Mike Castle is “Proud to be Wrong” on Iraq
In an interview in the extreme right-wing Washington Times, Mike Castle wears his uselessness on his sleave.
“My position is fundamentally the same as it was going into the [August] break,” said Rep. Michael N. Castle, Delaware Republican, who weathered protests outside his Wilmington district office, TV ads and a march by about 30 demonstrators on his home — although he was not there at the time.
“I never believed in setting a date for withdrawal,” Mr. Castle said, echoing others who await a mid-September progress report by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus to decide how to proceed with the war. – via World Peace Herald
While once the ISG report was the holy grail of Iraq wisdom for Castle, he now says that the mid-september Gen. David H. Petraeus White House report to Congress will frame his views. In the meantime Castle is proud to be wrong on Iraq and seems to think that he is showing some type of Bushian “resolve” that could help him win re-election next year.
Prior to this, Castle latest position on Iraq was that ““This war just needs to grind to the end.” Which he disclosed in a rare moment of candor on August 6th.
Prior to adopting his “grind to an end philosophy, Castle’s position on Iraq was impossible to dig out of his utter giberish.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAWGORRBJSM]
“In an interview in the extreme right-wing Washington Times,”
How extreme to the left you must be to believe that.
WT is moderate at best!
it is well known they lean well to the right Chrissy, get your facts straight.
Owned by the Moonies, the industry is well aware of their influence over articles within the paper and the right wing bias they have across their paper not just the Editorial section.
they are far from moderate. But the fact that you call them moderate speaks volumes about you.
Based on what I’ve read, and on the video that you’ve posted, Castle has been a supporter of implementing the ISG recommendations since the group completed its study. While the “grind to an end” soundbyte that you’ve been proudly exploiting might seem ambiguous when framed in a certain context, there is no indication that Castle has actually changed his position in this regard.
Not that I disagree with your position, but–aside from repeatedly saying that Castle’s view on Iraq is wrong because it’s wrong–have you made an argument as to why you believe that it is better to implement a withdrawl date than it is to implement the ISG recommendations (which provide a “goal for withdrawl”–April 2008–but not a firm date)? Is it a gut feeling or is there a tangible rationale?
While the “grind to an end” soundbyte that you’ve been proudly exploiting might seem ambiguous when framed in a certain context,
Dh. I have come to expect a higher level of knee jerk Castle defending that this.
How is it ambiguous? It is the most direct thing he has ever said about the war.
All his other other statements pleading for more time for this or that “report” or urging everyone to “support the troops” where burried under a blizzard of “however’s” “maybe” and “on the other hand’s”
When I first read the quote I interpreted it as meaning that Castle favors a troop redeployment in the coming months (as he has stated previously on several occassions). However, since you don’t want to believe that, you’ve chosen to portray the quote in a different light. Like a Rorshack (phoenetic spelling; I won’t even attempt the correct spelling) Blot, your interpretation of the quote in question is dependent on your predispositions. Tomorrow, if you read that Barack Obama said that this war needs to grind to an end, would you believe that he has suddenly betrayed his base and jumped on the Bush Administration bandwagon? I certainly wouldn’t. I would take the quote as an indication that Obama still favors setting a firm date for troop withdrawl (as he has said previously on several occassions).
From your description of the difficulty that you’ve had trying to understand the Iraq Study Group Report, it would seem that you are generally confused by the intricacies of diplomatic and military strategy. Should I conclude from this (and from your non-response) that your position on a firm withdrawl date for troops in Iraq is based on a gut feeling (Bush Style)?