Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

I will take your bet with these predictions:
1. The US Military will still be in Iraq next year.
2. The body count will be 3 GIs dead per day at a minimum.
3. The Shias and Kurds will begin to oppress the Sunnis.
4. The total US dead will exceed 2,500.
5. There will never be an investigation on what happened to the $8 Billion the US stole from Iraq.
6. Americans will forget that Iraq exists if there is still no Draft.
7. The Benefits of Veterans will be cut once again.

Jack,

C’mon Jack, we all know that Iraq was lost before a single shot was fired. It’s a war of lies after all. Made by a President that was never elected. Forced upon us so that Republicans could establish a fascist theocratic state. As well as get profits for Hallibuton.

Damn, Aldous still beat me to it.
;)

I expect that the U.S. will still be in Iraq next year. Three dead GIs each day, I don’t believe is probably. It depends on what you mean by oppress. Total dead depends on if you count non-combat accidents. There should not be an investigation because it is a red herring. There will not be a draft. Veteran benefits will not be cut.

But the question remains, will Iraq on November 1, 2006 be significantly better than today and will it be among the most democratic regimes in the Middle East. I believe yes to both.

I agree with your point that Americans will forget about Iraq but not for the same reason you state. I think they will largely forget because it won’t be such a news generator after things are working okay. The Bush critics will be the ones who want to forget about it.

will Iraq on November 1, 2006 be significantly better than today and will it be among the most democratic regimes in the Middle East.

Jack, As Americans, we have to keep hoping that things will get better in Iraq, but you fail to define “win” or even “better.” We can already argue that things are better in Iraq, if we use certain criteria. We can make an equally convincing argument things are going badly wrong, using a different data set.

As for Iraq being one of the most democratic regimes in the Middle East, the bar is set very, very low there. It can be argued that Iraq has already achieved this goal.

I think it’d be more interesting to make definite, quantifiable predictions we could check on in another year. Will the number of Iraqis who are being killed in the violence be more or fewer by next year? Will more or fewer people have access to stable electrical power and other utilities? Will Iraqis, especially women, have more or less social freedom in another year? Will there be more or less freedom of religion? Will GDP be up or down? Will satisfaction be up or down?

Personally, I think it’s likely there’ll be a mixed picture. GDP will rise, social freedom for women will decline, satisfaction rates will stay low due to sectarian tensions, security will still be dicey (I don’t know if slightly improved or worse), a more authoritarian figure will be on the horizon as people demand better security, American soldiers will be less and less welcome (their actual safety will depend on whether they can pull back into garrisons), infrastructure will improve slightly as more redundant systems are built, and freedom of religion will be enshrined in law but virtually nonexistent in much of the nation.

I think this is actually one of the more promising scenarios. The more gruesome alternative involves much more ethnic cleansing, growing chaos as in Yugoslavia, and a movement toward religious facism and civil war.

So, “winning” will be in the eye of the beholder. If we had put a signficantly larger number of boots on the ground after the invasion, the country might be relatively peaceful now. Alas, it didn’t happen and any future progress will be slow. Our best hope is that there will be any progress at all.

It is possible that we will still have a good outcome in Iraq in spite of the incompetence, lies and amorality of this corrupt administration… however if we do have a good outcome, 100% of the credit belongs to the courageous American soldiers and to the noble intentions of the American people who may win this in spite of President King George the Second. It steadily becoming increasingly unlikely… less troops then the Generals wanted, Rumsfeld setting the preconditions for torture at Abu Ghireb and Gitmo, failing to train Iraqi security forces fast enough, disbanding the Iraqi Army, giving no bid contracts to Haliburton instead of local Iraqi contractors, failing to rebuild, failing to create a real coalition, lies, lies and more lies, and on and on,

Jack,
By who’s standards do we measure this improvement? The Whitehouse has completely overblown the facts and Congress has no earthly idea on what plan of action is in play. Shot according to the latest hearings, we are still trying to get armor in the field. I think the newest word is called situation awareness training for the troops.

No, a year ago the Republican party said that the Democrats were wrong in the way they viewed Irag, yet when you looked at the Congressional Hearings of that time who was right? Even after 2 years, Iraq has only one fully trained unit that can stand and fight on its own. Conservatively speaking, the country would have to have about 15 units to allow American troops to withdraw and we want that done in a year? IMO I don’t think that will happen by real numbers. Maybe President Bush’s numbers, but we know that they are not accurate.

Given the fact that if peace would break out in Iraq tomorrow, America would find itself without a battlefield to fight terrorism do you really think that our leadership wants that? No, IMO Al is right. To feed the fire of hate America keeps the war on terror alive and off American shores. Also, the Middle East gets to keep the oppressive governments in place. So why would the leaders even want peace in Iraq?

A year from now or five years from now, the people of Iraq are pawns in a war bigger than just a few terrorist or their history and until they stand up on their own feet and kick all players out of their Nation things will not improve.

Now do I hope that I am wrong? Absolutely! However, given Human Nature and the lack of a native born national leader in Iraq with a workable plan for peace this time next year things will most likely be about the same.

Jack said:

Next year at this time it will be very clear that things are going our way.

That’s quite a goal post there, Jack. Rock solid criteria for assessing winning. :-)

As long as the US and or coalition forces are required to babysit the Iraqi’s and the integrity of their nation, there is no winning. There is only a persistent drain on American taxes, American voter patience and tolerance, and of course, sadly, a drain on America’s youth in the armed forces, not to mention recruting replacements.

You can quote me next year, or in 2015 which Rice says is possible for our continued presence in Iraq.

Reed,
Excellent. You hit the nail on the head when you called for Jack to quantify his statements.

1. The Iraqi government will be up and running at it’s full potential.
2. The Iraqi military will have taken over at least 90% of the defence of Iraq.
3.US troop will be starting to come home.
4. The liberials will STILL insist that we should’ve never gone onto Iraq, and that we lost the war.

Here’s another prediction - George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the greatest Presidents in United States for liberating Iraq and for dealing a death blow to Al Qaeda.

Another prediction - the 2000-2008 Democratic Party will go down in history as the most worthless collection of incompetent, corrupt and treasonous political hack scum to ever disgrace this nation.

“Next year at this time it will be very clear that things are going our way.”

I doubt it. We heard this same prediction after Saddam was captured, after sovereignty was transferred, after the first round of elections, and after the ‘04 US presidential election.

When things are objectively bad—daily terrorist bombings, massive defections and inability by Iraqi forces, widespread fear flowing from the lack of security—more ambiguous metrics of victory such as elections have been pointed to. But a democratic government that cannot govern is worse than no government at all. Unless the new Iraqi regime harshly whips the crap out of the Sunni insurgents and begins to restore security, then it will not only discredit itself but it will discredit the democratic political model. There is now not a victory strategy; at most there is a withdrawal strategy. Our leaders have explicitly said that we won’t win the counterinsurgency, the Iraqis will. But that does not say how they will do so or what we will do in the meantime to make that possible. A coherent counterinsurgency strategy has yet to emerge and the only real “hearts and minds” effort is through political processes to guarantee the new government legitimacy. If those governments cannot actually secure the goods, the limited legitimacy that democratic procedures bestow will be turned upside down.

I supported the war initially, but I see little indication anything is going better today than a year or two years ago.

Predictions

One year from today

1.Iraq security levels at 225,000 with 12 battions at Level 1 readiness

2.New Iraq leadership elected in December will continue the politicial process started with the Sunnis

3.Most if the current Iraqii insurgency leadership killed or captured.

4.Brave American and coalition will continue to sacrifice their lives for freedom not only in Iraq but probably else where too.Unfortunalely the theater of war moves during a world war.

5.Democrats still will be howling about something but in the final analysis the currently supressed Able-Baker testimony will sink the Clinton legacy once and for all and lay the blame for 9/11 where it belongs.

6.The left will try unsucessfully to make the Rove-Libby thing into another Watergate.

7.No matter what,they will lose the White House again in 2008.McCain or Guilliani will be called Mr. President then.

8.We will go into a recession next year but bounce back thanks to high tech.

9.Additionial alternative energy sources will be developed and marketed by private enterprise.

