Democrats & Liberals Archives

Bush/ Republican Iraq Plan Unveiled

Democrats in the Senate intercepted the Bush/ Republican plan for Iraq today. The Senate Democrats have posted the plan to their website. Following is an excerpt.

Bush Republican Plan on Iraq:

Posted by JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 1:38 PM
Comments
Comment #161269

HA HA. It is to laugh. Who says demogauges - er - Democrats don’t have a sence of humor. But, it’s still a page more than the Dems have. All they want to do is turn tail and run.

Posted by: Political Sniper at June 24, 2006 2:13 PM
Comment #161275

“Turn tail and run” or clean up after someone(Republicans) took a dump on on the American Flag and called it Patriotism? I do believe we were told there would be no occupation by American troops after the invasion. So, since the Republican lack of planning has created this disaster, maybe saving our troops lives by getting them out of this mess would be a start. Or send them back to Afganistan to finish the job we started there first. As I recall, Afganistan had an actual connection to 9/11.

Posted by: Vanessa at June 24, 2006 2:31 PM
Comment #161277
As I recall, Afganistan had an actual connection to 9/11.

After all, that’s all that matters. Just 9/11. Terrorism? Nah, don’t care, just get the guys responsible for 9/11 (even though we have they guy who planned and orchestrated it in custody…)

Rulers using terrorism on his own people and supporting international terrorism financially and with operational ties who publically claims he is at war with the US and uses his intelligence agency to infiltrate the US to harass former citizens?

We should leave ‘em alone, they don’t matter. All that matters is 9/11. Yeah, that’s the ticket…

Posted by: Rhinehold at June 24, 2006 2:36 PM
Comment #161279

Jay-Jay-

Fascinating stuff I would like to give you my opinion.


I hope that was clear to you.

Posted by: jblym at June 24, 2006 2:47 PM
Comment #161285

Haha, maybe I should publish a similar post, the Democratic Party platform:







Haha, that was a good one…

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at June 24, 2006 2:57 PM
Comment #161289

JayJay

Protecting America and
Restoring Our Leadership in the World

Expressing United States policy on Iraq

REID CALLS FOR A CHANGE IN COURSE IN IRAQ

Great ideas. Not original. Not a plan.

Posted by: Jack at June 24, 2006 3:18 PM
Comment #161292

Stephen

You are right. Your arguement is pointless, but I suppose you thought you had one. You may understand better later.

Posted by: Jack at June 24, 2006 3:24 PM
Comment #161295

What a majority of Americans want as demonstrated by the polls is a party willing to “CUT” our troop and tax dollar losses in Iraq, and “RUN” a well disciplined Exit Plan that gives the Iraqi’s a chance, and guarantees fewer losses for us.

So, given that the majority of Americans Want a Cut and Run party as defined, which party is best positioned to provide representation for the will of the people?

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 24, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #161296

The Democrats do have a plan for Iraq. I’m sorry, they have several plans for Iraq. Hillary and her coterie say stay and finish the job. John Murtha et al say get out now. Others say get out soon. If the Dems have any plans for the November elections, they’d better come up with one plan and run on it. Otherwise, the voters are going to be as confused as they are.

A suggestion: Put out a plan not based on a calendar but on achievement. As the Iraqi government becomes more in place and the military and police forces are able to assume more and more responsibility, withdraw our troops in increments. Give enough time to see if everything is holding together and withdraw more. Set quantifiable goals for each step. Let the American people and the Iraqis know what’s going on. Who knows, this might even get a meaningful dialogue going between the Dems and Reps. Of course, that is something that the zealots on both sides do not want. It’s much easier to hate than to talk.

If you Dems would run on this platform, and mean it, even this old Libertarian might vote for you. But, as long as the only platform you have is “Bush lied, Bush is wrong, We hate Bush”, I will continue to refuse to support either party. I will support individuals that seem to have their act together.

Posted by: John Back at June 24, 2006 3:31 PM
Comment #161298

“just get the guys responsible for 9/11 (even though we have they guy who planned and orchestrated it in custody…)”

Rhinehold,

Uh, when did we get Bin Laden? I’ve got to read the news more often.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 3:35 PM
Comment #161300

“Bush lied, Bush is wrong, We hate Bush”… beside the fact that this is true, a “plan” would be nice.. However, the Democrats did not get us into this mess.. the republicans did.. the Democrats are in the Minority, and have no say in any policy.The republicans are responsibe for a plan to get us out… They have NONE but STAY-THE-COURES, which is NOT a “plan” but a POLICY>…That said, I would like a “unified” plan from the Democrats, if only to quite people who are uninformed, and get the news from Fox and Tony Snow (the same thing)

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 3:39 PM
Comment #161301

Alex; Have you ever actually read the Democratic Party Platform? Please do so and get back to us.

Stephen: Come on. Many Republicans are not stupid. Just wrong.

Posted by: BillS at June 24, 2006 3:39 PM
Comment #161302

FACTS:
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 900 — all the hyjackers but one were Saudi’s
Bin Laden’s beef with the US were the bases in Saudi Arabia, which he consideres sacralige…
THAT why we have heard nothing about Bin Laden.. and won’t until the Shrub needs him for policical reasons..the bases were REMOVED and relocated to Iraq..
Bin Laden has NOTHING to do with was is going on in Iraq, it is a CIVIL-WAR..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 3:44 PM
Comment #161303

In truth, most republicans are miss-informed.. Driving around the Country and listening to the righ-wing garbage on the radio, it is wonder the entire country isn’t red, in fact is is purple, and most people when the have the facts are brought up short..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 3:46 PM
Comment #161304

Sorry about the typos, eating lunch and typing..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 3:48 PM
Comment #161306

Keaving Iraq is not an act of cowardice but one of intelligence. It would acknowledge that while we remain as occupying forces terrorism will continue to flourish there. No matter who or how many we kill, more will continue to come forward and carry on their deadly fight. In the past week alone sixteen more of our young men and women have been sacrificed, and only God knows how many innocent Iraq civilians lives have been wasted. Stay untill the last terrorist is wiped out? It will never happen. The republican plan has no realistic goals, none that are even close to being obtainable. A blank sheet of paper would be more preferable to the hollow, empty catchphrase of “stay the course”.

Posted by: mark at June 24, 2006 3:54 PM
Comment #161309

Sorry, should have been “Leaving Iraq….”

Posted by: mark at June 24, 2006 3:59 PM
Comment #161310

Relying on the “intelligent” thing to do is NOT the republican way..In any case, facts prove, time after time, the Shrub administration LIED and distorted facts to attack a soverigen nation for political reaons that had NOTHING to do with 911, the republicans, ignoring ALL the advice from the “experts” were not prepaired for the result.. Saddam controlled 3-factions of Ethnic and Religious division with an iron-fist, (not right, but it worked), Iraq should be split into 3-countries..Now there is NOTHING but Civil-War, which we caused and are making worse by our presence.. Unless we want to rule-Iraq like Sadam which has been suggested by some righ-wing talking -heads.. the BEST thing we can do is get out and let it settle itself out.. We “broke-it” but it is VERY clear we connot “fix-it”

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:02 PM
Comment #161312

What the right continualy is kept ingnorant of, is the fact that all they talk about is Baghdad..That is like talking about Sacramento (not even LA or SF) in a country the size of California.. And lets not forget Afganastan, going back to War-Lords and the Talaban.. nice job Rummy.

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:06 PM
Comment #161314

Why republicans are stupid:
The “rich” ones give up their privacy and civil-rights to make more $$$$$…
The “dumb” ones vote to prevent queers from marrying , and abortions from happening, no matter what happens to their jobs, (blame it on the Mexicans), their civil-liberties or their pensions (not to mention SS)

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:16 PM
Comment #161315

So now I ask, what then is the Democratic plan?

I will keep asking this question in this post until someone gives one that differs from the one currently in place. Don’t give rhetoric, 1.2.3 a plan! Show sources.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 4:19 PM
Comment #161316

Hey, not only were we told there would be no American occupation in Iraq, let’s go back a little further, to the 2000 Presidential debate. Anybody remember this line from then-candidate George W. Bush:

“I don’t think our troops should be used for what’s called nation-building.”

That’s a direct quote, not taken out of context nor paraphrased. A spoken promise by George W. It may just possibly rate as his first public lie about Iraq.

Posted by: Timothy at June 24, 2006 4:20 PM
Comment #161317

I see that JayJaysnow raised his hand. You may go first. Step one is??

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 4:20 PM
Comment #161318

John Back,

Idealogically I agree with you when you say, “A suggestion: Put out a plan not based on a calendar but on achievement. As the Iraqi government becomes more in place and the military and police forces are able to assume more and more responsibility, withdraw our troops in increments. Give enough time to see if everything is holding together and withdraw more. Set quantifiable goals for each step. Let the American people and the Iraqis know what’s going on. Who knows, this might even get a meaningful dialogue going between the Dems and Reps. Of course, that is something that the zealots on both sides do not want. It’s much easier to hate than to talk.”

