|
Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
26-11-05, 07:30 PM | #41 | |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
well, while we're all debating the wisdom of withdrawal from iraq, looks like it's a foregone conclusion:
Quote:
|
|
26-11-05, 08:52 PM | #42 |
Earthbound misfit
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
|
Believe what you want. Victory in Iraq has already been achieved, now it's simply a matter of keeping the peace. Really, calling all this the 'War on Terror' was an unfortunate mistake on the administration's part. Wars must come to an end, but defeating terrorism is a continuing process. The war with Iraq wasn't the war on terror, it was only one step in the process.
Last edited by Mazer : 26-11-05 at 09:04 PM. |
26-11-05, 11:26 PM | #43 | ||
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
Quote:
but it will be necessary for the administration to declare victory to begin withdrawing troops and it will be necessary for the hard-core Bush apologists to repeat it in order to save face. |
||
27-11-05, 11:40 AM | #44 |
Earthbound misfit
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
|
The difference is that now that Saddam is gone Iraq can do something about the human rights issues. As Sinner said in the text he quoted, Iraqis are beginning to despise the remanents of the old regime and you're going to see more and more of their attention focused on getting rid of them.
To prove that the US has lost this war, you'll have to prove that a) there are in fact more terrorists then there were before and they're more capable of attacking us, b) our military has been weakened, to do that you'll have to do more than cite recruitment statistics, c) show exactly how our image is hurting us in the eyes of other nations, ignoring general sentiment and citing actual economic and political evidence, and d) convince everyone that peace between Iraq and Iran is bad. It's okay if you can't, as long as you just keep pounding the message we'll beleive you. Look, everybody is getting what they wanted. US forces are going to leave Iraq on a rather short timetable, Iraq gets the chance to prove they're grown up enough to manage their own nation democratically, and the fact that no WMD's were found there is actually a good thing. The middle east is a safer place now because, no matter what you say, a madman with killer weapons and an entire nation at his command would be an order of magnitude more dangerous than even a thousand madmen with carbombs and machine guns. |
27-11-05, 12:23 PM | #45 | |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
1)the number of terrorists attacks world-wide, and obviously in iraq, are higher and dealier than ever (google the reports, but they've been linked here before), therefore it would be reasonable to assume there are more of them and they are better at it. 2)anecdotal, but telling: i was at Fort Bragg, NC last month, home of the 82nd Airborne - there are aging pot-bellied civilian rent-a-cops at the gates. they simply don't have enough active duty personnel to guard the base. there are lots of reports and stats, but you can google them as well as i can. it is also questionable whether we currently have the resources to sustain a second war, long held to be the benchmark of our military capabiliies. 3)ask any American who's travelled overseas in the last year (i spent T-Day with a bunch of them) - the dislike for Amerca is palpable, the hostility often overt. extrapolate that into dollars lost for Americans who don't want to go back there, and foreigners who don't want to visit here. anecdotal as well, but a sea change nonetheless - we are simply no longer the beacon that we used to be. 4)"peace between iraq and iran"? i suppose that's one way to look at it - another way might be that one leg of Bush's "axis of evil" has now expanded it's sphere of influence to include a large part of iraq. this is a good thing? |
|
28-11-05, 09:34 AM | #46 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 123
|
Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania was right when he said that the U. S. military "have become the target" and he was right to suggest the U.S. should pull the troops out of Iraq. Immediately after Murtha's statement the Bush Administration linked the pro-military Democrat to Michael Moore and the so-called radical left of the Democratic Party. When the Bush War Room realized that most Americans agree with the hawkish Murtha, they toned down their description of Murtha recognizing his military service before criticizing his call to leave Iraq. The Bush Administration has two War Rooms, one to fight the political battles at home and one to fight the political battles in Iraq. Sometimes they forget which room they are in and tend to paint Democrats with the same brush they paint insurgent Sunnis. Vice President Dick Cheney called critics of the war "dishonest and reprehensible." Do you think he would have described himself that way when he asked for and was granted 5 deferments from the Vietnam War? Maybe deep down in his subconscious he knows that he is dishonest and reprehensible and now feels the need to call others that for criticizing his Iraqi war. It is the epitome of hypocrisy for Cheney to call critics of the Iraq War "dishonest and reprehensible" when he himself did everything possible to avoid the Vietnam War. Rep. Murtha was right to call Cheney on his 5 deferments. That is what stopped the Bush Administration from their catcalling and linking of Murtha to Michael Moore, the fact that Bush and Cheney did everything to avoid going into the Vietnam War and will do everything to keep sending others to war, a war in which they embellished the intelligence so they would have a reason to go to Iraq, throw out Saddam and take the Iraqi oil. Unfortunately the prosecuting of the Iraq War was not as simple as the simpletons in charge thought it would be and we find ourselves in the no win situation of staying for decades with the U.S. military getting picked off daily or leaving and letting the country fall into an all out civil war...
Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) in the House said to Murtha that a former marine told her to tell him, "That cowards cut and run, Marines never do. Danny and the rest of America and the world want the assurance from this body that we will see this through." I have a question that everyone that voted for Schmidt should ask her and every other Pro-Iraq War congressperson. How many American casualties does it take for her to "see it through?" There are over 2,100 American dead from the Iraq War. At what number of American dead do you say enough already? In six months, a year, two years a decade, two decades, if the insurgency is the same and 4,000 or 10,000 US. soldiers are dead will you still say, "That cowards cut and run, Marines never do" and will you still want to give "the assurance from this body that we will see this through?" Voters should hold their representatives and senators to their word. What is exactly the end game? Is an Iraqi democracy, as Bush and Cheney want worth thousands of American lives and billions of dollars while little or nothing gets done to help the New Orleaneans that became refugees in their own country? An exit strategy should be laid out on the table for all to see with a specific timetable; anything less is nothing short of dishonesty. But then again dishonesty is something Bush, Cheney and the Republican led Congress have made into an art form... Rep. John Murtha has the foresight and understands that staying the course means more American dead with little or nothing to show for it. It is easy to wrap yourself in a flag, say 'support the troops' and stay the course but the best way to support the troops is take them out of a war with no end in sight. Murtha has a strategy to get the U.S. military out of Iraq. President Bush and the Republican Party have a strategy to stay the course with some small temporary withdrawals to appease voters.... The bottom line is that no one likes another country to come into their country and occupy it, even if you remove a dictator in the process, occupation is occupation. As long as American soldiers patrol Iraq there will be an insurgency and as long as there is an insurgency there will be American casualties. Is that really the course you want to stay? I don't think so... |
28-11-05, 11:16 AM | #47 |
flippin 'em off
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the real world
Posts: 3,232
|
You think at the level of a goldfish going belly up after the aerator quit, so what you think is of little concern to normal people.
The real bottom line is plenty of Iraqis are very happy having U.S. troops providing a degree of security and freedom to them and even the biased liberal media occasionally airs their statements to that effect. Saying it's easy to stay and fight instead of cut and run shows how your seriously damaged brain can't even process the simplest logic without inverting it. The same legislators that voted to invade Iraq and now say we should withdraw, have recently voted against withdrawing; so whatever their mouths are saying their actions have contradicted and they have completely discredited themselves to intelligent, ethical people. |
29-11-05, 06:25 AM | #48 | |
My eyes are now open.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Oxford uk
Posts: 1,409
|
Quote:
__________________
Beer is for life not just Christmas |
|
01-12-05, 10:49 AM | #49 |
Thanks for being with arse
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
|
Costly Withdrawal Is the Price To Be Paid for a Foolish War
For misleading the American people, and launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C sent his legions into Germany and lost them, Bush deserves to be impeached and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial along with the rest of the president's men. If convicted, they'll have plenty of time to mull over their sins. Costly Withdrawal Is the Price To Be Paid for a Foolish War Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University, is author of "Transformation of War" (Free Press, 1991). He is the only non-American author on the U.S. Army's required reading list for officers. An interview with Martin Van Creveld. See also Nowhere To Run metafilter |
12-02-06, 06:20 PM | #50 | ||
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
not such a great week to be Cheney....documents unveiled this week in Libby's upcoming trial indicate disclosure of classified documents was done, in fact, on the Vice-President's orders, as part of the larger campaign to sell war with Iraq and crush critics thereof:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
12-02-06, 07:18 PM | #51 |
BANG BANG BANG (repeat as necessary)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Soon to be elsewhere
Posts: 1,327
|
Shame Bush wasn't on the hunt...
...with his moose-antler cap... ...and a fur coat... ...and a target drawn on his ass.
__________________
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction" Dick Cheney - August 26, 2002 "I did not authorise the leaking of the name of David Kelly. Nobody was authorised to name David Kelly. I believe we have acted properly throughout" Tony Blair - July 22, 2003 |
12-02-06, 07:39 PM | #52 |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
if the republicans want to shoot each other power to them.
- js. |
13-02-06, 07:40 PM | #53 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,522
|
What's the problem here anyway.
They were out hunting. They both had guns.
The other guy could have shot back u know. I bet almost none of u dillweeds have ever eaten what u killed. U just let others kill for you. Pay attention pls.
__________________
May your tote always stay tight and your edge eversharp :wink: |
13-02-06, 08:12 PM | #54 |
Earthbound misfit
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
|
Maybe he deserved it, he is a lawyer after all.
|
13-02-06, 08:20 PM | #55 | |
BANG BANG BANG (repeat as necessary)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Soon to be elsewhere
Posts: 1,327
|
Quote:
__________________
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction" Dick Cheney - August 26, 2002 "I did not authorise the leaking of the name of David Kelly. Nobody was authorised to name David Kelly. I believe we have acted properly throughout" Tony Blair - July 22, 2003 |
|
13-02-06, 08:33 PM | #56 | |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
|
|
13-02-06, 09:44 PM | #57 | ||
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
14-02-06, 10:40 AM | #58 |
Formal Ball Proof
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,948
|
Letterman's Top Ten Excuses For Dick Cheney:
10. "Heart palpitation caused trigger finger to spasm." 9. "Wanted to get the Iraq mess off the front page." 8. "Not enough Jim Beam." 7. "Trying to stop the spread of bird flu." 6. "I love to shoot people." 5. "Guy was making cracks about my lesbian daughter." 4. "Thought the guy was trying to go gay cowboy on me." 3. "Excuse? I hit him didn't I?" 2. "Until Democrats approve Medicare reform, we have to make some tough choices for the elderly." 1. "Made a bet with Gretzky's wife." |
14-02-06, 12:21 PM | #59 | |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
and from the Daily Show:
Quote:
|
|
14-02-06, 12:48 PM | #60 | |
even the losers
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,090
|
and from the White House press corps:
Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|