10.Math and reaging score will continue to go as they did this year under No Child Left Behind.

11.Dean will embarrass the party 8 times in twelve months,almost matching Keddeny’s record of monthly embarrassments.

12.The Bush Library Committe will beging to accept donations.

Here’s my prediction for next year. The anti-war, anti-Bush and anti-american crowd will (still) be blaming Bush and saying the war was illegal and based on lies.

How did I come to this conclusion? Simple. They’ve been doing this since Bush took over in 2001. Nothing has changed for them. However, plenty has changed. Let’s look at Bush and the “coalition”.

After two and a half years of the Iraq War, with all the hateful things done and said about Bush and his coalition, Bush was re-elected, Blair was re-elected, Howard was re-elected, Poland and Italy’s Leaders are safe, Schoeder is booted out, the U.N. is a laughing stock and the boycott has been on with France and Spain. And yet, the haters are sitll spewing out the same old crap! Why? Porque?

If you (still) hear anyone complaining about why we went into war with Iraq, you know that person is filled with hate and can’t (and never will) see the big picture. My advice, just walk away from them. Hell, run! Or, just don’t take them seriously, even though that’s what they want.

With all that has been going on in the last few years and what has transpired (Bush and the colation being re-elected), it’s ridiculous to recite the same crap over and over (and over) when the people have spoken up and sided with Bush and the coalition. The anti-crowd will not be able to turn popular opinion with the same “conspiracy” theories.

Give it up and walk away! I said, walk away!!

Yes it is hard to be precise. Sicilian Eagle did a decent job, I thought.

Let me be simple as possible.

Security
There will be 272,000 Iraqi Security Forces, who will do most of the day-to-day security in place of U.S. and coalition troops.

Oil
Oil production peaked at 2.5 million barrels a day under Saddam. We will exceed that next year.

Iraqi GDP during the last years of Saddam was $18.2 billion. By next year, it will be MORE THAN DOUBLE that - $37 billion.

Average electricity production during Saddam’s last year was 3958 megawatts a month. We will reach 6000 by November 1 next year.

Telephone
Under Saddam 833,000 people had telephone service. We will easily reach 5,000,000 by next year.

Internet
Under Saddam there were 4,500 Internet subscribers. By next November there will be 50 TIMES that much 225,000

Independent Newspapers and Magazines
Under Saddam there were none. There are now 170. That number will remain the same.

U.S. Casualties
Fewer than an average of one a day from hostile action.

Democracy
Some of you have pointed out that Iraq is already one of the most democratic countries in the Middle East. The fact that it has gone from one of the most oppressive to one of the most democratic since 2003 show the success we have already had. This progress will continue.

I also predict that the current critics of the Iraq war will just say that all this is nothing much.

I agree that a year from now liberals will still refuse to see anything postitive at all in Iraq regardless of what happens. On the other hand, Republicans will still refuse to acknowlege that we went into Iraq under false pretenses - whether Bush knowlingly lied or truly fell victim to bad intelligence, there will be no acknowledgement that the Amercian people supported the war ONLY because they believed that Iraq represented a clear and present danger to the security of the United States (and many believed that S.H. had an active role in 9/11) and would NOT have supported sacrificing 2000+ American lives for the goal, however admirable, of spreading democracy and deposing a despot.

While I applaud the idea of asking people to put their predictions on the record, let’s not get too comfy with the idea that one year from now means anything.

If the clock stopped right now I don’t think any rationale person could argue that the war was worth it. We’ve lost almost as many citizens as died on 9/11 and had far more families destroyed. Substantially more Iraqi citizens died in the last year than died under any given year under S.H. and the infrasturcture of the country is in worse shape. Fear of oppression has been replaced by fear of civil war. But the clock hasn’t stopped and Iraqis do have something they didn’t have before: hope. Every American who cares about freedom, democracy, and national security should share in the hope that one year from now the insurgency has been quelled, Iraqi battalions are combat ready, the Iraqi government is self sufficient and running smoothly. If so, many will say we’ve won, but the clock still will not have stopped.

The truth is that we have shoehorned democracy into an area where it has not historically taken root. What if, after five years, Sunnis are feeling marginalized and plunge the country into a civil war destroying everything they are currently building? What if it happens in 10 years? Every American should believe that democracy is a cause worth dying for, but can anyone say just what the tradeoff is? Is 5,000 deaths worth 5 years of freedom? 10 years?

Anybody; liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican, who tries to claim victory or defeat in this within the next few years is kidding themselves. (Sadly the only way we can have a definitive answer is if we cut and run and let the country to go to hell). Only history will tell whether this war was a success.

Last thought - here’s what our President should have said: “We went to war due to mistakes. We thought Iraq was a threat to our national security and clearly it wasn’t. But now that we are at war we have a chance to turn this error into something positive. Saddam Hussain was a terrible, cruel, tyrant and, with our country providing temporary support, his people can have a much better future without him.”

or something like that.

IF the Chimp can admit a mistake as Adverbal says, which we all know that he will never do, then we will be better off than we are now. If he can learn from his mistakes, also never gonna happen, well what a glorious day that would be.

What republicans just can’t seem to COMPREHEND is Iraq has NOTHING to do with 9-11…Why arn’t repugs screaming for Bin Ladens head? He was head of 9-11, not Saddam…bunch of stupid friggin lemmings…tell them Bush’s shits gold and they lap it up!
I still don’t understand of how/why the republicans are all gung ho for wars, and yet they won’t fight or have military sign up drives to go fight for their holy god they call Boosh…
Republicans show more and more everyday, they are the true party of CHICKENHAWKS!
Go run repugs…bird flu is coming to get YOU!

Lisa:

The connection between 9/11 and Iraq is indirect. The suicide bombers from 9/11 were mostly Saudis. Suicide bombing is only carried out to remove occupation combat forces from native lands. 9/11 was and attempt to have the US remove it’s forces from the Persian Gulf.

Why were our forces on Arab land to begin with? To protect Saudi oil from Iraq and enforce UN resolutions with regard to Iraq such as the no fly zone. If Sadaam were not in power, the US would not have needed forces in the Persian Gulf region, and suicide bombers would not have targeted the United States.

If we had only gone into Afghanistan, the reason for 9/11 would still exist. Aqaeda could be eliminated, and a new terrorist group would simply spring up and take their place because US troops on Arab soil is a big no no.

The only answer is to remove Sadaam from power and put in it’s place a peaceful government. This had been the policy of the United States since Clinton signed a bill that was passed by Congress in his term. The bill Clinton signed made it the official US policy to change regimes in Iraq. The bill prohibited the use of armed forces. After 9/11 President Bush authorized the armed forces to enforce the Clinton policy.

Should a peaceful Iraq come out of this, the US hopefully can remove it’s troops to the pre 1991 level and we should be safer from a threat of suicide bombings in the future. This is safer because pre 1991 levels of troops were carried on ships.

In the end it is all about protecting the free flow of oil.

Unless you have a better explaination as to why the suicide bombers were Saudis. But if you look at suicide terrorism across the globe you will find, it is a military tactic to rid lands of occupying combat troops of a democratic society of a different religion.

Craig

Craig,
If the suicide bombers were Saudies, how did the Iraqi citizens get to be the lucky ones we kill?

We have already spent almost 3 BILLION dollars…
How come Republicans DON’T care about their kids/grandkids future? Don’t give me that they are safer now bullshit, if anything, Bush has made usa alot more ENEMIES and has ensured they are not only going to pay for his stupidity, they will also be in fear for the rest of their lives…

Your words….
Why were our forces on Arab land to begin with? To protect Saudi oil from Iraq…

Tell Cindy and the other 2000 families they lost their kids to protect Saudi’s, you know, the ones who are terrorists…

Republicans are such lemmings!

Going into Iraq may have been based upon false causes, but now our intentions are good, we are helping them to establish a democratice government. They are on their way to being a democratic nation. I am not saying that this will happen over night, but as they say all good things come in time. Also once Iraq is able to support themselves with their own government, that will give us a friend in the middle east and area that we are definately lacking in the friend department.

Gosh, who are we to ‘save’ next?