I would add however, that we must properly fund the war effort NOW, and not keep fooling the American people by passing the costs on to the next several generations. Also, we can’t keep redeploying the same troops for a 3rd and even 4th tour of duty. It’s irresponsible. If we must stay the only way to quell the violence in some areas of Iraq is to dramatically INCREASE troop levels. To accomplish these two objectives (and also increase troop levels in Afghanistan) will require reinstating the draft.

Now, if you can find any congressional or presidential candidates to tell the American people this and still get elected I’m all for staying until the job is done.

Or, we could set a reasonable timeline for withdrawal and in so doing “light a fire” under the asses of the Iraqi government to control their own destiny.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 4:21 PM
Comment #161319

John Back

A plan based on achievement rather than calendar would be just fine, but what is being achieved in terms of ending the violence and terror that now exsist in Iraq? The killing is not stopping and now people are not being allowed on the streets but for six hours a day. Is this freedom?

As a Democrat I’m sick and tired of Republicans telling us that we must have one plan. We do not have to march lockstep to the tune of a few who would decide what everyone must think. If Hilary wants to think we should stay that is her right. If Russ Fiengold thinks we should leave right now he is free to say so. We all should be free to debate and discuss this without derision but with the comman goal of doing what is best for the young men and women in harm’s way over there.Through free thought and discusion will come the best ideas for ending this misbegotten war. Let people offer as many plans as possible and out of this perhaps a way can be found out of this horrific mess.

Posted by: mark at June 24, 2006 4:23 PM
Comment #161320
Alex; Have you ever actually read the Democratic Party Platform? Please do so and get back to us.

BillS and Jayjay Snow:

Guys, anyone can scribble words on a paper and call it a platform, and the Dems have done just that. What they are lacking is the ability to take action…the core of the Democratic party has evolved into this far-left Air America machine that resembles a 21st century Whig Party (the anti-Bush party) who is more concerned with making Bush look like a fool than improving the country.

They call themselves progressive, but all they seem to want to do is repeal all of Bush’s policies, lambasting and slashing everything that makes this country so great.

-Just a note: not all Democrats fit into the mold I just characterized. There are many sensible, rational Democrats…they just seem to be more center-left and not Michael Moore/Al Franken-left-

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at June 24, 2006 4:23 PM
Comment #161321

Scott,

Here’s Biden’s plan in pdf:

http://uniteourstates.com/documents/iraq_a_way_forward.pdf

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 4:26 PM
Comment #161322

Kansas Dem

Ah yes. Bidens plan to split Iraq into 3 parts.

1. What do the Iraqis have to say about this?
2. Who else supports him in this plan? Very few I believe.


Good try tho!

A real plan anyone? JayJay is that your hand still up?

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 4:37 PM
Comment #161323

Rulers using terrorism on his own people and supporting international terrorism financially and with operational ties who publically claims he is at war with the US and uses his intelligence agency to infiltrate the US to harass former citizens?

We should leave ‘em alone, they don’t matter. All that matters is 9/11. Yeah, that’s the ticket…
Posted by: Rhinehold at June 24, 2006 02:36 PM

And what about American support for Terrorism Rhinehold, or doesn’t that count? And what about the 3600 Palestinians killed by the Israeli Defence Forces in the last five years? At least 1,600 of whom were not engaged in fighting, of whom 580 were children. Isn’t it strange that the weapons they used were supplied mostly by the US? That their policy of ethnic cleansing is sanctioned by the US? If Americans were prepared to investigate what is actually happening in Palestine, people being killed carelessly,people being thrown out of their homes, their land being confiscated, being herded into bantustans, instead of taking their propaganda from a media terrified of criticising Israel for fear of being branded anti semitic, they would be disgusted with their own countrys’ support for terrorism. You wonder why the Mid East is seething with rage? If I was a Palestinian, bereft of a potent way of defending my people, my community, my family, would I don a suicide belt? In a New York minute. You talk about terrorism, and yet you do not know what you own Government sanctions by its political, military and economic aid to a fascist Israel. And you wonder why they hate you? You who boast of your freedom, and many of you who say that if your Government acted in a way to reduce your freedoms, you would arm up, and defy your Government, in your ignorace you are prepared to call decent people, who want to live in dignity, terrorists for trying to defend themselves from a goliath. If you think I exaggerate, check out the Israeli Human Rights Organisation B’Tselem at this link;

http://www.btselem.org/English/index.asp

America, the country that demands respect for human rights around with world, can tolerate a lesser holocaust perpetrated by one of its allies, and not only tolerate it, but give it great succour. For shame America!

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 24, 2006 4:39 PM
Comment #161324

here are many sensible, rational Democrats…they just seem to be more center-left and not Michael Moore/Al Franken-left-

Gee such a Fox news thing to say.. MM and AF.. well you might have a point with Michael, but Franken..?? Listening to TOO much propaganda there.. try listening to him sometime..(don’t be afraid, if you so sure of the “right” what harm can come).. Michael Moore.. lets see, he made movie which has proved 100% CORRECT in EVERY regard..fraid I have to side with him on that one
++
“bush’s policies, lambasting and slashing everything that makes this country so great.”.. I am a little confused here, isn’t the shrub who is attacking SS, education, Unions, the poor, the enviornment, science, PRIVACY, the Constitution, etc., etc., etc.,…
==
What EXACTLY is the Shrubs “policy” or “policies” that make America “great”..??

Come on now.. Running the highest defficit EVER in the history of the world.. More that all , ALL of the previous presidents COMBINED..??

Distorting EVERY policy to favor the “wealthy” and “big-business’

“What they are lacking is the ability to take action”.. difficult to “take-action” when you are in the minority..
-

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:40 PM
Comment #161325

Steven:
|Michael Moore.. lets see, he made movie which has proved 100% CORRECT in EVERY regard|


http://www.slate.com/id/2102723

Now thats funny. For a list of the lies and the truths I would refer you to Christopher Hitchens.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and is well respected by both sides. But you guys keep standing by Micheal Moore. It sure helps you with those swing votes.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 4:50 PM
Comment #161326

” Bidens plan to split Iraq into 3 parts.”..you right wingers do realize that Iraq WAS three countries before being mashed together to form Iraq -
right-wingers aren’t to keen on education..

The merging of the three provinces of Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra into one political entity and the creation of a nation out of the diverse religious and ethnic elements inhabiting these lands was accomplished after World War I. Action undertaken by the British military authorities during the war and the upsurge of nationalism after the war helped determine the shape of the new Iraqi state and the course of events during the postwar years, until Iraq finally emerged as an independent political entity in 1932.

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:51 PM
Comment #161327

No stephen, we do know that. However that was almost 4 generations of Iraqi’s ago. The Iraqi’s do not want that and are at this time rather supportive of their current Govt.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=hmpg1
Iraq was once a part of the Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Empires at one time also. How far back should we go?

A plan any one?

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 4:56 PM
Comment #161328

” is a columnist for Vanity Fair..”

“…is well respected by both sides.”

And that would be which sides, the right and the FAR right..??

YOU should do some simple research..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens

He is a vociferous critic of what he describes as “fascism with an Islamic face” and is sometimes described as a “neoconservative” (Hitchens himself only makes reference to his “temporary neocon allies”

NOw a “neo-con” slamming Michael Moore, what a surprise..??

Research is TOO easy to do.. try it sometimes..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 4:57 PM
Comment #161329

Iraq was once a part of the Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian Empires at one time also. How far back should we go?

A plan any one?

It is far enough to describe exactly what the problem is today..

And the republican plan is..???

(attack Iran, North Korea..?? Cuba…??)

Come on, a PLAN PLEASE..??

Or do we just “stay the course” (a policy not a plan) FOREVER…???

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 5:00 PM
Comment #161330

Do you suppose that the reason the troops have to stay is to protect KBR and Haliburton while they build the THREE MAJOR air-based, HUGE, and a BILLION dollar Embasy in Bagdad… Nooo, that couldn’t be the reason… The republicans would never use US troops as Security Guards for a Corporation..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 5:04 PM
Comment #161331

So now I ask, what then is the Democratic Republican plan?

I will keep asking this question in this post until someone gives one that differs from the one currently in place I like. Don’t give rhetoric, 1.2.3 a plan! Show sources.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #161332

Stephen,
Why did you not post the full text from wikipedia?

He is a vociferous critic of what he describes as “fascism with an Islamic face” and is sometimes described as a “neoconservative” (Hitchens himself only makes reference to his “temporary neocon allies”[1]) or a “Liberal Hawk”, though his idiosyncratic ideas and positions preclude easy classification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens


A plan anyone?

Hitchens no longer considers himself a socialist, but maintains that his political views have not changed significantly. He points out that, throughout his career, he has been both an atheist and an antitheist, and that he has always remained a believer in the Enlightenment values of secularism, humanism and reason.

HMMM Wonder why?

I would encourage all to research for them selves.

