Pelosi thinks the surge is a scam

Rep. Pelosi is complaining that there has been no "change in policy." When they were elected, there was supposed to be a change in policy in Iraq.
Well, there was. Its called the surge. Don't act suprised that when the surge ends, we have the same amount of troops in country. YOU put Patraeus in charge. Live with it. And since you believe that this is just a ploy to keep troops in country, and that keeping the troops in protecting Iraqis prevents any change in action by the Iraqis, I say "GREAT!".

Lets use that logic and expand it. You just described the way the entire "civilized" world depends on the US military to keep it safe. I guess you feel its time to withdraw from Kosovo, Korea, pull back our Navy from patrolling shipping lanes, pull out of NATO, and the UN (that would be the one!), and force Europe and Asia to shoulder the load that we carry. And when the world falls apart, we can blame YOU!

UPDATE:

Lets look at this lying b**ch's words. She gets started on the lies right away. While Gen'l Petraeus was talking about major downsizing the troop levels within 2 years, she starts talking about "10 years."

Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today after meeting at the White House with President Bush on Iraq:

"President Bush's policy announced by General Petraeus is a path to 10 more years of war in Iraq. General Petraeus' testimony to Congress drew a bright line: redeployment is not an option; endless war in Iraq is the Administration's only option. (Petraeus said no such thing. In fact, he made sure that he made NO predictions further than his withdrawal of the surge.)

"Under the Bush plan, 130,000 Americans will remain in harm's way in Iraq at a cost of hundreds of billions of additional taxpayer dollars. This status quo policy was rejected by General James Jones, whose recent report stated that significant force reductions are possible and that we must reduce our military footprint in Iraq. ( see above about troop withdrawals. Oh, and we're all in harm's way from terrorists. Not just in Iraq. Remember 9/11? Oh that's right, that's today.)

"The Bush-Petraeus plan of 130,000 Americans in Iraq for 10 more years is not a reduction in our footprint; it is an insult to the intelligence of the American people to call that a new direction. It is a status quo plan that tells the Iraqi government that they do not need to change. (Again, what 10 years? Then again, if it takes 10 years, so be it. And there was a new direction. It just wasn't YOUR new direction. If you want to go in reverse and surrender, resign. And we tried that "reduced footprint" idea under Rumsfield. You complained about that. Make up your mind.)

"The American people long ago rejected the President's plan to stay in Iraq, which is why they voted for a New Direction in 2006. Yet, with his veto pen and the 60-vote hurdle in the Senate, the President is preventing the redeployment of our troops, the rebuilding of our military, and the refocusing of our nation's efforts on fighting terrorism."(If you can't convice 9 Repubilicans that you're not a moonbat, then there must be something wrong with your plan. And Bush hasn't vetoed anything yet. Americans vetoed Bush's plan of playing defense. Now we're on offense. As to fighting terrorism, what has YOUR party done except hamper us? We ARE Fighting terrorism in Iraq. WE DON'T GO VISIT TERRORISTS AND BAD MOUTH THE US. YOU CAN TELL KUSINICH HE CAN F**KING STAY IN SYRIA! When has YOUR party EVER rebuilt the military?)

Oh, and I don't think that word "redeployment" means what you think it means. Idiot.