Cost of War calculator is set to reach $204.6 billion at the end of fiscal year 2005 (September 30, 2005)

We most certainly can afford to save the world, eh!

Hmmmm….lets see…who else has oil that we crave? Ahhhh, Saudi Arbia…time to bomb the Saudi’s…cuz Bush can just say…gosh, I got more bad intelligence…heh, heh!

Whether Bush knowlingly lied or truly fell victim to bad intelligence…

Lets give him more chances to lie or be stupid enough (again) to trust ‘bad intelligence’ MANY INNOCENT HUMANS HAVE DIED BECAUSE THE PINHEAD CAN’T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REALITY AND ‘BAD INTELLIGENCE’

Like I said…tell a Republican Bush shits gold and they lap it up…gosh our god shits gold…

The interesting thing - again - is how so many resort to name calling so quickly. I ask people to put their predictions of the future where their predictions of the past are, and we get all sorts of misguided passion. I have always believed that the resport to anger and name calling indicates that the person has no logical argument to make. That is still true.

At least Aldous went on the record without name calling.

Prediction?

Crystal ball is cloudy. Why? Too many major domestic developments in the near term can dramatically affect the situation in Iraq a year from now.

Indictments this Fitzmas day could result in the resignation of Cheney or nothing whatsoever. Withdrawal of the Miers nomination could cause enormous loss of face for the Bush administration.

Saber rattling games with Syria and/or Iran could get out of hand, and result in another war. There could be a very intentional provocation. This eventuality becomes more likely the worse the domestic situation becomes.

Remove those obscuring mists from the crystal ball, and…

Since 2004 I’ve been predicting economic recession next year, summer or fall time frame. I’ll stick with that prediction.

The domestic economic downturn, critical military manpower shortages, and an upcoming midterm election, will combine to provide motivation for the US to substantially draw down troops beginning late spring 2006.

Iraqi elections this winter will result an overwhelming SCIRI victory, a consolidation of their power, and a crowning achievement for Iranian foreign policy. Al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army, caught between unfriendly Sunnis and the Hakim clan’s control of the government reins, will find themselves in the process of being slowly absorbed by SCIRI.

The US & SCIRI will coordinate announcement of the US withdrawal. It will be presented to the US audience as a victory. Saddam Hussein will have been removed from power, and, by this time next year, executed. An Iraqi democracy will be in place. The US can save face, declare victory, and go home.

The Baathists/secularists/Sunnis and foreign jihadists will continue their fight against the Shias.

We wanted a democracy in Iraq. We’ll have one. The ruling Shias will push for US withdrawal, including permanent US military bases. It may take more than a year for the Shias to ramp up their military- the police and what little Iraqi Army exists are already predominantly Shia organizations- but eventually the Shias will use the police, Iraqi Army, and Badr Brigades to settle scores with the Sunnis.

It will be a thoroughly nasty piece of work. There won’t be pitched battles between set armies; the civil war will take the form of midnight arrests, assassinations, mass executions, etc.

And as long as we’re putting predictions out there for all to see…

There will be no major terror attacks in the continental US in the next year.

An increasing realization among Americans will develop: The War on Terror ended on a military scale at Tora Bora; as an intelligence/Special Forces operation, it ended with the capture of Sheik Mohammed Khalid in Pakistan.

OBL & Zawahiri, however, will remain at large. While unable to participate in planning or operations, their words will continue to incite wannabe nutjobs around the world.

In a moment resembling a scene from the movie “The Godfather,” in which Vito Corleone slaps Johnny Fontaine and admonishes him to ‘be a man,’ the conservatives will overcome their War on Terror fears, and rediscover their manhood. The metaphorical slap will come with the midterm elections-

possibly administered by… who else?

Dean.

Get real, of course we will be in Iraq, We are still in Germany, Japan, Korea, and Kosovo arent we. What is so much different being in Iraq. I hope and pray we stay there to keep the radicals coming to be killed. Wake up and smell the roses, WE ARE IN WORLD WAR THREE and remember what OUR GREAT PRESIDENT SAID. THIS WAR WILL BE A LONG ONE AND WE MUST STAY THE COURSE. SO GET ACCUSTOMED TO US BEING IN IRAQ. BETTER THAT THAN THEY BEING HERE BLOWING UP YOUR LOVED ONES.

GET OFF OF BUSH’S BACK AND BACK HIM HE ONE OF THE GREATEST PRESIDENTS IN MY LIFE TIME AND I AM 74 YEARS OLD. HE HAD THE GUTS TO DO SOMETHING INSTEAD OF GOING ALONG WITH THE RADICALS LIKE TRICKY DICKEY CLINTON DID FOR 8 YEARS.

I HATE TO SEE ANYONE DIE, BUT DIEING TO PROTECT YOUR LOVED ONES AND THIS COUNTRY IS A GREAT CAUSE. YES, I SPENT 14 MONTHS IN COMBAT IN KOREA AND WOULD GO BACK NOW TO KEEP THEM FROM TAKING OVER THIS COUNTRY.

DON’T YOU PEOPLE REALIZE WHAT IS HAPPENING, THE COMMUNEST IS TRYING TO TAKE THIS COUNTRY OVER THROUGH THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND THEY WILL IF THIS COUNTRY LISTENS TO ALL THE BLEEDING HEARTS CRYING WE SHOULD NOT BE IN IRAQ. WE HAVE THE WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION IN JAIL AND GOING ON TRIAL.

BY THE WAY, I AM ASHAMED TO BE CALLED A DEMOCRAT.

Two stories I came across today add another dimension to this discussion. It seems that in much the same way that drowning swimmers sometimes kick and fight their rescuers, a substantial percentage of Iraqis believe that attacks on US and UK forces are justified **

Further, as this article points out, there is growing consesnus that even if democracy does flourish in Iraq it may not diminish terrorism.

So I put the question out there - If, at whatever future point you want to set as a benchmark, Iraq is a self reliant, fully functioning democracy but still harbors extreme anti-western sentiment and is a breeding ground for terror - will it have been worth it? In other words, if Iraqis are much better off but our country is no safer, will our sacrifice have been justified?

**re: the drowning swimmer analogy - I realize some will object to my use of the term rescuer and say it was us who threw them into the water in the first place. That may be so, but it’s irrelevent. The fact is right now they are dependent upon us for their survival and if they succeed in driving us out thier nation will dissolve into chaos.

Craig,
It sounds likie you are saying a butterfly flaps its wings in Iraq and a Republican launches a smart bomb in Washington. Of course Iraq is INDIRECTLY related to 9-11. Ask any Buddist - all is oneness. If Bush the Second had done the job in Afganistan instead of outsourcing the job to a bunch of warlords who been comrads in arms with Bin laden against the Soviets, then he could have demoralized the Wahabist Islamist and significantly reduced the threat against us the U.S. Instead he encouraged the Wahabist and let them know that they can stand up to the U.S. and get away with it. If the Republicans had not crippled the Clinton Presidency with their obsession about whether Clinton got his cigar licked and then turned a blind eye to treason in the Bush White House… But that is history… elections have consequences… Americans are getting the government they deserve.

There are two of us Rays posting here. I changed mine to Ray G.

I agree that a year from now liberals will still refuse to see anything postitive at all in Iraq regardless of what happens. On the other hand, Republicans will still refuse to acknowlege that we went into Iraq under false pretenses

This is a generalization but is likely to be true in its broad strokes. Still, around the edges, there are plenty of moderates and liberals who badly want to see positive developments in Iraq and there are clear-sighted conservatives who already admit the nation was misled into a war, whether for good or bad reasons.

The domestic economic downturn, critical military manpower shortages, and an upcoming midterm election, will combine to provide motivation for the US to substantially draw down troops beginning late spring 2006.

This seems fairly likely to me as well, though I’m not sure about the economic downturn. We need to be careful to withdraw for the right reasons and not for strictly political ones.

eventually the Shias will use the police, Iraqi Army, and Badr Brigades to settle scores with the Sunnis.

Seems likely and will impede progress on other fronts.

There will be 272,000 Iraqi Security Forces, who will do most of the day-to-day security in place of U.S. and coalition troops.