Even if it is just wikipedia. It is an interesting article on Hitchens.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #161333

Steven:

A plan:
Here has been the plan:
Remove Saddam - Done
Elect a provisional government -done
Vote on a constitutionm - done
Elect a permanent govt. - done
Train Iraqi police - being done
Train an Iraqi military - being done
Rebuild infrastructure - being done
Slowly remove our troops until Iraq stands up on its own

Now have there been mistakes? YES of Course.
Every war has mistakes. Without knowing you I can honestly say that you have made some reall dum mistakes at the begining of every job you have held. We all do. I own a pizza place. My employees
make mistakes. I make mistakes.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:09 PM
Comment #161334

JayJay

I thought you had a plan. Oh it was to play with the words in my post. You will stay after class until you finish your homework.

PS. Notice the current plan.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:12 PM
Comment #161336

I have in fact read and heard Hitchens over the years.., he is whatever gets him heard at the moment.. someone with no position, except what is expedient, and will sell… I find hime amusing, but hardly a source of ANY useful information…

His rant on MM was histerical.. and considering that all efforts to “refute” Moores film were defeated, also somewhat lame..

Republicans, who love the lawyers, except when they are fighting one, threatended all kinds of lawsuits.. nothing ever came of it.. and, I repeat.. EVERYTHING in Moores film is factual, and can be verified.. Does it have “left-slant”, well if you are a neo-con and it exposes you warts, I would guess so…

Republicans are the best at character-assination, don’t shoot the message, shoot the messanger… An it appears you fall for it..

There are dozens of examples from just this past two-years and the administration… Don’t refute anyting, just destroy who says it, no matter what..It is 100% political and f*** everyone and everything…

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 5:16 PM
Comment #161339

|EVERYTHING in Moores film is factual, and can be verified|

So verify it. We will leave this one for people to research on there own. the article is here:

http://www.slate.com/id/2102723

I would encourage all interested to read it and then research Hitchens claims for your selves. Dot just rely on my statements or stephens either.

let’s find a plan!

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:21 PM
Comment #161340

Here has been the plan:
Remove Saddam - Done
(Attack a soverign government that was NO threat to the US or its interests, for Oil and Polictical posturing in the Middle East)
Elect a provisional government -done
(Puppet government, held up by the US)
Vote on a constitutionm - done
(Wrong guy won, the shrub was upset)
Elect a permanent govt. - done
(been re-elected, assinated and replaced)
Train Iraqi police - being done
(Trainees kill and behead US troops, other run)
Train an Iraqi military - being done
(???, where do you get you information)
Rebuild infrastructure - being done
($10 BILLION MISSING..unaccounted for, electricity only on for hours a day in Bagdad..water no good)
Slowly remove our troops until Iraq stands up on its own
(troops needed to man PERMENTENT Bases, and to provide security..FOREVER)

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 5:25 PM
Comment #161341

Scott:

A plan: Here has been the plan: Remove Saddam - Done Elect a provisional government -done Vote on a constitutionm - done Elect a permanent govt. - done Train Iraqi police - being done Train an Iraqi military - being done Rebuild infrastructure - being done Slowly remove our troops until Iraq stands up on its own

I am a registered democrat and even I knew this was the plan. If our leadership does not come up with an alternative they deserve to lose. And what a dumb idea to split Iraq into three parts. I did not know Biden had that idea. I still like him though.

Posted by: Talondegato at June 24, 2006 5:27 PM
Comment #161343

“Ah yes. Bidens plan to split Iraq into 3 parts.
1. What do the Iraqis have to say about this?
2. Who else supports him in this plan? Very few I believe.
Good try tho!

A real plan anyone? JayJay is that your hand still up?”

Scott,

What you fail to see is that posts like this actually reinforce JayJay’s “blankpage” representation of the Republican strategy. It’s like the schoolground bully getting in someone’s face and taunting, “Whatcha’ gonna’ do!”

It’s hollow and meaningless, uh yeah, a blank page.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 5:29 PM
Comment #161344

Steven,
Whether you like it or think your far left rhetoric can tear it apart, it is the plan.

Where is yours?

Where is yours?

Where is yours?

Sorry for the echo, I am at the Grand Canyon.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #161345

http://www.slate.com/id/2102723

Scott, you cannot come up with anything better.?? One article by a neo-con.(no excuses, I know better),, is this just for the un-informend, or do YOU just rely on ONE source of information..

I kind of destroys you credibility.

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 5:32 PM
Comment #161346

Kansas:
‘What you fail to see is that posts like this actually reinforce JayJay’s “blankpage” representation of the Republican strategy”

No, it goes to reienforce that the only plan the far left has is to hate bush. Not to come up with anything substantial.

So kansas, Besides telling Iraq that the cannot be one nation, that they have to split themselves into three countries,

What is your plan?

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #161347

Stephen,

Again I encourage every one to do serious research for them selves.

Information for you all tho. Hitchens was a long time writer for The Nation. Hmmm Now was that one of them conservative magazines?
Hmm

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:37 PM
Comment #161348

One thing all this partisan bullshit has shown me in the last six years: Republicans are vile and Democrats are spinless.

As a Gay citizen who’s on the receiving end of “Don’t ask/Don’t tell”, and the FMA, and all the other happy horse shit lambasted upon LEGAL CITIZENS of this country who are being scapegoated to throw a smoke screen on the Republicans while they rape and pillage the candy store…I’d like to say to you all: kiss my homo ass.

And to the Republican pigs in office:
The war is your mess.
Those who wanted it, those who started it, it’s your mess. Your straight boys are fighting it and coming home chopped up like chum for your flag and your cause…..so now I gotta ask:
Who’s paying for it?
you want my gay dollars to fund this happy horse shit?
You slap me in the face repeatedly and have the brass nuts to want my tax dollars to fund your regime of religious wackos and big business robber barrons.

And don’t play that terrorist card again…that crap is old.
We’re all sick of ‘terror’. Find a new excuse…oh yeah, you did. Rekindling the cold war with nukes again. The lie that global warming doesn’t exist? What failures you all are….what utter failures.
Ass clowns.
I hope you all rot in your Xian hell.

Have a nice day :)

Posted by: Black Cherry at June 24, 2006 5:41 PM
Comment #161349

Can anyone explain why we are in Iraq?

Posted by: phx8 at June 24, 2006 5:43 PM
Comment #161350

Eh Why not. Here are a couple of places to get you started.

Moore’s best-selling book Stupid White Men was no less factually challenged. In it, he made a number of mistakes, ranging from the sloppy (suggesting that the multiyear cost of a new fighter plane was all being spent in 2001) to the outright ridiculous (reprinting an outdated list of attacks on Bush from the Internet virtually unedited).


http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016.html

The film also inspired criticisms concerning accuracy and honesty

In Bowling for Columbine, on-screen text was allegedly altered in a Bush-Quayle campaign ad, and footage edited into it from a non-campaign ad, in order to make it seem racist. Moore denied that this was done in the film, but is said to have slightly corrected the text for the DVD release. [16]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moore

Oh stepen, now lets get back to a plan. Have you turned yours in yet?


Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 5:44 PM
Comment #161351
Michael Moore.. lets see, he made movie which has proved 100% CORRECT in EVERY regard.

Stephen:

Is that why Moore’s getting sued by an army vet for taking his quote out of context in Farenheight 9/11 and inappropriately characterizing the vet as anti-Iraq war?

Please, I think you’ve been listening to a little too much liberal propoganda.

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at June 24, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #161352

Scott,

Would you concede that things are bad in Iraq?

And getting worse?

How about Afghanistan?

I assume you read my reply to John Back earlier. If not please do. If so, how do you feel about making the war a “pay as you go” proposition?

Care to buy some war bonds?

How about reinstating the draft? This is (and will be) a “long” war if the Republicans have their way about it, do you think it’s fair to keep redeploying the same troops over and over again?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 5:57 PM
Comment #161354

Scott,

A plan:

1) Require that President Bush be accountable in his capacity as Commander in Chief. Demand that the President, as Commander in Chief, develop a plan for post war Iraq, and submit a “Strategy for Success” in Iraq, including clear benchmarks for determining when our troops can begin coming home. An open ended commitment is not sustainable. This is not a matter for “future Presidents” to resolve as Bush has stated. We must have clear goals and a means to know when we have met those goals. The Republicans in the Senate stand alone in insisting on “no plan and no end.”

2) Strike a balance between military, political, regional and international solutions. establish a regional security group, whose assistance could go a long way towards stabilizing Iraq.

3) Transition from a Military operation to a Political operation. Begin a phased redeployment this year. Work diplomatically to reconcile the sectarian differences, to regionalize the U.S. strategy and to revitalize reconstruction efforts.

4) Refocus our resources to fight the real “War on Terror.”

The Democratic plan is to force the man responsible for having a plan, the Commander in Chief, to actually have a plan.

