1. Major General Batiste was a subordinate commander in Iraq. He reported to the commander of Multi-National Force - Iraq, who reported to the commander of U.S. Central Command, who reports to the National Command Authorities (the President and Secretary of Defense).

Major General Batiste never made and request directly to the president. He made requests to MNFI, who made requests to USCENTCOM, who made requests to the NCA.

So Major General Batiste is not in any position to say if the President denied any requests. And if he has knowledge that the President denied the requests of the commander of USCENTCOM, then Batiste is calling the USCENTCOM commander a liar, because both Franks and Abizaid have stated none of their requests were denied.

So Major General Batiste is either lying, or he is imprecating his superior generals (Gens Sanchez and Casey MNFI, Gens Franks and Abizaid USCENTCOM). There is no way around this logical deduction.

Finally, what is not said is the request Batiste claims was denied was for more troops. That's right, Batiste wanted a surge, of the type going on now.

Mark at 3:09PM on May 11th 2007

2. I have had it up to my eyebrows with "generals" who should shut up! As a vet and the widow of a vet, for goodness sake, we are in a war! Let's win and then fight over whether we should have gone there or not.

Lucy Snearly at 3:26PM on May 11th 2007

3. The moveamerica forward ad is on a positive basis concerning support, which is what is at issue, also it does not imply that we will be "nuked" it implies that we put our nation in peril with dangers of a serious threat. It's just a big fireball expolosion. What all of this is about is not our troops, but politics. The left has never moved on.org past a "stolen Election". They hate Bush, nothing else matters. really quite simple.

Erik Freeman at 3:33PM on May 11th 2007

4. From mosques and TV programs, middle east Muslims are saying that America HAS BEEN defeated and to kill EVERY American. This in response to the Surrender policies being inflicted on the vast majority of us. Then comes the Ft. Dix 6. Surrender is NOT an option. Are YOU willing to fight for what YOU believe? If so, then what makes you any different than our troops proudly serving their country? If not, then it is only your arrogance talking. Move America Forward has it right. Cowards deserve White Feathers.

Bethany Bay at 4:11PM on May 11th 2007

5. Melanie Morgan pointed out in her WorldNetDaily column today that VoteVets.org is really just a MoveOn.org front group that is focused on electing Democrats to Congress and the White House. I don't begrudge people supporting one political party over another, however for these organizations to intentionally undermine the war effort to advance their Democrat party agenda is really, truly, shameful!

Joe W. at 5:29PM on May 11th 2007

6. Bin Laden has stated that the forefront of his war against infidels is in Iraq. His Jihadist "American spokesman," Adam Ghadan has stated, "...it's your turn to die. Allah willing, the streets of America will run red with blood matching drop for drop the blood of America's victims."

The question is, do we wish to fight Al Qaeda there or here? The Democrats prefer it occur here, even after the knowledge of over a thousand arrests of individuals found engaging in terrorism in our country.

My concern is there is no plan by the Democrats, only rhetoric and the young Captain in the ads seemed to be more interested in the partisan interests of a political party than in the safety and security of a nation.

I honor and respect our American heroes, who are overseas, fighting to keep us safe....as Al Qaeda has stated, the only issue is WHERE to engage the global war on terror.

Thank you Move Forward America for serving as a voice of reason.

Linda B at 6:08PM on May 11th 2007

7. "The question is, do we wish to fight Al Qaeda there or here?"

I am finding that question more and more fascinating everytime I hear (read) it.

We are fighting Al Qaeda there. Do we have Al Qaeda pinned down there or something?