Thanks for the specifics, Jack. One problem with the security forces numbers is that it’s hard to get an accurate count. Still, if they’re doing most of the day-to-day security and aren’t just militia groups, then that’ll be real progress.

Jack,

Your post is redundant. Bush’s teleconference with the GI’s last week firmly established that the good guys are indeed winning. I mean, if the well-rehearsed GIs said it, it’s GOTTA be true. Right?

Isn’t it ironic that we’re all debating the victory of a war based on what MIGHT happen a year down the road instead of what HAS been happening these past two years? Apparently, hope has become a new military strategy.

Jack,

I hope you’re right that in one year’s time the situation on the ground will have vastly improved and Iraq will finally be functioning as a democracy. I can only speak for myself, but I always hope for good results regardless of whether they buoy the arguments for “my side” or not.

When we attacked Iraq I was convinced it was a terrible mistake and the wrong method for removing Saddam (which I did believe ought to happen), but I sure was hoping we would find those WMDs and quickly. Otherwise the ill will generated toward America would be huge - and indeed that turned out to be the case.

I hoped we would be greeted as liberators.

I hoped we would be able to quickly train Iraqi security forces and get out quickly.

I hoped that we would welcome more foreign nations in the effort to secure Iraq.

I hoped that we would capture Osama bin Laden and Zarqawi and bring them to justice.

Had all of these things come to pass I would have been happy for them, but I still would have thought the war in Iraq was a mistake and the wrong way to accomplish a worthy mission. Still too many innocents would have died, too much depleted Uranium would have littered the Iraqi landscape, and too much dishonesty would have tainted the effort.

But the naivete of the neocons (and I AM talking about the Project for the New American Century crowd), has been pretty thoroughly exposed, and as Adverbal so aptly pointed out:

While I applaud the idea of asking people to put their predictions on the record, let’s not get too comfy with the idea that one year from now means anything.

Every American should believe that democracy is a cause worth dying for, but can anyone say just what the tradeoff is? Is 5,000 deaths worth 5 years of freedom? 10 years?

I agree with you Jack that resorting to name calling does nothing to further one’s argument, whether the epithets are deserved or not, but name callers abound on both sides of any debate, they don’t lend credence to their opponents any more than they do to their own side.

Some liberals, not me, do wish for bad news. Some conservatives do the same sort of wishing when the shoe is on the other foot. But what people wish for is irrelevant to what makes the best policy. I can’t pretend to predict what 1 year, or 5 years, or 100 years will bring in terms of what forces will prevail in this world. There are simply too many variables. One prediction I WILL make is that history will not judge George W Bush kindly. His presidency is already a disaster, regardless of what transpires in the Middle East in the coming decade. There WAS a better way than escalating violence and alienating those who should be our allies.

Hey Grandpa Walter

Your one confused lil fella ain’t cha?

You say:
GET OFF OF BUSH’S BACK AND BACK HIM HE ONE OF THE GREATEST PRESIDENTS IN MY LIFE TIME AND I AM 74 YEARS OLD. HE HAD THE GUTS TO DO SOMETHING INSTEAD OF GOING ALONG WITH THE RADICALS LIKE TRICKY DICKEY CLINTON DID FOR 8 YEARS.

(HE TOOK A HUGE SURPLUS & MADE IT INTO A DEFIECT THAT OUR KIDS & GRANDKIDS & GREAT GRANDKIDS WILL BE PAYING FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES…NOW THATS DOING SOMETHING FOR THE FUTURE, EH GRANDPA?)

And then say:
BY THE WAY, I AM ASHAMED TO BE CALLED A DEMOCRAT.

By sucking up to the monkeys balls, your a REPUBLICAN! Shows how stupid Republicans are,
they don’t even know who they are!

By the way, the military has lowered its enlistment standards…they WILL take you…
join tomorrow since your so gung ho on killing innocent woman & children.
Chickenhawks love getting their daily death reports…makes em feel
so chickenly!

Lisa you seem to be a very stubborn person who only see things your way and does not want to see it any other way, Lets say we did not go into Iraq, hey we would not have spent soo much money, but we most likely would have gotten bombed again. Most likely Saddam was in it with Bin Laden so you can believe what ever you want. If we did not go into Iraq then more American civilian lives would have been lost on American soil. So whether you choose to see this or not is up to you

Poll shows Iraqis back attacks on US, UK forces

Sat Oct 22,

Forty-five percent of Iraqis believe attacks on U.S. and British troops are justified, according to a secret poll said to have been commissioned by British defense leaders and cited by The Sunday Telegraph.

Less than 1 percent of those polled believed that the forces were responsible for any improvement in security, according to poll figures.

Eighty-two percent of those polled said they were “strongly opposed” to the presence of the troops.

YUP…CHENEY’S RIGHT…THEY ARE GREETING US WITH FLOWERS AND SO HAPPY TO BE LIBERATED BY GETTING KILLED FROM USA BOMBING!

But we most likely would have gotten bombed again. Most likely Saddam was in it with Bin Laden so you can believe what ever you want.

Dude, you have got to stop watching Faux news!
There is NO evidence what so ever Saddam was with Bin! Thats as real a fact as Saddams WMD!
So your saying…its ok to kill/seriously injure
100’s of children in Iraq? Face reality…
Boosh is creating terrorists! He is creating more anger and hatred and yes, that will create bombing in the USA to your kids and grandkids in their lifetimes BECAUSE of Boosh…wake up…please?

Wait till this week is over…Boosh & Co. WILL be busted for their lies and the Republicans are going to see how gulliable they were for ‘believing Boosh’s lies’ Where’s your outrage of the war killing 2000 more Americans?

SO what your saying is that the men and women who gave their lives died for no reason. Oh yeah and if that poll is so accuarte then why is it such a big secret, a secret poll I am starting to wonder if you are reading the National Enquiere. Yuo have no idea what is going on over there, its real easy for you to just sit here typing bullshit and making fun of the president, and what if Kerry won the election every country would love us? You bullshit, Kerry would have pulled out of Iraq in a heartbeat, and we would be seen as weak and be an even bigger target to terrorists. So let me know what else they write about the war in the very accurate national enquirer

“Jack, Your post is redundant. Bush’s teleconference with the GI’s last week firmly established that the good guys are indeed winning. I mean, if the well-rehearsed GIs said it, it’s GOTTA be true. Right?”

You know what’s so funny about the media’s response to that teleconference is they focused on the negatives and conspiracies of that event rather than what the troops were saying. The President asked the same questions that were spread around by the media and the anti-Bush groups (Iraqi’s don’t want there country, are they being trained, the morale of the US troops, etc.). The media has been lying to the American public about these issues and the troops, the same troops that the liberals “support” (yeah right). It was a good thing to listen to the troops respond, rather than the President or his Administration.

And yet, the media just wouldn’t listen to them, just like they didn’t want to listen to them in the 2000 election when the military ballots were thrown out in Florida; just like when they volunteered to enlist after 9/11 and the Iraq war; just like when they said there was no desecration of the Koran at Gitmo; and, of course, just like when they voted for this president (4 to 1) in 2004, even with all the hateful things said about this President.

That’s it media, keep up the lies, laziness, incompetence and divisiveness like you’ve been doing. We’re smarter than you and we won’t let you get away with this; at least the people who are smart and not hateful will, anyway.

you seem like the type of person who will always complain about what the president is doing or should be doing not matter who would be in office, whether it was kerry or bush, or anyone you would probually find the bad in everyone, and who are you to say that there was no connection between Saddam and Bin laden, we know its true that other countries are helping bin laden, whos to say he was not?

More predictions from the one and only Sicilian Eagle:

1.Syria will finally relent and disclose the locations of Iraqi fugitives in return for being let up off the ground over the Lebanon assassination.

2.Iran will relent due to combined EU-USA pressure and some type of comprimise will occur over their nuclear program.

3.North Korea will make significant movement as South Korea begins to take the lead.

4.Japan will have its supersonic airplane get past the development stage that will take air travelling to a new era.

5.The bird flu will eventually get to the USA but we will get a handle on it.