Sources:

REID CALLS FOR A CHANGE IN COURSE IN IRAQ

The Democratic Record on Real Security
Vs. The Bush Republican Record of Dangerous Incompetence

Real Security: Protecting America and Restoring Our Leadership in the World



Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 6:03 PM
Comment #161356

One thing all this partisan bullshit has shown me in the last six years: Republicans are vile and Democrats are spinless.

THAT I will agree totaly with..

Calling me a Lefty, has about as much effect as calling me a Liberal, I AM ONE…and PROUD— and 65 years old, a Vietnam Vet, not a neo-con chicken-hawk.. an MBA

That lawsuit has come and gone, it was viewed approved the uses of the clip before release..and changed mind afterwards, WAAAAyyy afterwards..

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=hmpg2
-
—I guess you could accuse this of being lefty, but its not..

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32330

Ahh, but what would the military know..

Found this on a military websit, but lost it..
http://www.notinourname.net/troops/poll-28feb06.htm

http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20060228212828287/print

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=31975

http://www.wnyprogress.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=381&view=previous&sid=03be41635893c6162a32da1d2c371a30

These polls were done in Feb.. gotten worse since..

Posted by: Stephen at June 24, 2006 6:06 PM
Comment #161357

Kansas:

|Would you concede that things are bad in Iraq?|

Yes bad but not half as bad as the far left would like us to believe. and as bad as it is :77% of Iraqis think it was worth it. Take out the sunnis who want to go back to dictatorship and that leaves the kurds @ 91% and the Shia at 98%

|Care to buy some war bonds?|

You have some to sell, My family alwaysd bought their share of war bonds.

|How about reinstating the draft?|

And give up the strength of our all VOLUNTEER military. Never. I did notice that we are slowly bringing troops home.

I know this is the NOW generation. But war is hard. I fully believe we will succeded.

|I assume you read my reply to John Back earlier. If not please do. If so, how do you feel about making the war a “pay as you go” proposition?|

Run for office! I’ll vote for you.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/jan06/Iraq_Jan06_rpt.pdf

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 6:11 PM
Comment #161361

scott:

You are absolutely right about Moore and his lack of credibility. He is currently being sued by a injured veteran of the Iran/Iraq conflict. The veteran was interviewed by Moore for inclusion in Moore’s movie. The vet said that during the interview, Moore was pleasant and likeable. However when the movie came out, the vet was appalled by the impression Moore had created through editing the vet’s footage.

The vet was inaccurately portrayed to be anti-war and anti-Bush and when he tried to contact Moore to protest, Moore stalled him refusing to communicate with the vet, and eventually, the vet’s lawyer. The vet is now suing Moore for over $50 million.

Michael Moore is to documentaries what Jesse Jackson is to activism, a parasite.

I suggest that anyone who considers Moore a credible source read some of the info published about him. There are countless examples of dishonest editing procedure which go beyond mere shady practices. One example comes to mind. In Rodger and Me Moore did a lead in about the economic impact of a reduction of jobs at the Flint auto plant and then showed part of an interview with a city official at a city festival which was formal and featured fine dining and general wealthy merrymaking. The official talked about how times were good and that he was pleased with economy in Flint. Moore then followed with a scathing dismissal the callous attitude of the wealthy. Wonderful movie making. The problem is that the festival occurred YEARS BEFORE the plant closed.

In other words, Moore deliberately mislead the public by deliberately telling lies about the timeline supposedly being portrayed. Some might say, “So what. The rich stick it to the poor all the time and they wouldn’t have cared about the poor workers anyway.”

Maybe not. But one thing that is known is that Michael Moore was manipulating the public. He lied to make money. There is nothing noble about that.

If anyone is interested in further examples of Moore’s dishonesty, I suggest that they look into the editing involved in the footage showing Charlton Heston.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 24, 2006 6:24 PM
Comment #161360

scott:

You are absolutely right about Moore and his lack of credibility. He is currently being sued by a injured veteran of the Iran/Iraq conflict. The veteran was interviewed by Moore for inclusion in Moore’s movie. The vet said that during the interview, Moore was pleasant and likeable. However when the movie came out, the vet was appalled by the impression Moore had created through editing the vet’s footage.

The vet was inaccurately portrayed to be anti-war and anti-Bush and when he tried to contact Moore to protest, Moore stalled him refusing to communicate with the vet, and eventually, the vet’s lawyer. The vet is now suing Moore for over $50 million.

Michael Moore is to documentaries what Jesse Jackson is to activism, a parasite.

I suggest that anyone who considers Moore a credible source read some of the info published about him. There are countless examples of dishonest editing procedure which go beyond mere shady practices. One example comes to mind. In Rodger and Me Moore did a lead in about the economic impact of a reduction of jobs at the Flint auto plant and then showed part of an interview with a city official at a city festival which was formal and featured fine dining and general wealthy merrymaking. The official talked about how times were good and that he was pleased with economy in Flint. Moore then followed with a scathing dismissal the callous attitude of the wealthy. Wonderful movie making. The problem is that the festival occurred YEARS BEFORE the plant closed.

In other words, Moore deliberately mislead the public by deliberately telling lies about the timeline supposedly being portrayed. Some might say, “So what. The rich stick it to the poor all the time and they wouldn’t have cared about the poor workers anyway.”

Maybe not. But one thing that is known is that Michael Moore was manipulating the public. He lied to make money. There is nothing noble about that.

If anyone is interested in further examples of Moore’s dishonesty, I suggest that they look into the editing involved in the footage showing Charlton Heston.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 24, 2006 6:24 PM
Comment #161363

“…Yes bad but not half as bad as the far left would like us to believe. and as bad as it is…”“

Scott.. just to clarify, FAUX err FOX news it “the center” and the New York Times, and Washington Post, are Far Left Liberal..??

EU news sources are Far Left Liberal..

That would be you positon..?

See, you can’t argue with a republican.. the don’t live in the real-world.. they live somewhere the administration and Faux tells them is Nirvana.. and like all cult followers are impervious to argument..

I have to go now.. but for the rest of you, this guys is a “sound-reaonable con-man” something like Chenney ..

He has no argument, no solution, no discussion..just “give me a plan”.. but any plan you offere is not a plan.. Michael Moore is Far Left, but he quotes a “rabid” right winger…
He claims to “research” but does none, or dissregards anything that dissagress as “far-left”.. Same ol, same ol.. another republican.. so sad..

Trust me, or better yet, do some real research… Michael Moore is FAAAARRRR more honest than the administration… FAASAAARRRR more accurate than ANYTHING you will get from FAUX or Cable News (except for Kieth Obermann or the Daly Show)..but you all know that, so just ignore, and look behind the curtain

Posted by: Steve at June 24, 2006 6:34 PM
Comment #161364

Moore and his lack of credibility. He is currently being sued by a injured veteran of the Iran/Iraq conflict.

Too much Rush.. the case has been dissmissed, not valid…. and try reading something other that right-wing propaganda..Your stupidity is showing

Posted by: Steve at June 24, 2006 6:36 PM
Comment #161365

—A THERY Advocating A Pathological Lie Iraq had WMDs. International and American Inspectors found None! Several months past with many speeches about Iraq and the implications Sodom had these weapons. After rounding up and removed most of these weapons they were piled on about thirty five acres and left there intact. There were also several Bunkers full of c-4- explosives all intact ready to use none of these weapons were ever destroyed why would any sane person be that incompetent .Plausible denial-ability does not count with such an egregious mistake. In the event any one can show me prof positive Sodom had any thing to do with 9/11 please show me prof positive. I will leave others to decide if the rest of this War is factual and a worthy cause.

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 6:40 PM
Comment #161367

JayJay

|The Democratic plan is to force the man responsible for having a plan, the Commander in Chief, to actually have a plan.|

Hmm

So what do they do after they are in office.?

|Strike a balance between military, political, regional and international solutions|


|Begin a phased redeployment this year. Work diplomatically to reconcile the sectarian differences, to regionalize the U.S. strategy and to revitalize reconstruction efforts.|

Has been and Is being done!

This is not a plan and when Reid releasesed this even some democrats said it was not a plan.

This is in a nutshell:

Make the president come up with a plan.
Start removing our troops.
Help Iraq balance Military needs and Political needs.

Nothing in this plan helps The Iraqis stand up on their feet.

Steven:

sorry to see you go:

|this guys is a “sound-reaonable con-man”|

If all you can do is put me down, it is ok. I have big shoulders. But you still have no plan and your argument that Micheal Moore is %100 accurate holds little water even with many democrats. But stick with him PLEASE. It helps us.

I guess you missed the patr where Christopher Hitchens was a self proclaimed Socialist and worked at THE NATION. But if you want to believe he is a far right winger. Go ahead. People can look for them selves

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 6:42 PM
Comment #161369

Scott,

Sources?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 6:46 PM
Comment #161370

—by weapon’s means the weapons taken from the Iraqi military and citizens.

