I think there are three or four possible Republican nominees -- Giuliani, Romney, Thompson,Huckabee , and, based on his recent re-energizing,McCain . All of them are smart people. None of them have yet broken out and begun to define a fundamentally different future."
Newt had this to say when asked what the GOP needs to do to regain popularity with Americans:
"We need very bold, dramatic change, change at every level -- from school board to city council to county commission to state legislatures to the presidency. That's what the Republican Party has to stand for. And, frankly, the Republican Party hasn't stood for that."
And perhaps the most interesting answer from Gingrich came when he was asked about Hillary Clinton:
"She is actually much more centrist than MoveOn.org. She is much tougher on military affairs than the Left. She is more rational, and I have very great respect for her as a hardworking professional. No Republican should think she is going to be easy to beat."
And when asked the question if he wanted to run in '08, Gingrich said:
"Not necessarily. I want to serve my country. I don't want to run as an act of habit. I have no great interest in going out to campaign. I have every interest in finding a generation of solutions. So if you said to me, would I be willing to serve my country, the answer is yes...The most tempting thought about running next year is the idea of debating Senator Clinton. That would be fun."
As always, Newt Gingrich offered us his opinions, and I think they will surprise a few. I was surely surprised about how nicely he talked about Sen. Hillary Clinton. He is right about her, she is not as far left as some in her party, and I think Gingrich was trying to imply in that statement that that is why she is such a formable candidate. Its also interesting how he is still flirting with the idea of running in '08. He says not necessarily, but at the same time says he's willing to serve his country. So what exactly does that mean? My guess is that in Newt's world, if he thinks there isn't a candidate who would "serve" America well, then he would run. I think he won't, but he always leaves the door open by answering questions so ambiguously. But again I would just like to close by saying that good for Newt, for once he didn't attack the democrats, in fact, he kind of gave Hillary a compliment.
When asked about the Democrat's chances of winning the Presidency in 2008, Newt had this to say:
"I think that the country, after the last couple of years, has a bias in favor of change -- I think probably starting with Katrina and coming through Baghdad and the whole sense of too much spending. And you sense a lack of enthusiasm in the conservative base, and you sense a stunning level of intensity in the anti-war Left. And so you just look at the dynamics and you have to say the odds are probably 80-20...Now, it could change. If you had a Republican candidate who could break out and who could say, 'Obviously, we need to change pretty dramatically, and the party of trial lawyers, public employee unions, and left-wing ideologues probably can't change,' and could force Hillary or Barack Obama or whomever to be the defender of failed bureaucracies, then I think you could see a Republican win next year. But I don't think they can win by passively staying within the framework of where we have been."
When asked about who has the best chance at being the Republican nominee, Newt responded:
"I think there are three or four possible Republican nominees -- Giuliani, Romney, Thompson,Huckabee , and, based on his recent re-energizing,McCain . All of them are smart people. None of them have yet broken out and begun to define a fundamentally different future."
Newt had this to say when asked what the GOP needs to do to regain popularity with Americans:
"We need very bold, dramatic change, change at every level -- from school board to city council to county commission to state legislatures to the presidency. That's what the Republican Party has to stand for. And, frankly, the Republican Party hasn't stood for that."
And perhaps the most interesting answer from Gingrich came when he was asked about Hillary Clinton:
"She is actually much more centrist than MoveOn.org. She is much tougher on military affairs than the Left. She is more rational, and I have very great respect for her as a hardworking professional. No Republican should think she is going to be easy to beat."
And when asked the question if he wanted to run in '08, Gingrich said:
"Not necessarily. I want to serve my country. I don't want to run as an act of habit. I have no great interest in going out to campaign. I have every interest in finding a generation of solutions. So if you said to me, would I be willing to serve my country, the answer is yes...The most tempting thought about running next year is the idea of debating Senator Clinton. That would be fun."
As always, Newt Gingrich offered us his opinions, and I think they will surprise a few. I was surely surprised about how nicely he talked about Sen. Hillary Clinton. He is right about her, she is not as far left as some in her party, and I think Gingrich was trying to imply in that statement that that is why she is such a formable candidate. Its also interesting how he is still flirting with the idea of running in '08. He says not necessarily, but at the same time says he's willing to serve his country. So what exactly does that mean? My guess is that in Newt's world, if he thinks there isn't a candidate who would "serve" America well, then he would run. I think he won't, but he always leaves the door open by answering questions so ambiguously. But again I would just like to close by saying that good for Newt, for once he didn't attack the democrats, in fact, he kind of gave Hillary a compliment.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)