6.FEMA,after the NOLA embarrassment,gets its act together and learns something from the nightmare.

7.The Fed,with its new chairman, will raise interest rates thru the end of the second Q 2006.

8.Both McCain and Guilliani announce.

9.Kerry,Edwards
and Blyth announce.Hillary wavers because of the Able-Baker thing.

10.Stephen Donahue,AP,Burt,Siegal,ElliotBay,Lisa,Mister Magoo all have ephifanies and swing to the right is a mass outing.In disgust,David Reamer puts yet another addition on his west Texas home and calls it Shangri La

I do not think ANYONE is winning in Iraq =/

Drew, how would you respond to this claim:

“Who are you to say that there was no connection between Global Warming and Hurricane Katrina, we know its true that Global Warming causes Hurricanes, who’s to say it didn’t cause Katrina?

Now, given that this is true, we should spend $200+ billion and risk thousands of lives to ensure another disaster doesn’t happen, because it surely will.”

Since my baseball predictions sucked, I’ll try again.

I predict that one year from today, Republicans will still be predicting how great things will be in another year.

-Burt

No not the National Enquirer…
but yahoo news AND the British The Sunday Telegraph.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051022/ts_nm/iraq_britain_dc

Its not a secret poll, just turn away from Boosh/Faux news and get the REAL news!

Christ, they would be gung ho if Bill O’Reily ran for president and Anny Coulter for his VP!

“Kerry would have pulled out of Iraq in a heartbeat, and we would be seen as weak and be an even bigger target to terrorists”.

AS TO BUSH MAKING TERRORIST TO LAST YOUR KIDS THEIR LIFETIME? DUDE…VIOLENCE DOES NOT STOP VIOLENCE…IT ONLY CREATES MORE HATRED (FOR USA)

AND GOD SAID…BEHOLD ONTO YOU REPUBLICANS…
FOR YOU SHALL BE THE POLICE OF THE WORLD…

AS TO NATIONAL ENQUIRER…They say Mista Boosh is hitting the ol bottle again…suddenly everything makes $$$ sense now! (Notice how the republicans didn’t outcry the boosh drinking stories! Even NY Times ran them! And you know NY Times is republican)

we know its true that other countries are helping bin laden, whos to say he was not? (Saddam)
Cuz he said he wasnt’ and if he was…you know he’d be PROUD to be associated with the 9-11 job…

Adverbially,
“So I put the question out there - If, at whatever future point you want to set as a benchmark, Iraq is a self reliant, fully functioning democracy but still harbors extreme anti-western sentiment and is a breeding ground for terror - will it have been worth it?”

Well said. It’s the issue at the heart of the matter for the Bush administration Middle East policy.

Curiously absent from this threead is the issue of Israel. Well, let that be for now… to answer the question: will it have been worth it?

In the long run, and by this, I mean decades, yes, it will be worth it. Democratic regimes will do a better job of providing opportunities for freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Representative democracies will undermine the religious insanities behind fundamentalism in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Yes, Israel. Until we recognize the same forces at work there as at work in the rest of the region, we’ll never make progress.

Globalization and technology will do their work, peacefully, but it will take a looooong time.

The problem with the Bush administration MIddle East policy & vision is twofold: 1) the time frame is impractically long to implement this liberal, progressive vision for the Middle East, and 2) transitioning authoritarian Middle East governments by force simply doesn’t work. It creates more resentment than amicable progress.

Furthermore, a mercantilist approach by democracies, a colonialist competition for fixed raw resources such as oil & water, could fuel conflict between democracies despite their shared political ideals.

AND GOD SAID…BEHOLD ONTO YOU REPUBLICANS…
FOR YOU SHALL BE THE POLICE OF THE WORLD…

Spend all the money it takes…
Kill at the people it takes…
For you are my killer Christians

Republicans are against abortions
yet are for killing Iraqi kids
and pregnant woman…
Go figure!

Walter Flatt
Thankyou for serving the greatest country on earth. Your service and sacrifice is GREATLY appreciated by my wife and me.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/09/us-soldiers-allegedly-trading-pictures.html

And now Mr. Brown you can repay Mr. Flatt by joining the Republican military
and fight/kill those bad woman and kids in Iraq, after all…they are terra-rists…
who are going to bomb your grandchildren in the future…

Run chickens…run…bird flu is coming to getcha!

Another “National Enquirer” article of that
Iraqi Poll…Hmmmm…just where are those flowers?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/23/ixportaltop.html

I find it difficult to understand why we forget (intentionally or not) that at the beginning of the war, Bush stated it was going to be a long war. Not quick but long. The American fast food mentality is that if we can’t have our Mac-war in the same time frame as our MacDonald’s hamburger, it simply isn’t good enough.

Of course all Americans on this post get to enjoy and take for granted the freedoms that other people paid for with their lives. We have no real understanding of struggle because of the lack of liberty. Very few Americans even understand real sacrifice (other than the real men and women of this country who serve for the benefit of the rest of us - even the idiots of this country). We get to sit on this chat board and throw biased BS opinions back and forth to each other like we really understand this stuff.

In reality, none of us understand what it is like to live under a dictator who slaughtered over 200,000 innocent people. Where there is no freedom to disagree without loss of life. Where there is no real education or basic facilities of modern life.

The people of Iraq and the rest of the world will appreciate in time what freedom and liberty brings with it. Our own freedom didn’t happen in a year either in the first war (American Revolution) or the second (Civil War). Ultimately, Afghanistan and Iraq will be the catalyst for change for the good in the most depressing area of the world that for decades has only produced (other than oil) terrorists in any quantity for its contribution to the world. 911 taught us that. How quickly so many of us forget.

So, for those of you who feel that we should have continued to let terrorism reign on the world and continue for the next targets in the US, keep espousing your “we made a mistake by going to war on those who want to kill us.” Is your ego being so easily bruised really worth allowing terrorism to grow and more of our own innocent people getting killed here and abroad? Are you that ignorant of what has been happening in the Middle East for decades and what it has built up to? Is either your party affiliation or your hatred of an elected official so intense, that you throw intelligence and reason out the window just to shore your own opinion?

Oh and let’s remember, we did not start this war. So keep on with your bias BS like you know what real struggle is about and what is right for people who have no freedom, no liberty, no modern conveniences of life, no hope for a future, and a dictator or religious fascist group who will severely punish you without much thought for wanting and striving for any of these things.

Scott I totally agree with you, and anyone who disagrees with that is very self centered and does not care what happens in other peoples lives jsut in their own life.

Scott & Drew,

“Oh and let’s remember, we did not start this war.”

Oh, yes we did. We invaded Iraq. Remember?

If you’d like to go further back in history, you might look into the creation of the nation of Iraq, or oil companies’ Red Line of 1928.the Red Line Agreement.

The Red Line agreement “. . is an outstanding example of a restrictive combination for the control of a large portion of the world’s supply by a group of companies which together dominate the world market for this commodity.” In a confidential memorandum, the French described the objectives of the agreement: “The execution of the Red Line Agreement marked the beginning of a long-term plan for the world control and distribution of oil in the Near East.”

You write:
“… At the beginning of the war, Bush stated it was going to be a long war. Not quick but long.”

Tsk, tsk. How quickly we forget the declared end of major military operations, and “Mission Accomplished!”

Never mind. Refuting this kind of thing is waste of time. Do some reading. Please.

” So, for those of you who feel that we should have continued to let terrorism reign on the world…”

So many conservatives have been utterly unmanned by the fear mongering of the Bush administration. Truly, I pity such people. I encourage those poor people, crippled by fear, to come out of their shell-shocked paranoid, xenophobic shells, and look around.

It’s ok. Really, it’s ok. Smile. There are no Iraqi terrorists lurking outside your doors. None in your neighborhood. Never have been.

Tiptoe out to the street in front of your houses, and look up and down the avenue. No Iraqi terrorists in sight. Feeling better yet?

Go to work. Look around the workplace. Check the closets. Check the basement. No Iraqi terrorists there either.

It’s ok. Relax.

Fitzgerald has a possible 22 indictments THIS WEEK!
Christmas comes early this year boys & girls!!!