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 6:47 PM
Comment #161371

Steven would you give a source on the dismissing of the Micheal Moore case?
I cannot find anything about that at all. I do find where the case was reported as valid 2 weeks ago however.

http://cbs4boston.com/national/local_story_151102350.html

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 6:50 PM
Comment #161372

Scott,

Make the president come up with a plan.

Hello, he is the Commander in Chief. He is suppose to have a plan! Making the Commander in Chief have a plan is pretty basic stuff that the Cons in Congress don’t seem to understand. If they cannot comprehend that then they shouldn’t be there.

Start removing our troops.

Yup.

Help Iraq balance Military needs and Political needs.

Yep.

Nothing in this plan helps The Iraqis stand up on their feet.

Which part of “Help Iraq balance Military needs and Political needs” don’t you understand?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 6:53 PM
Comment #161373

JayJay;
Sources for what? Christopher Hitchens?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens

That not all the Dems agree with Reid that that was a plan? Ask Susan Esterich to start off with.

That There strongest point in the plan is to make the president come up with a plan?
Read it.

That most of the other things in the plan we are already doing?

Look up anything said by any democrat who has gone and visited Iraq in the last year.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 6:58 PM
Comment #161375

Here is one to start with:

|Sen. Tom Carper wishes politicians from both parties would visit Iraq before making pronouncements about U.S. policy in Iraq.

The Delaware Democrat spent the week after Thanksgiving with a congressional delegation on a trip to the Middle East and Iraq and returned to a growing political uproar. While President Bush assured reporters “the war is winnable,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean claimed that the idea the war can be won is “just plain wrong.”

“I wish more of my colleagues, and folks like Howard Dean, would try going to Iraq to see the situation there for themselves,” Carper told The News Journal.

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051213/NEWS/512130338/1006

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:08 PM
Comment #161377
Sources for what? Christopher Hitchens?

Who?

Ask Susan Esterich to start off with.

Who?

That most of the other things in the plan we are already doing?

That would be nice.

Look up anything said by any democrat who has gone and visited Iraq in the last year.

Ok, I have heard what John Murtha has to say. So?

You were very specific in asking for sources, but have provided very few yourself. Things that make you go hmmmm.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 7:08 PM
Comment #161378

Alex: So the answer is you have not read the Democratic Platform and will not? So there is no reason we should take anything you say about it seriously.

Posted by: BillS at June 24, 2006 7:10 PM
Comment #161379

|Instead, Carper said, he backs a policy of gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces as Iraqis take over military and political operations in their country.|

I do believe this is part of the above stated bush plan.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:10 PM
Comment #161380
Alex: So the answer is you have not read the Democratic Platform and will not? So there is no reason we should take anything you say about it seriously.

BillS:

I’m not sure, did I say that? Hmmm…I was looking all around but I didn’t seem to find that passage…I guess you just blindly assumed, and then discredited my opinions based on that blind assumption.

You should get a gig at Air America…

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at June 24, 2006 7:15 PM
Comment #161381
I do believe this is part of the above stated bush plan.

Scott,

Is this plan published somewhere, or does it just exist in your head? Sources please.

According to this Carper supports the position of Reid, which you claim is not a plan.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 7:18 PM
Comment #161383

http://voanews.com/english/archive/2005-02/2005-02-19-voa12.cfm?CFID=31996304&CFTOKEN=37291908
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051213/NEWS/512130338/1006


PA-18: Murphy Returns from Iraq, Says Iraqi Life Improving
“U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy [PA-18] returned home from a quick tour through Iraq and Afghanistan yesterday with considerable soreness, a cut above his eye and an abrasion on his cheek, but said his visit reinforced his view that American troops should remain in Iraq and that life for Iraqis was improving,” the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports. “…During his visits with U.S. troops before the accident Mr. Murphy said he discussed the recent debate over a proposal by U.S. Rep. John P. Murtha [PA=12] to withdraw U.S. soldiers from Iraq at the earliest possible date. … ‘Every soldier I talked to said, ‘Don’t pull out…. We know we can take care of this cause we’ve got to finish it,’ Mr. Murphy said. ‘They’re concerned about their families being scared that they’re going to [pull out] and they don’t want al-Qaida to be emboldened…. When some people say, Just get out, I think that’s the wrong message,’ he said. Mr. Murphy … said when he flew over Baghdad in a helicopter to meet with the head of the Iraqi Security Forces, he saw a ‘bustling city.’” (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Senator Bennett Visits Iraq
Jun. 7, 2004

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Sen. Bob Bennett said Monday that he returned from a trip to Iraq with renewed confidence in the war’s importance in fighting terrorism and continued assurance that troop morale remained high.
http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=5&sid=98973

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #161384

BillS:

And to answer you question, although I haven’t read every word of the “platform” I have read enough to reach the conclusion that it mostly consists of sugar-coated rhetoric that the core of the Democratic party can’t even agree on.

Sugar-coats, fancy verbiage, and party dissention (oh, and not to mention anti-Bush smear) is what I gather from the core of the Democratic party, with a group of rational good-eggs mixed in.

Posted by: Alex Fitzsimmons at June 24, 2006 7:24 PM
Comment #161385
returned home from a quick tour through Iraq and Afghanistan yesterday

Scott,

A quick tour? Ok. I am not sure what your point is. These Democrats are against an immediate withdrawl as am I, so is Reid and Murtha. I never said anything about immediate withdrawl in any of my posts. The only person to offer “cut and run” legislation in the Congress was Republican Duncan Hunter.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 7:30 PM
Comment #161386

Bush Presents Plan to Win Iraq War
Pelosi Says More Democrats Backing Call to Bring U.S. Troops Home Now

By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 1, 2005; Page A01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113000164.html?nav=rss_email/components

Bush’s 35 page plan:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/Iraqnationalstrategy11-30-05.pdf

People can read and compare for themselves what Reids plan and what Bush’s plans are. Think foir yourselves folks.

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:31 PM
Comment #161388

— Bob Bennett The best spinmeister troll west of the Mississippi!Give us the best laugh of the day, maybe the best SPIN. Real cute

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 7:34 PM
Comment #161389
Bush’s 35 page plan:

Scott,

Now was that so hard?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 7:40 PM
Comment #161390

“One has to be able to count if only so that at fifty one doesn’t marry a girl of twenty.”

Maxim Gorky

Scott

I like your use of polls, but you only painted a partial picture.

Question to Iraqis: Whom do you trust for your personal safety?
Iraqi Army: 35%
Iraqi Police: 43%
Multinational Armies: 1%

Question: How would you rate security conditions?
Excellent: 2%
Good: 5%
Fair: 14%
Poor: 76%

Question: Do you approve the government endorsing a timeline for US withdrawal?
Kurds: 64%
Shia: 90%
Sunni: 94%

Question: Do you approve (strongly or somewhat) of attacks on US-led forces in Iraq?
Overall: 47%
Kurds: 16%
Shia: 41%
Sunni: 88%

Bush’s plan is similar to Nixon’s plan in Vietnam. Nixon called it Vietnamization, and it started in 1969. By 1973, Nixon secured a ceasefire and withdrew most of our troops. In 1975, Vietnam was overrun, by North Vietnam and the insurgency. There was some report issued some months back by high ranking military officials that stated, that it would take at least 8-10 years of US occupation to give the Iraq government a reasonable opportunity for success. The Bush White House chose not to comment and it got very little play in the news.

Posted by: cube at June 24, 2006 7:41 PM
Comment #161391

JayJay

First you say I Cite no sources.

|A quick tour? Ok. I am not sure what your point is.|

Then you pull out One phrase from many ans say you don’t understand. Where are you going?

The point is that Reid’s plan is not much of one (Most of the whole four points, next to Bushes 35 pages refer to dogging Bush and repeating what is already stated policy.)

You started out with a blank PDF to make a funny that Bush has no plan. I give you a 35 page PDF that shows you he does.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/Iraqnationalstrategy11-30-05.pdf

So where I still ask is the Democratic,comprehensive, non repetitive, non bash bush plan?

Biden’s split Iraq plan is ten times as comprehensive as Reids. It is kinda silly since that is not the wish of the Iraqi people. (Source cited above in previous post)

Someone with lexus nexus can look for more news that many dems said also that Reids proposal was not a plan


Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:43 PM
Comment #161392

* We will help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. To achieve this end, we are pursuing an integrated strategy along three broad tracks, which together incorporate the efforts of the Iraqi government, the Coalition, cooperative countries in the region, the international community, and the United Nations.

sound any thing like what Reid said folks?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113000376.html

Read the plan here. Compare with Reids plan, and then tell me that the Dems have a plan and Bush doesn’t

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 7:46 PM
Comment #161393

—35 pages of spinning talking point to keep people of track with his right hand and four more mo. of treachery being performed before the November Elections.

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 7:54 PM
Comment #161394
There was some report issued some months back by high ranking military officials that stated, that it would take at least 8-10 years of US occupation to give the Iraq government a reasonable opportunity for success.