Here's a question to ponder. Where would Al Qaeda prefer to engage us? Would they prefer to engage us there, or would they prefer to engage us here? Assuming the latter, why then have they not engaged us here? Do we have them pinned down over there? (I don't think so.)

vegastracon at 7:56PM on May 11th 2007

8. Al Qaeda has engaged us and attempted to engage us on our soil on dozens of occasions during the past fifteen years.

1. World Trade Center Bombing 1993
2. Attempted Millineum Bombing of LAX 1999
3. 9/11 Attack 2001 NY
4. 9/11 Attack on Washington DC
5. Ohio Bomb Plot 2004 (Nurada M. Abdi, convicted)
6. Brooklyn Bridge Bombing Plot (Lyman Farris, convicted) 2003
7. Sears Tower Plot 2005
8. FBI Headquarters Bombing Plot 2004
9. Lackawanna Terror Cell (Six convicted attending terroist camps in Pakistan and laundering money to Al Qaeda - plotting NY attacks)
10. Georgia Tech Students, Building Surveillance
and attending terrorist camps Pakistan 2005
11. Holland and Lincoln Tunnel Plot 2005
12. International Flight Plot 2006
13. Florida Professors Terrorism Support 2003
14. Assassination of Kahane 1990
15. Rockland, Illinois Shopping Mall Plot 2007
16. Palo Verde Nuclear Reactor Plant Intelligence
Theft and Plot 2006
17. Bly, Oregon Terror Training Camp 2002
18. International Air Plot - Richard Reid 2001
19. Al Ferahin infiltration into military 2004
20. Operation of Terrorist Websites -Moscow ID. 2004
21. Plot to Sell Shoulder Held Anti Aircraft Missiles to Al Qaeda 2004
22. Chicago Nuclear Weapons Plot 2003 Padilla
23. Michigan Arrest Al Qaeda Member with Nuclear Info 2007
23. Fuel Truck Plot - NY Tunnel 2003 Al Marabeh
24. Al Rebeii Plot 2002
25. The Portland Seven Plots 2002 (Terrorist cell of seven individuals - one just violated parole and is back in custody)
26. Nashville, Tennessee Plot 2004 Ahmed Hassan Al-Uqaily
27. The Firing and Murder of Jewish Targets NY - March 1994
28. Plotting to Provide Money and Training to Al Qaeda
29. 2002 Seattle, Washington (Mahmud Faruq Brent)
30. Virginia Jihad Network training with paintball
exercises 2001 - 2002
31. Kahlil Deek, Los Angeles, Bomb Making Instructions
32. Bombing Plot on the Los Angeles Masonic Temple
33. Kissimmee, Florida bomb threats and plot (Juan Diaz)
34. Michigan, Dinssa arrested with cyanide and nuclear information to bomb US targets 2006
35. New York Subway Bombing Plot 2004 (Siraj Elshafay)
36. Shooting at the Seattle Jewish Federation (1 dead)
37. Syed Hashmi American involved in terror plots and delivering money and equipment to Al Qaeda
38. Philadelphia City Hall Mall Plot (Henry) 2006
39. Plot to kill a Pakistani Diplomat in NYC 2006
(Mohammed Hossain)
40. 2002 Suicide Bombing Plot by Jdey
41. Memphis, TN, individual with ties to Al Qaeda arrested with airline plot 2005

The above is only a minute amount of Al Qaeda terrorist activity in the U.S. during the past several years. It would be thousand fold if we were not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's final statements to the March 10 hearing at the US detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and a list of the operations he claimed responsibility for:

" I was the operational director for sheikh Osama Bin Laden for the organising, planning, follow-up, and execution of the 9/11 operation under the military commander, sheik Abu Hafs al-Mastri Subhi Abu Sittah."
" I was directly in charge, after the death of sheik Abu Hafs al-Masri Subhi Abu Sittah, of managing and following up on the cell for the production of biological weapons, such as anthrax and others, and following up on dirty bomb operations on american soil."
". I was responsible for the 1993 World Trade Centre Operation."
"I was responsible for the 9/11, from A to Z."
". I was responsible for the Shoe Bomber Operation to down two American airplanes"
"I was responsible for planning, training, surveying and financing the New (or Second) Wave attacks against the following skyscrapers after 9/11:
a. Library Tower, California.
b. Sears Tower, Chicago.
c. Plaza Bank, Washington state.
d. The Empire State Building, New York City."
"I was responsible for surveying and financing for the assassination of several former American presidents, including President (Jimmy) Carter."
"I was responsible for surveying, planning and financing for the bombing of suspension bridges in New York."
"I was responsible for planning to destroy the Sears Tower by burning a few fuel or oil tanker trucks beneath it or around it."
"I was responsible for surveying and financing for the destruction of the New York Stock Exchange and other financial targets after 9/11."
"I was responsible for surveillance needed to hit nuclear power plants that generate electricity in several US states."
". I was responsible for the assassination attempt against US President (Bill) Clinton during his visit to the philippines in 1994 and 1995"

Linda B at 10:53PM on May 11th 2007

9. While I totally support the war as well as movingamericaforward.org, in all objectivity I had to vote for the "surrender" ad for the following reasons. First of all, viewers are not sophisticated enough to know that Gen. Batiste was never in a position to request more troops, nor does the ad say that it supports bringing the troops home. Except for us news junkies who know the difference, everyone else will think it is a pro-war ad, or at least a pro-troop ad. The moveamericaforward.org ad re-hashes the "if we don't win there we will fight them here" argument which most of us here would agree with, but which too many Americans now think is just more Administration fear-mongering. I strongly feel that Melanie and Co. would be better off taking a fresh, new approach. For example, someone recently sent a brief slide presentation to me showing American troops interacting with Iraqi children. Throw in a few shots of Iraqis holding up purple fingers, pictures of new schools and hospitals,family shots, etc. and then ask the question, "Does America really want to abandon these people? Do you?"

Jack Ott at 10:54PM on May 11th 2007

10. People who do not respect the office of our leaders have lost my respect for them.

Estell Allen at 11:47PM on May 11th 2007

11. Linda,

I can only respond to your excellent post with the following:

SECURE THE BORDERS. SECURE THE COUNTRY.

I count at least twenty attempted acts of terrorism on our soil since 9/11. At least ten after we invaded Iraq.

When did these would be terrorist get here? I think that it stands to reason that most, if not all, of the individuals who have attempted to do harm on our soil arrived prior to 9/11. I also believe that when the festivities started in Afghanistan and Iraq, those who were already here didn't pack their bags to go join the fight. (John Walker Lindh being the exception.)

"It would be thousand fold if we were not fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq."

And why would that be? Al Qaeda is spread across the face of the planet. Did they all just up and say "Let's go to Iraq"? Based upon the statistics that you provided, I would have to say that the answer is no. That being said, why then Iraq?

Our national security depends on our borders being secured. Not Iraq. But for the sake of argument, let's say that we secure Iraq. How will that prevent a member of Al Qaeda from crossing at the Mexican border? What about the Canadian border?

SECURE THE BORDER. SECURE THE COUNTRY.

vegastracon at 1:19AM on May 12th 2007

12. Vegastracon,

There is no way we are ever going to be able to secure the entire wilderness northern border, nor the entire southern border. Its not only simply borders. Many of the people who have been apprehended, engaged in activity are here legally on Visas, as were the majority of the 9/11 terrorists.

The terrorist attacks were planned well prior to 9/11 and the 1990s was when Bin Laden's organization was allowed to grow and develop into the monster it is today. You have to remember, what I wrote was just what happened on domestic soil and only a small part of it. It didn't include the attacks on embassies, our military and Americans overseas.

If you look back through history, you will recall, it was in 1995 that Bin Laden first publicly started attacking the U.S., called for a boycott of U.S. goods in 1996 and in 1998, declared war on the U.S. However, it was earlier than 1995 when he and his organization performed the first attack of terrorism on U.S. soil, specifically at the World Trade Center in 1993. By September of 2001, he already had totally developed his global network because of global apathy.