The truth will now come out…
The lies to start the Iraqi war
will come out…

Reports are coming out that the White House
is preeeeetttty nervous about this upcoming week…

Just hope Bush doesn’t mix his
anti-depressents with ol Jack Daniels!

“If we do have a good outcome, 100% of the credit belongs to the courageous American soldiers and to the noble intentions of the American people who may win this in spite of President King George the Second.”

Ray- 10/22/05

Amen to that…

Personally, I am tired of people saying a person is anti-American if they don’t drool over Dubya. I support our troops to the fullest, but I do not support them being used as mere numbers and fodder by the powers that be.

I believe our country would be in terrible trouble if our leaders themselves had to physically duke it out with other world leaders… We certainly wouldn’t be a “super-power” if disputes were settled in this way.

MJShaw

In general, I do not doubt the patriotism of conservatives, or their devotion to the same ideals as moderates and liberals. It’s not always obvious, but we agree on far more than we disagree. Always have.

The difference of late has come about because of 9/11 and Iraq.

My point? We’re foolish to determine our foreign relations & foreign policy based upon 9/11 and terrorism. It should be obvious to any unbiased observer that neither 9/11 nor terrorism present enough of a concern for us to make them the cornerstone of relations & policy.

Most Americans approved of the Bush administration & the invasion of Afghanistan.

The wheels came off with the invasion of Iraq.

Now we find our policies and relations driven by fear.

Time for conservatives, as well as moderates and liberals, to act with confidence. Time to size up our fears, recognize them for what they are, assign them their proper proportion, and believe in the rightness of what we represent. Our strengths dwarf our weaknesses. Our strengths completely and utterly dwarf our vulnerabilities to terrorists.

What we represent does not depend upon oil or military force to prevail.

Bush wants urgent U.N. meeting on Syria.
Got to Grab Those Headlines Away from TreasonGate!

Chickenhawks now want to bomb Syria?
Time to ENLIST Republicans…
more terra-rists gotta be taken care of!

Scott wrote: “at the beginning of the war, Bush stated it was going to be a long war.”

That’s what Bush said about the war on terror NOT about Operation Iraqi Freedom.

I distinctly remember the administration making statements to the effect that the conflict in Iraq would take, oh possibly 6 months to a year. Not to mention the whole “greeted as liberators” nonesense. Not to mention (as phx8 already did) “mission accomplished.”

We can argue whether or not the war in Iraq is even part of the war on terror. The problem is that if we begin to believe that the war in Iraq IS the war on terrorism (as is implied in your comment) then we risk diverting our attention and our resources from legitimate risks.

Mr.Walter Flatt thank you and well said. lisa you still have your Kerry bumber sticker on your honda civic next to your gay pride flag? just keep on sending your money to move on.org and you will still be just as big a looser next year as you are now. you and your kind will never stop freedom it does not matter how many have to die on any one given side you can’t kill freedom you can’t get it over till you get it on and we are just starting to get it on. millions are yet to die on all sides. are you willing to die for your side? the wars will drag on for many years to come and we will see WMD’S you and your kind say were a lie kill americans and freedom loveing people around the world and thats when people like me truley really deal with people like you.

phx8,

You’re right on about the cowardice of the right. They are so overwhelmingly frightened of the boogey-man, that they really believe they need to send other people’s kids to die - like lambs to the slaughter - so that they won’t be exposed. It’s flat out pathetic.

This would be OK if their fear actually made them do the right thing to combat terror. But it’s unfortunately just the opposite. They’re weak-kneed, weak-willed, and weak on terrorism as a result.

Forget about terrorism? Not the democrats. It’s those on the right who have forgotten who is responsible for 9/11 and refuse to do what is necessary to bring them to justice.

Burt,
Yes. Isn’t it interesting how the War on Terror and the Occupation of Iraq become confused? Amid all the talk of Iraq, the subject of Al Qaida and OBL rarely come up. We’re all quite sure we won’t find OBL or Zawahiri in Iraq.

But to return to the topic of fear, and the War on Terror…

Recently, an innocent human being was killed by a shark of the California shore.

In fact, more civilians have been killed in the US by sharks than terrorists in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. Should we declare a War on Sharks? Should we drop carpet bomb the shores of countries harboring sharks with depth charges? After all, shark attacks are terrifying.

Of course, it’s silly. We recognize the existence of sharks, and as awful as it may be, we rationally accept and expect a few people to be killed by sharks every year.

By the same token, our fear of terrorists should be proportional to the threat.

If one shark ate a dozen people, it would be reasonable to pursue that particular shark.

And so we should pursue OBL, as a matter of revenge, as a matter of justice, as a way of preventing his inspiring other wackos.

And so, once again, I invite Bush supporters to turn their backs on fear. “Fear is the mind killer,” as Frank Herbert once wrote. Conservatives, gird your loins, take a deep breath, and rejoin the rest of us.

There’s so much to do. Let’s stop wasting time, and devote our energies to issues that matter.

My you said that well…angry white man!

I actually have my “Impeach Bush” sticker on my
Dodge pickup truck. As for gay pride flag…yup, I’m all for FREEDOM of CHOICE…funny how the republicans hate gays and yet they masterbate to lesbians!

You say we will see WMD…yeh…A really stupid man who can’t tell fantasy from reality has them…his name is Mista Boosh…

As for freedom…it will come as soon as this week! Indictments are to be handed out to alot of Republicans…feels like xmas to me!

And…why in the world are YOU still here in USA? You should be in Iraq fighting your war! Chickenhawk!

Why aren’t Republican’s children signing up for military service in droves to help Jack’s predictions become a reality?

Why aren’t the children of America in gerneral signing up? Afterall, the American people back this war despite what the liberally biased polls indicate.

Lisa,

Why, oh why, did you respond to that? Don’t you know when you’re being baited? The only way we can ever raise the level of discourse is if we refuse to respond to or even acknowledge pointless posts that are written more to get a reaction then to actually state any kind of meaningful point.

As a side note, I would like to point out to anyone who cares that A) you can preview your writing before you post it and B) the Google toolbar has a spellcheck feature that you can use for this or other message boards and forms.

I’m not above a typo here or there, but shouldn’t we draw the line somewhere? I mean it’s one thing to have someone who is clearly ignorant have his/her writing reflect that, but there are some insightful, well thought-out posts above that are downright hard to read because of spelling, syntax, and grammar problems.

Lisa,
Thanks for taking these chickenhawks on. It does seem odd that none of your critics have come back at you with claims about their own military service or the service of loved ones.

It is interesting how these chikenhawks whore-ship a President who dodged Vietnam and went awol, but hated a candidate who actually served in a war zone and got wounded in action. They must truly be chickenhawks… Why don’t they join the military… or send their loved ones? My daughter is a combat medic.

They keep changing the justification for the war in Iraq.

I would like to see us turn Iraq into a better place. But that was no reason to invade. I would like to see us turn the U.S. into a better place… but with this chickenhawk as commander and cheif neither of those things are going to happen.

By the way… my daughter is a combat medic… and they still don’t have enough armor in Iraq… and these idiots whore-ship this chickenhawk - Bush the Second.

Ray G.

If Bush the Second had done the job in Afganistan instead of outsourcing the job to a bunch of warlords who been comrads in arms with Bin laden against the Soviets, then he could have demoralized the Wahabist Islamist and significantly reduced the threat against us the U.S. Instead he encouraged the Wahabist and let them know that they can stand up to the U.S. and get away with it.

Let’s say you are 100% correct in this. US forces would still be in the gulf to protect the oil fields from Iraq, and another group would emerge to take us on.

Imagine if it were here in the United States and foreigners were on our soil. If one organization that was fighting them was wiped out another would emerge.

We have chosen to remove the threat to the oil fields, so we can return to our pre 1991 military positioning. Suicide bombing will continue as long as our combat troops are on arab land.

Part of the problem is the red verses blue debate on this whole thing. If Reagan would not have withdrawn the marines from Lebenon, of Bush the first would have finished the job, if Clinton would not have deployed combat troops to the region, if if if if. Or if we were were not dependent on oil from the region, 9/11 would not have happened. This is a 20 year problem.