It would take well over 10 years to accomplish all the things outlined in the plan pointed out by Scott. Nation building takes a long time. Permanent bases go without saying, we will be there for decades. People who have become restless with this war had better get used to it. $300 billion is drop in the bucket.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 7:56 PM
Comment #161395

— My goodness, my last post looks like something President Bush might write. sorry

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 7:59 PM
Comment #161396
So where I still ask is the Democratic,comprehensive, non repetitive, non bash bush plan?

Scott,

I gave it to you. Make Iraqis responsible for their own welfare, then turn our attention and resources to the real War on Terror. It sounds like Bush is going to have us there until there is a McDonalds on every corner. The last thing we need to do is add 16,000,000 people to our welfare rolls.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #161397

Cube.

Let us remember that Kenedy and Johnson got us into that war and it was pressure by the liberals to get out. Nixon should have stayed the course.

Yes those other poll numbers are very true.

Who do you trust for your national security?
Total of 78% trust Iraqi military and police. Great statistic. As we have been in the backround in this area for a while, it looks like the Iraqi’s are doing the job.

At the same time they dont feel safe yet. They still have a ways to go. Read your history, the middle east has never been a real safe place.

remember that that aproval on attacks is skewed by the Sunni 88%. They do not want to go forward.
Take them out you drop to about 27% and remember that this poll was overpolled with sunnis by about 10%.


Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 8:03 PM
Comment #161398

Rulers using terrorism on his own people and supporting international terrorism financially and with operational ties who publically claims he is at war with the US and uses his intelligence agency to infiltrate the US to harass former citizens?

We should leave �€˜em alone, they don�€™t matter. All that matters is 9/11. Yeah, that�€™s the ticket�€�
Posted by: Rhinehold at June 24, 2006 02:36 PM

And what about American support for Terrorism Rhinehold, or doesn’t that count? And what about the 3600 Palestinians killed by the Israeli Defence Forces in the last five years? At least 1,600 of whom were not engaged in fighting, of whom 580 were children. Isn’t it strange that the weapons they used were supplied mostly by the US? That their policy of ethnic cleansing is sanctioned by the US? If Americans were prepared to investigate what is actually happening in Palestine, people being killed carelessly,people being thrown out of their homes, their land being confiscated, being herded into bantustans, instead of taking their propaganda from a media terrified of criticising Israel for fear of being branded anti semitic, they would be disgusted with their own countrys’ support for terrorism. You wonder why the Mid East is seething with rage? If I was a Palestinian, bereft of a potent way of defending my people, my community, my family, would I don a suicide belt? In a New York minute. You talk about terrorism, and yet you do not know what you own Government sanctions by its political, military and economic aid to a fascist Israel. And you wonder why they hate you? You who boast of your freedom, and many of you who say that if your Government acted in a way to reduce your freedoms, you would arm up, and defy your Government, in your ignorace you are prepared to call decent people, who want to live in dignity, terrorists for trying to defend themselves from a goliath. If you think I exaggerate, check out the Israeli Human Rights Organisation B’Tselem at this link;

http://www.btselem.org/English/index.asp

America, the country that demands respect for human rights around with world, can tolerate a lesser holocaust perpetrated by one of its allies, and not only tolerate it, but give it great succour. For shame America!
Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 24, 2006 04:39 PM

Something over three hours ago, I posted the above response to Rhinehold, and not a single response to it? Am I living in some parallel universe? All this talk of terrorism, and no one to engage on a very provocative posting? Is what I said somehow considered irrelevant? Untrue? Too close to the bone? What it is?

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 24, 2006 8:03 PM
Comment #161399

JayJay

|Make Iraqis responsible for their own welfare|

This is your plan? No this is a goal!

|then turn our attention and resources to the real War on Terror|

This part has nothing to do with Iraq.

So you have a 1 point plan that is really a goal.

You are definately not graduating. You will be in my class again next year.

Again compare folks:

Bush’s 35 page plan:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113000376.html
PDF:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/Iraqnationalstrategy11-30-05.pdf


JayJays plan:
1. Make Iraqis responsible for their own welfare, 2. turn our attention and resources to the real War on Terror.


BTW:
Talk about sources
|It sounds like Bush is going to have us there until there is a McDonalds on every corner.|

“We will be in Iraq until the Job is done, Not one day more or one day less!”

GWB


Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 8:11 PM
Comment #161401

Bush plan on current state of Iraq: Play politics with it and use phrase “cut and run” to afront any idea to altering the current course of “stay the current course”.

Ofcourse the other entry was funnier.

Create democracy that has no available power to rule over it’s own country without US intervention. Shiite kills Sunni, Sunni kills Shiite, terrorists kills westerner and we are stuck in the middle. I welcome any and all debate on this topic as we stand perched to put out more fires either side might set. This whole thing is f#cked-up let’s go home.

Iraq is on course for a full conflagration and all we hold pretty much is the greenzone, from all reports. We need a new plan of action—and Republicans fail to see it.

I know we pretty much have to stay there but what do we hold after three years—one area. Three years, one area and nothing new is allowed on the table by Republicans. They have a plan which is—umm well slog, yeah and muddle and purple fingers, yeah and..

Bush is “the decid’r” afterall and his “deshishuns” leave us still up sh#t’s creek.

I want to see this whole thing come about so that a full-out civil war is avoided and the terrorists get what is theirs—but I fear the stalemate is too much to support too. We need something new on the table and whether that comes from the left, right, or anywhere it should be fully welcomed at this point. We are having a bitch of a time occupying that region and there are no let ups in sight.

Last night Baghdad was in scattered gunfights and carbombs at mosques. Does this sound like a place under control? What new plans are there? Three years and that’s where we are and I’m not blaming our troops but the preliminary strategies that could probably afford some alteration perhaps.

F#ck-it let’s go home—sounds like a good strategy, not currently feesible, but what is on the table to create a better controlled situation there on the ground? Anything? Both sides, left and right, might be equally guilty of not having sh#t.

Posted by: Novenge at June 24, 2006 8:14 PM
Comment #161400

Scott,

Argue with these guys:

Guardsmen: Iraq a minute-by-minute battle
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060624/ap_on_re_us/iraq_conflicted_soldiers;_ylt=AnXAmz5lb8.igGbinQ5LdP2s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-

Notable quotes;

“They’re using our good will, our good-nature policy against us,” says Sgt. Bobby Walls, a 38-year-old Pennsylvania National Guard member. “The fact that we fight as the good guys sometimes turns around and kicks us in the can, you know?”

“You start realizing how vulnerable you really are all the time,” Walls says. “You’re not safe anywhere in that damn place, and that’s a bad feeling. Too many guys got hurt or killed just walking to chow … or running to the bathroom, and they don’t come back.”

“If you’re going to fight the enemy, there are two ways to look at it. You either become just like them, fight them on their own terms or you take the heavy burden like we’re doing it right now and it’s going to cost American lives. It’s a hell of a price to pay but if you fight them on their terms, you’re no better than them.

One day, Richards says, the parents of a 12-year-old boy told him their son had been beheaded by insurgents because he accepted a soccer ball as a gift from soldiers. “We said to the parents, ‘You tell us who did it and we will get them.’ They said if we talk to you, they’ll kill us as well,’” says Richards, a hedge fund broker from Philadelphia.
________________

Scott, my point is that we have three real choices:

#1. Keep on just the way we are and watch things go just the way they’re going (certainly there will be times that attacks slow and then again increase) and keep burying Americans that are fighting an endless war.

#2. Increase troop deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan possibly as much as four times what they are now to restore/create true control. (This will require a draft, no one wants it, it’s political suicide, and that’s why Bushco won’t say the word)

#3. Tell the Iraqi government that we will begin drawing out troops at staged intervals which should light a fire under their asses if they want peace. If they prefer sectarian violence to some form of moderation then let them shape their own future.

Believe it or not we are making the same mistakes in Iraq we made in Vietnam when it comes to understanding the people. All people (us included) have a survival instinct, certainly religious extremism might drive someone to using their body as a bomb, but most people just want to live.

Short of truly occupying Iraq with overwhelming force (500,000 to 1,000,000 troops) we stand no chance of achieving peace in Iraq, and only then if we’re willing to “stay the course” for at least 20 years.

Or we can keep playing “hit-n-run” with the “insurgents” and for every “insurgent” we kill we also kill 2 or 3 or 4 “innocents” therefore growing the insurgency. IMO we should list those Americans accused of crimes during war among the casualties of war.

My conclusion: We either need to create true security in Iraq by increasing troop strength or get the hell out. If the President can’t sell the idea of a draft to the Amercican people then let someone else lead. Simple, eh?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 8:14 PM
Comment #161403

—Paul— the R. winged ding bat spinmeister, tricksters have come early today, do not mind them, they are just looking for bug’s. If you get my drift.

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 8:16 PM
Comment #161404
You started out with a blank PDF to make a funny that Bush has no plan. I give you a 35 page PDF that shows you he does.
Scott, And I gave you a 123 page Democratic Security plan that includes the whole “war on terror”, not just Iraq, and you still insist that the Democrats don’t have a comprehensive plan. Go figure. Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:17 PM
Comment #161406
|then turn our attention and resources to the real War on Terror|

This part has nothing to do with Iraq.