If you also recall, it was 1998 that a number of Democrats called upon Clinton to attack Iraq, because Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" according to the Clinton White House intelligence. Persons who wrote that letter included John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and many others. Madeline Albright was very concerned about the WMD in Iraq.

Al Qaeda had an entire decade to set up operation. They had professors placed in our colleges, persons placed in our military and elaborate financial structures organized. Its amazing our law enforcement was able to do as much as they did in the first several years after 9/11 to tear apart the structure and capture a good number of the terrorists...and most of that was done over THERE...by our military and intelligence agencies. Not HERE...and we owe it to our troops. It is the information they have found that has kept America safe....

In example, the finding of the computer disks of the elementary schools in California by our military, which were maintained by the terrorists--as well as many of the plots and identities of those residing in the U.S. and living amongst us, who intended to do us harm.

As of May 15, 2006, there were 726 individuals held in Guantanamo, almost all top level leaders of Al Qaeda and a number of them apprehended and captured by our military overseas. A considerable amount of information received from those persons resulted in the cessation of terror plots in the U.S....to include:

Juan Padilla and his dirty bomb plot in Chicago
The plot to blow up airliners last August
The plot upon the financial structures of the U.S.
and many more...

We cannot return back to the 1990s when intelligence was performed in a Washington Office. We need to be on the ground, apprehending terrorists where they are...not sitting at home, waiting for something to happen, like we did in the 1990s. We need to stop this once and for all, for the sake of future generations, especially with the nuclear threat as we saw just a few months ago, in Michigan, with Dinssa or a few years ago with Padilla.

We know the Al Qaeda network not only met with scientists to develop a nuclear weapon but also tried to acquire one (suitcase bombs) from individuals within the former Soviet Union and was interested in acquiring nuclear warheads. There is no evidence he was not successful, but there is also no evidence that he was successful except for the arrests and detentions of those who were found with documentation on them or items within their laptops which related to their mission in respect to nuclear weapons...and one of those persons was apprehended merely a few months ago in the U.S.

Al Qaeda is not a recent phenomenom---it was allowed to develop and now we have to deal with it and dismantle it. And it can't be done here...it has to be done there as realized with the mistakes made during the 1990s.

We don't need to have our streets riddled with IEDs and suicide bombers walking into our shopping malls. That is NOT the answer and certainly not the way we deal with situations in the U.S., as indicated by the way we handle our law enforcement matters with the street gangs in our cities. We don't ignore them...

Every bit of safety we enjoy today, is a result of the sacrifices of our troops overseas, the sacrifices of their families and the sacrifices of our law enforcement agencies here.

Let them finish their mission, respect them, support them and give them your utmost in gratitude because they know its a fight we can't turn our backs upon. Afterall, they've existed and saw the devastation of a country where one person can blow up fifty others, where one bomb planted in a roadway can devastate dozens...

Thats not what we want for America...for our children. Because if we don't end it there....we are going to have to end it here...it is a given that they will come to us in more numbers than ever before as they have done in the past.

Linda B at 3:10AM on May 12th 2007

13. "Because if we don't end it there....we are going to have to end it here...it is a given that they will come to us in more numbers than ever before as they have done in the past."

Linda B.

If what you say is true, then prepare yourself for the worse. Nothing started with Iraq. Nothing will end with Iraq.

vegastracon at 4:24AM on May 12th 2007

14. Linda B.

Just so we can be on the same page.....

"WASHINGTON (May 12) -- The Army will offer incentives to keep midlevel officers as it faces another decade or so in combat around the world, its chief of staff said Friday."

vegastracon at 5:40AM on May 12th 2007

15. I think it's despicable that we openly debate a cut and run policy when our brave troops are fighting, often at the risk of loss of life, to endure our freedom. If we leave Iraq unfinished, they'll be on our shores before we know it.

Jack at 8:32AM on May 12th 2007