Craig

Phx8.
Blow it out your ass, thats the problem with you liberals you are alwasy undecided and no matter who is in office you are going to have a problem with them. Do you recall the early party of the federalists, they are much like democrats of today. They only see things their way and if they do not get it then they try to worm there way into the government and try to impose their policies upon people. And how could you say the war started becasue of us? That statement is probually the dumbest I have seen on this message board. The anti-terrorist war has been going on for a number of years, in many different countries. You just neglect to relize that because this war might effect you more then the other problems did. And Saddam Hussien is not innocent no matter what you people belive he killed his own people just becasue he did not like them and that is not a very good reason, he would tocher his olympic athletes because they may have lost, so he is definetly not innocent. This war on terror has been going on for a number of years and will still be going on for a while, invading Iraq means we are one step closer to containing terrorism. You are not looking at the long term benefits, we will have a friend in the middle east, and we do not have many of them. I mean who do we ahve now? Sadui Arabia they would turn their backs on us in a heartbeat. Having Afaganistan and Iraq on our side or atleast friendly with us will definetly help us in the long run. Yes there is a huge debt that will be paid off by our children and grand children, but atleast they can live in a more peaceful world.

Ray and Lisa

The chickhawk line is very useful but logically invalid on a variety of fronts. First and foremost a person can be right about something without himself being personally involved or even virtuous in any way. It doesn’t matter who tells you 2+2=4. It is just right and your argument that this person is stupid in any other way is itself just stupid. In the classical sense, your first fallacy is called ad hominem.

Then you imply that people involved have some sort of superior morality or emotional ability to understand. That fallacy is the appeal to emotion.

You also have a simple problem in that most studies indicate that the military, especially those deployed to Iraq, are more likely to support U.S. policy than average Americans and that military voters voted more heavily for Bush.

Just so you know, I have several friends, but no close relatives serving in Iraq. My son is considering joining the Marines when he graduates from high school. I am encouraging him to do so, mostly because I think it would be a good experience for him. I won’t pretend that is not the most important consideration. I understand the political part of military better than the military part because I have studied it professionally and interviewed a lot of people about this. My expertise is not based on the suffering by me or anyone close to me. I support the policy to the extent I do because I think it is in the best interests of the United States. I regret all destruction and killing of war, even when it is my enemies who are being killed (with some individual exceptions). I understand that some of them operate from sincere (if misguided) conviction, and that some are brave and virtuous, even if I hate what they are doing. However, there are times that war or a particular war is the better alternative. You can think of me as a chickenhawk if you like. Such opinions mean little to me. If fact, I have been often be prouder of the reference to the people who don’t like me.

Jack,
The problem with calling a person a chickenhawk or dove is that it misguides the public on what the military part needs from what you call “the political part of military.”

IMO the Powell Doctrine put it PC Correct when he said go in with overwleming force, have set objectives, and an exit plan. None which was followed by President Bush and Company. Although war is never a good opition, it is necessary. Thus, once a President takes that step, he needs to be ready to deal with taking the leash off the dogs of war.

Lisa and Ray want to bash Bush for what he did and did not do as well as the lack of thinking and action required to do something right. My question to them is simple. What if anything can be done know to put the spilled milk back in the glass.

Iraq is not the problem nor is it the solution to peace in the Middle East. Yet, as one with professional political military views can you honestly say that President Bush is not fighting a civil war in Iraq to avoid having a civil war breakout in all the nations of the Middle East?

Can always tell a republican - Drew
(They have the hardest time spelling!)
I noticed that on another message board.

Once a chicken hawk always a chicken hawk…
esp. if they follow in Boosh’s footsteps.

When I totally believe in something…I JOIN
the forces and do something…example…
vegan (Which I’m not pushing here, only stating
to make a fact)
I would not say…rah rah rah, I support animals
right to life and then eat them!

Thats what chickenhawks do…rah rah rah…
we love war…as long as WE don’t have to
fight it….

IF this war is to “keep usa safe” why isn’t
ANY of Bush’s/Cheneys kids, nieces, nephews,
family friends proudly helping ‘Unka Boosh & Dickie’ fight his holy war on terra-rists?
Oh, right…
they are much to busy doing what they do best…
getting DRUNK (Just like Unka Boosh!)
The Kennedy’s all were in the military when
the war was going on…not sitting on their
million dollar porches drinking booze…
Kerry FOUGHT in the war…did Boosh?

And look how the chickenhawks do treat our
military that died for them (Cindy) They
scoff at her losing her son for their freedom!

Iraq Insurgency Shows No Signs of Slowdown
BAGHDAD, Iraq - With the grim milestone of the 2,000th U.S. military death looming in
Iraq, many wonder about the direction of the insurgency that killed most of them.

Experts think the country’s increasingly regional-oriented politics will fuel the insurgency and even spread it further inside Iraq. Others put forward a simple, disquieting scenario: So long as U.S. and other foreign troops remain in Iraq, the insurgency will continue.

“It will become more chaotic,”

BOOSH NEEDS HIS REPUBLICANS
TO GO FIGHT HIS HOLY WAR…
WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE IN USA???

Adverb,

Good point about previewing. I’ll try to do better, it’s simple courtesy. Thanks for the reminder.

Drew,

“Do you recall the early party of the federalists, they are much like democrats of today. They only see things their way…”

Yeah, those founding fathers really sucked. And shall we compare the Republicans to Whigs? Come on.

“And how could you say the war started becasue of us? That statement is probually the dumbest I have seen on this message board.”

Mmm. Need I point out our military bases are in their countries? Our multinationals exploiting their resources? Our culture assimilating their culture?

Need I point out our battles are being fought on their soil?

What made 9/11 extraordinary was that, for the first time, a terrorist landed a lucky shot within US borders, killing thousands of civilians.

What made OBL extraordinary was that, for the first time, an enemy of US policy successfully played offense, rather than defense. While his ability to affect events directly has been curtailed, his words continue to inspire other fanatics.

If I may be so bold, it would be a very good idea to concentrate on taking him down.

It’s interesting, Drew, that you managed to write your last post about the War on Terror without once mentioning OBL.

As for Saddam, before the Invasion of Iraq, US public opinion was nearly unanimous in its disapproval of him, whether liberal, moderate, or conservative. The disapproval of the US public made the policy of ‘regime change’ easy to support. Unfortunately, that disapproval never translated into support for invasion. Hence, WMD’s, Saddam & 9/11, and so on.

Long term benefits of invading Iraqa? Well, one benefit nearly absent from this thread will be the friendship of the Kurds. Regardless of what happens elsewhere, that counts as a positive, a win.

Lisa

Thanks for the confirmation, even if you didn’t intend it or know you did it.

Yeah sorry about not spelling correctly and just to let you people know that you are fighting with a 15 year old, I am only 15, so you can give me a little credit considering that I do have a plauseable argument. Whether I agree with you or not does not make me a bad person or a good person. Different people have different beliefs, and thats a little stereo typing on your part by accusing all Republicans of being poor spellers, maybe its just us 15 yr old republicans. I just thought I would let you guys know thaT I may be young but I do stand strongly with my beliefs and I do understand where you are coming from which is probually more then I could say for most of you adults on this board.

Lisa,
“we know its true that other countries are helping bin laden, whos to say he was not? (Saddam)
Cuz he said he wasnt’ and if he was…you know he’d be PROUD to be associated with the 9-11 job…
“

“Cuz he said he wasn’t?!” You’re taking the word of a malevolent dictator now?! Geezz!! That’s digusting! The reason we went to war is b/c he had WMD’s (in the 80’s), along with a cease fire agreement from the Gulf War in 1991 (when we b*tch slapped his butt out of Kuwait), 17 U.N. sanctions he defied and the infamous words that Saddam ignored: “Disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences”. Well he didn’t and thank goodness we have a President that won’t just make accusations and not act on them.

And this goes back to what I’ve been saying for a while now, the WMD’s and why we went to war is not the issue anymore; except for the anti-war, anti-Bush and anti-American freaks. We’ve had numerous elections (counting the coalition leaders) and Bush and company have all been re-elected. That’s what democracy is all about, if you don’t like the leadership then you can vote them out. Well, it didn’t happen, even when all sides were heard. You have to be past this now.