At least you guys can admit this now. If Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror, then what are we doing there at all?

JayJays plan: 1. Make Iraqis responsible for their own welfare, 2. turn our attention and resources to the real War on Terror.

If Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terrorism, as you have admitted, then this seems like a good plan to me. Sometimes the best plans cannot be found in 35 pages.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:22 PM
Comment #161407

—Paul— the R. winged ding bat spinmeister, tricksters have come early today, do not mind them, they are just looking for bug’s. If you get my drift.
Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 08:16 PM

David, if this post was intended for me, then sorry, I don’t actually get your drift!

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 24, 2006 8:23 PM
Comment #161408


JayJay
|It would take well over 10 years to accomplish all the things outlined in the plan pointed out by Scott. Nation building takes a long time. Permanent bases go without saying, we will be there for decades.|

Yes, it took a long time in Germany and Japan. we will not need 130,000 troops to do this.It will be accomplished a multitude of ways. Oh yes it used to be 160,000 troops. Hmm the number seems to be going down.

Lets see now, we are training all this here Iraqi military. Now are they going to need bases or not?

I do believe that they are for the Iraqi army:
http://usinfo.org/wf-archive/2005/050815/epf102.htm


The ambassador dismissed the notion that the United States is seeking to maintain a long-term presence in Iraq.

‘We do not seek permanent military bases in Iraq. Our goal is to help Iraq stand on its own feet, to be able to look after its own security, and to do what we can to help achieve that goal,” he said. ‘

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 8:25 PM
Comment #161409

You’re all making a huge mistake. We’re at war with EASTasia, not EURasia. Now get back to your telescreens lest you be late for two minutes hate.

Posted by: Bill C at June 24, 2006 8:25 PM
Comment #161410
Our goal is to help Iraq stand on its own feet, to be able to look after its own security, and to do what we can to help achieve that goal

Scott,

You mean: 1. Make Iraqis responsible for their own welfare?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:29 PM
Comment #161411

GoodKingNed,

“The veteran was interviewed by Moore for inclusion in Moore’s movie. The vet said that during the interview, Moore was pleasant and likeable. However when the movie came out, the vet was appalled by the impression Moore had created through editing the vet’s footage.”

The lawsuit concerns footage taken from an NBC interview, not an interview conducted by Moore.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/entertainment/movies/14709855.htm

“DENISE LAVOIE
Associated Press
BOSTON - A veteran who lost both arms in the war in Iraq is suing filmmaker Michael Moore for $85 million, alleging that Moore used snippets of a television interview without his permission to falsely portray him as anti-war in ‘Fahrenheit 9/11.’”

Posted by: Rocky at June 24, 2006 8:33 PM
Comment #161412


JayJay if by my saying:
|This part has nothing to do with Iraq|

Unhinges Iraq from the war on terror.

Then you and the Democrats saying:


|Scott, And I gave you a 123 page Democratic Security plan that includes the whole ‘war on terror’, not just Iraq,|

surely rehinges it.

No, JayJay, lets’s have a Plan on Iraq all by itself. Thats what we are tallking about and the republicans have a plan for each. Even tho you say that Bush’s 35 page plan doesnt exist. (facecious)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/documents/Iraqnationalstrategy11-30-05.pdf

Posted by: Scott at June 24, 2006 8:37 PM
Comment #161414
JayJays plan

Scott,

Actually, that was not my plan, it was Harry Reids, which I would agree with if I agreed with you that Iraq has nothing to do with the “War on Terror.” I don’t. My plan would be to stop pussyfooting around and show the Middle East what the U.S. military is really made of. I would drastically increase the number of troops and get a grip on the security situation. I would not be out to nation build. Putting a functioning government and a decent security force in place is adequete.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:43 PM
Comment #161415
surely rehinges it.

How do you figure?

Even tho you say that Bush’s 35 page plan doesnt exist.

Scott,

I never said it didn’t exist, I asked you if it existed and to provide a source. You did.

No, JayJay, lets’s have a Plan on Iraq all by itself.

That is a bad idea. They must go hand in hand. If the Iraq war is not about the War on Terror, then we should not be there and immediate withdrawl is called for.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 8:48 PM
Comment #161416

—IN all seriousness,,I believe America needs to be inclusive with it’s citizens with the war on terror, offer of some reward for turning in known suspected terrorists get to the business of doing a better job of protecting our boarders. I also believe we could get the United Nations and any other Countries, together in Mass get in Iraq get the job done!

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 8:50 PM
Comment #161419

Still no response to my post? What is going on here? More that four hours ago, and nobody agrees with me or disagrees with me? Was what I said of no interest to anyone?

Posted by: Paul in Euroland at June 24, 2006 8:58 PM
Comment #161420

DAVID,

“IN all seriousness,,I believe America needs to be inclusive with it’s citizens with the war on terror”

You mean like the capture of those bozos in Miami?

Posted by: Rocky at June 24, 2006 9:01 PM
Comment #161422
I also believe we could get the United Nations and any other Countries, together in Mass get in Iraq get the job done!

David,

This would be an integral part of any plan on Iraq. Unfortunately, that will be near impossible as long as Bush is in office. The real problem here is that what can be done in Iraq is limited. We do not have the support needed worldwide, nor do we have adequate forces to secure the nation and bring things under control. We are pretty much boxed in between go it alone and “stay the course” for 10-20 years and “cut & run.” There is not much wiggle room.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 9:05 PM
Comment #161424

The problem comes, I think, when we define our strategy in political meetings more than in discussion of the facts. Whatever we can enchant ourselves into believing, we will have to face the cold hard facts on whatever policy challenge we face. I’d just as soon Democrats and Republican alike ensure that our policies will do what we set them to do, rather than sitting like cowardson our positions because deviating from them would cost us politically.

I’m sick of simpleminded platforms. Governing is the job we hire them for. I would rather the Democrats leave their plans lose and flexible, and tighten things up when they get a good idea about how things are really working before they make things final. Nobody’s wise enough to predict all ends, and we should act in that understanding, observing, keeping a beginner’s mind.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 24, 2006 9:09 PM
Comment #161455

—Rocky I would say that’s a very GOOD BEGINING!

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 9:58 PM
Comment #161460

Jay Jay Snowman,

I agree, it looks bleak with GW sitting on top. We race around and stamp out fires continuously and hold our position with elections in the region that mean little. The point made about playing the goodguy and if fighting like we do becoming what they are—struck hard.

We made big mistakes early on that jeopardized us an easier or atleast clearer win in the region.

If we leave, we leave a conflagration in our dust-tracks. We stay, there is no assurance of victory in what has become essentially a batting cage of radicalism. We installed a democracy that cannot rule. We trained an army that we can only partially trust and hardly rely on. But yet we have to stay the course or Al Qaida will make the claim that they won—so what to do, what to do.

Posted by: Novenge at June 24, 2006 10:03 PM
Comment #161464

—Paul in Euroland I should have said you do a very good post but for some reason all most every post that is good today gets attacked with a vengeance and I thought writing what I did might cut back those comments on your post. If I offended you I am sorry DAVID

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 10:14 PM
Comment #161482

Kansas, I generally don’t have a problem with any of your post and most times agree with what you say. In this case I have to disagree with you. As someone who has a son almost at the age where he could be drafted, I don’t want to see the draft reimposed, especially to send more innocent young men and women into a war that even our wonderful president has admitted to not even being a winable war, one that NEVER should have been started in the first place. If I’m selfish then so be it. To many people have died for this cause already, Americans, Iraqis, right on down the line. We need to get the hell out of there and let them kill each other in the name of their God. Enough is enough, and it’s not going to get any better, our presence there is just adding fuel to the fire. They didn’t want to be “saved” in the first place let sleeping dogs lay.

Posted by: Sherri at June 24, 2006 10:38 PM
Comment #161484

“Too much Rush.. the case has been dismissed, not valid…. and try reading something other that right-wing propaganda..Your stupidity is showing”
- Posted by: Steve at June 24, 2006 06:36 PM

Manners aren’t your strong suit. But anyway, I saw an interview with the veteran on a news show about two weeks ago. If it was dismissed, it happened recently. Even if the courts determine that this claim is not actionable in the justice system, the plaintiff was credible to me and I believe that the allegation is indicative of shady behavior by Moore.

Rocky:

Thanks for the info. I couldn’t remember the specifics of the dispute and I filled in the blanks, incorrectly apparently.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 24, 2006 10:44 PM
Comment #161485

What makes me laugh about this whole thing is that we can train a person in however many weeks of bootcamp to be a soldier, but we can’t train the Iraqi’s in 3 years to be soldiers, to take care of their own country. Whats wrong with this picture. After this long of a period of time they still don’t have a viable army. Sorry I’m loosing sympathy for the Iraqi people.

Posted by: Sherri at June 24, 2006 10:44 PM
Comment #161492

Sherri,

I could so easily be swayed to your point of view right now.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 24, 2006 10:50 PM
Comment #161507

—To all those criticising Roger Moore! Where was your criticism when the Bush Administration was paying so call news reporters even a TV commentator to place disinformation in the news and on TV as if these they interested were true?

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 11:15 PM
Comment #161511

What makes me laugh about this whole thing is that we can train a person in however many weeks of boot camp to be a soldier, but we can’t train the Iraqi’s in 3 years to be soldiers, to take care of their own country. Whats wrong with this picture. After this long of a period of time they still don’t have a viable army. Sorry I’m loosing sympathy for the Iraqi people.
- Posted by: Sherri at June 24, 2006 10:44 PM

Sherri,

You can’t compare adding troops to an established military force with existing training facilities and a core of experienced instructors and combat leaders to the creation of an army from scratch, in a hostile environment with saboteurs constantly trying to infiltrate. Even with the tremendous difficulties inherent in this task, the Iraqi army now exceeds a quarter of a million men. Iraqi forces are dying in defense of their country and still more enlist everyday. And the official cabinet has only been in place for less than a month. I say that is phenomenal progress.

Remember, its a volunteer army. Your son need not join the military unless he wants to. The modern military requires committed individuals who can be trained. The number of unacceptable candidates would be too high using a randomly selected draftees.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 24, 2006 11:27 PM
Comment #161512

—goodkingned looks like you got spun out today. I must say you are usually better than this, Guess we all spin a little.

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 11:28 PM
Comment #161515

—goodkingned Our military went in Iraq two times and both times an most of the solders threw down their weapons and sometimes their clothing and ran away or gave up, now you think they are going to shoot their own people for our military! Good luck

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 11:46 PM
Comment #161516

Sherri,

You’re dead on the money!

I’m not advocating the renewal of the draft. I’m advocating a serious decision. Vietnam came about so soon after WWII and Korea that we truly felt we had to fight every threat of the expansion of communism head on (remember Patton wanted to invade Russia). Anyway that’s now history.

What I was saying was that we have three options regarding Iraq and the “Global” war on terror.

#1. Is “stay the course” according to the Bush/Rumsfeld plan which I believe has led to a quagmire and will continue to spin into a scenario similar to that of Vietnam.

#2. Increase troop levels, both in Afghanistan and Iraq, to a level which will truly maintain stability (but this IMO is the one that will require reinstating the draft if we expect to be successful).

#3. Inform the Iraqi government of a reasonable timetable by which “they” will be responsible for their own security. It really won’t matter if we make it public or not. There are always people willing to speak to the press.

The truth really is:
#1. If we were forced to pay for this war now rather than pass the bill along to future generations, or:
#2. If everyone of us had a family member or friend eligible for an active draft:

The support for this war would drop to an all time low.

What I truly advocate is honesty and transparency from our government. What we are getting is the same load of BS with different catch phrases attached to it.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 24, 2006 11:46 PM
Comment #161518

just a follow up-Remember the story of the trojan Horse

Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 11:50 PM
Comment #161520

Scott etc. Of course we will keep permanent bases in Iraq. Secureing the oil requires it. That was the point of the invasion anyway. Google it. The bases are already under construction.One of them has a Burger King. The huge embassy is in itself a base.
Some talk of the draft here. I still think that if the war is so great GWB should get his daughters to enlist. Certainly they would be in great danger but so are everybody elses sons and daughters over there. And I bet their unit would get all the armor they needed. Come on Mr. President,show us what the Bush family is really made of!

Posted by: BillS at June 24, 2006 11:56 PM
Comment #161530

DAVID:

—goodkingned Our military went in Iraq two times and both times an most of the solders threw down their weapons and sometimes their clothing and ran away or gave up, now you think they are going to shoot their own people for our military! Good luck
- Posted by: DAVID at June 24, 2006 11:46 PM


The Iraqi army is not going to fight for our military. Apparently, they wouldn’t fight for Saddam either. But, they are currently fighting for their country. As I stated, Iraqis soldiers are dieing for the future of their country. Iraqi casualties have increased with each month. For the past several months more Iraqis are giving their lives in military service than Americans.

Continued increases in Iraqi military enlistment is a sign that the Iraqi are committed to securing their country.


DAVID:

I don’t see it as spinning to say that the Iraqis are building an impressive military force. I actually under-reported the number of Iraqi troops. The last figure I heard was 260,000.

I wasn’t spinning when I accurately stated that military service is voluntary or that due to increased educational and technical requirements for recruits make a draft less feasible.

Posted by: goodkingned at June 25, 2006 12:09 AM
Comment #161535

DAVID,

I don’t really know too much about Roger Moore. The only thing of his I have seen is the 9/11 movie. I do know that if the right wing lumps you into the same catagory as Moore, then you probably said something they didn’t like (probably the truth).

I see that Al Franken is lumped in the Moore catagory. I do listen to the Al Franken Show quite regularly. I do enjoy it. He is on at the same time as Rush Limbaugh where I am at, so when I am driving I switch back and forth between the two. What a difference! Al Franken and his guests are actually talking about important issues. I flip over to Rush Limbaugh and I’ll bet 8 times out of 10 he is talking smack about liberals.

The other day Franken and his guests were talking about human rights and worker rights. Limbaugh was talking about a whale that ate an otter that was released into the wild by some “leftist animal right group.” Ok, that’s 3 minutes I’ll never get back.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at June 25, 2006 12:21 AM
Comment #161541

Bill:

|Scott etc. Of course we will keep permanent bases in Iraq. Secureing the oil requires it. That was the point of the invasion anyway. Google it.|

I did google it. I went through 10 pages and all I found was far left, not even right of left blogs.No news stories,, nothing credible, no facts, no proof,just ranting. (A few right wing of course also but still no facts)

I would encourage everyone to do the same. Google it!

Posted by: scott at June 25, 2006 12:35 AM
Comment #161556

Google this:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

Scroll through the list of dead, look at the ages, stop and think that everyone of them was a living, breathing human being! With girl/boy friends, wives/husbands, children, etc.

Then ask why? How many more? What’s the mission?

Then the next time you go lay down in your comfortable bed ask yourself if we’re doing the right thing!

Do you really sleep well supporting this?

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 25, 2006 1:18 AM
Comment #161587

Kansas:

Look here instead and do the same thing.

http://ww2bodycount.netfirms.com/

Was it worth it?

Posted by: scott at June 25, 2006 2:19 AM
Comment #161593

Scott

The Vietnam War was a continuation of Eisenhower’s commitments and policies in the Far East. It is true though, that both Kennedy and Johnson escalated the United States involvement. Nixon stayed his course and found a way to extricate the United States with a ceasefire, as he had promised during the 72 elections. By the time the US removed most of our troops, the war had grown unpopular with both the liberals and moderates. I find it funny now how some people are trying to rewrite the history of the Vietnam War. The struggle in Vietnam lasted 25 years; it was time to stop sacrificing our young men needlessly. By the time the war ended, few believed that war was about stopping communism.

Posted by: Cube at June 25, 2006 3:31 AM
Comment #161598

—J J Snow- I listen to the same shows often, their sincerity non hostile programs try to address many of the concerns that a great many people have concerning a hostile climate. So many scorsese’s with all their misrepresentations an lockstep rhetoric, make this web site vital to many people including my self, which is generally optimistic an up beat, an occasionally feisty(a good thing). I am about 2 weeks new at the web. an make mistakes but I am working on them. The controllers of this site an people like you give a new prospective on politics. Thank you

Posted by: DAVID at June 25, 2006 4:37 AM
Comment #161818

Syria - planned no pre emptive strike
Saudi -planned no pre emptive strike
Isreal - planned no pre-empive strike
Iran - planned no pre - emptive strike
Jordon - planned no pre-emptive strike

America - pre - emptive strike and nation building

Afghanistan - retaliation for WTC disaster.

Posted by: carl at June 26, 2006 7:29 AM
Comment #161996

“Every war has mistakes. Without knowing you I can honestly say that you have made some reall dum mistakes at the begining of every job you have held. We all do. I own a pizza place. My employees
make mistakes. I make mistakes.”

Oh my god. Did this guy really just compare bush’s FUBAR Iraq plan with putting the wrong topping on a pizza?
And were debating with him?
How bout a little comparative analogy here.
You buy a Round Table franchise. The EXPERTS from Round table corporate tell you NEVER turn the oven above 550 degrees. NEVER EVER EVER turn the oven above 550 degrees. IF you turn the oven above 550, it will be disastrous. DONT TURN THE OVEN ABOVE 550!!!!
Based on the advice of the stoner pizza maker you hired, you turn the oven to 650. The entire shopping center burns to the ground, 120 people are killed.
Hey, I make mistakes, We all make mistakes. Part of the learning curve, right?

Posted by: Observer at June 26, 2006 7:10 PM
Post a comment