The only thing that should be of paramount importance to you (and your anti-Bush friends) is winning this war. Period!!

And, by the way, I read your little comment about chicken hawks fighting the war so they should be in Iraq. We have an all volunteer military; the same military that voted 4 to 1 in favor of Bush. You should think before you speak. However, when people are full of hate, their not able use sound judgment and end up saying and doing disgusting things; just like the terrorists.

Figure out what side your on (ours or the terrorists) and then get on it!

well personally I agree with the opinions of Drew and scott. Why would somebody insult somedoby for a typo. its not spelling wrong if hes on a computer seeing as he probably just typed to fast, plus all you flip-flopers, pick a side and develop your opinion around it, no body likes a flip-floper…cough…John kerry…..cough

see, i made a typo, that doesnt make me stupid…..and as for the war on iraq: the reasons may appear fuzzy to some of you liberals for starting the war, but Bush was in a tight spot and most americans would have done the same. You all just complain and you are never happy with what is being done. If Kerry was elected you all would have most likely had problems with his cabinet as well, so you all should re-think your positions….we are in war and as it stands, it is justified. Bottom Line

Drew:

“Whether I agree with you or not does not make me a bad person or a good person.” Perhaps not, but writing “Phx8. Blow it out your ass,” says a lot about the kind of person you are, whether you’re 15 or 50.

As far as your being 15 (if you really are 15 - After all, I could say I’m a Scottish Belly Dancer and who could prove me wrong?), I’m not sure what your point is. You can’t sling mud around and then cry “I’m just a kid” when people throw it back. Besides, I teach kids younger than you and they all know how to use spell check.

The reasons may appear fuzzy to some of you liberals for starting the war, but Bush was in a tight spot and most americans would have done the same.

President Gore would have gone after Bin Laden
NOT start a war in Iraq!!!

The ONLY reason Boosh started his war in Iraq
is cuz that mean, bad, man tried
to kill his daddy…
WAKE UP!

Hmmmm….so if say Russia does a attack on usa soil…we get to start a fight/war in Iran?
Ok I get the logic now!

Hmmmm….so if say Russia does a attack on usa soil…we get to start a fight/war in Iran?
Ok I get the logic now!
Posted by: Lisa at October 23, 2005 10:52 PM

well first off i didnt even come close to insiuating that. Second, how do you come up with that, terrorists committed the 9-11 attacks, they were funded by Iraq, saddam is the leader of Iraq……YOU WAKE UP! ok! well as you can see if you lay it out like that a comparison of russia and iran doesnt hold piss in a tea bag, let alone water

No body likes a lier…cough…George Bush…..cough
Cough…Dick Cheney…ahhhh……ahhhhh sneeze
Condy Rice….spit out the phlem….Donny Rummy…

and lisa, might i add, you are the perfect example of a true liberal: one minded, not willing to listen and an excuse maker…..WAKE UP!!!! (you can insult bush as much as you want, but guess what….your sitting at home, complaining about the past, while he is leading the greatest country in the world! sorry to inform you but,your just a few steps down on the social ladder; behind bush and republicans!)

I take the comments about proofreading from Adverbal as applying more towards me than others. I won’t go into personal details, but in terms of background, I really don’t have an excuse.

Drew,
You deserve credit for intelligence & articulation beyond your years, no doubt; but no fair using age as a cop-out when it comes to arguing an idea. As a substitute for experience, use links to cite articles to back up ideas.

Question authority, and never trust anyone over 30… er, wait. Make that 48.

Lisa,

I answered your question “why isn’t Bush/Cheneys kids fighting in war”, it’s because we HAVE AN ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARY!! Sigh on that. They are courageous and deserve better than you filling up this blog bashing their commander in chief (whom they voted for overwhelmingly in 2004). And, don’t think I didn’t notice you ducking that response from my previous article, by the way.

You’re not on the US side if you think Bush & Cheney are bigger terrorists than our enemies. That’s the problem with the anti-Bush/War/Americans, you think you are courageous, and yet you’re not even close. In fact, you are a bunch of cowards. Let me explain.

Courage is our Founding Fathers (you probably hate them too, only remembering the bad and not the great things) signing a declaration of independence; which back then was a declaration of death with the big, bad English Army. And, how about the Afghanistan and Iraqi people going to the polling stations admidst terror threats, now that’s courage. Mouthing off to your leaders, who are taking on disgusting, despotic regimes, in a country where your speech (even hateful speeches) is protected, that’s not courageous. Also, you know you’re going to get publicity from this liberally biased media (there cowards too by the way).

So, once again, figure what side you’re on and get on it…

Lisa:

Ok I get the logic now!
Posted by Lisa at October 23, 2005 10:52 PM

Having read a number of your posts in this thread, I humbly submit that your statement above is inaccurate. I’m not sure what you get, but I AM sure that it has little to do with logic.

Adverbal, first off let me say how dare you insult my charcter, and unlike you think I am not a lier whether you believe it or not. All of you have no life apparently and you have the balls to talk about this stuff in here but I don’t see any of you running for president or trying to make the world a better place. At least Bush is standing up for what he belives is right and not running away from the issue because of people like you. I could care less what you think about my spelling or what you teach and that was not what I was trying to get at but yeah sure you go ahead and think that. All you people do is sit here and type away, let me ask you a simple question, what is that gonna do is it going to stop world hunger or stop the war? ,no its not soo stop bitching already, I am out

Let us not for get the food for oil that Iraq cheated on.

Let un not for get females every single day were getting rapped by the Iraqs.

So when you go to sleep at night you thank your god and you can rest that your mom or your wife has never been stripped from your arms in day light and they were killed or never found again

IT TOOK THE U.S 5 YEARS AFTER WW2 TO WEED OUT ALL THE LITTLE CHEAP GERMAN FIGHTERS AND START OVER AGAIN.

I go over there I see what is really there and the fighters from other countries hate us, but the Iraqs they want us here, and the know that in time it will be a better place. D DOG

Lisa said:

The ONLY reason Boosh started his war in Iraq
is cuz that mean, bad, man tried
to kill his daddy…
WAKE UP!

Hmmmm….so if say Russia does a attack on usa soil…we get to start a fight/war in Iran?
Ok I get the logic now!

————————————————————

Saddam tried and succeeded in killing millions of people’s daddy’s (and mommies and daughters, sons, grandparents,etc.). He’s called the Butcher of Baghdad for a reason.

As far as the second (idiotic) comment. Yes, Russia is actually siding with Iran as we speak. And, we will be in Iran soon. Now, will you be on our side or Iran’s? Are you going to make the case for the Mullahs, like you do for Saddam? Are you going to blame Bush for concocting that war since he was fifteen, like you do for IraQ?

The terrorist have been defying the worlds super powers for decades. Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton have failed when it came to terrorism. Actually, H.W Bush did kick Saddam’s sorry but out of Kuwait; however, he didn’t have the fortitude to remove Saddam.

GWB is the only President that is taking the fight to them and will not give in. Even if that means taking crap and hearing the most outrageous things from his fellow americans (well so called americans).

Lisa, you’re stuck on stupid! USA is going to win, despite you and your anti-American crap. Ha! Ha!

phx8,

“Question authority, and never trust anyone over 30… er, wait. Make that 48.”

No make that 53!

Lisa you are very wrong in just about all things you say, you are the type of person that just sits at home and thinks of things to complain about next. You need to look at he big picture, the war in Iraq is a longterm thing, and we need to stick with it. Oh yeah and by the way Gore was never really president other then in your dreams/ extensive fantasies. You are definetly a Kerry supporter I can tell how you flip flop on issues.

Some of you folks scare the hell out of me. From both sides.

Craig,
Thanks for your response to my post. I responded to your post because i thought that it was somewhat more intelligent and nuanced than most Republican posts - but still wrong. None the less it is still refreshing to see a Republican at least attempt to be nuanced. I just don’t think that you are very good at it. Of course sometimes I get a bit carried away by own rhetorical flair - so I am not always so nuanced either.

Yes Craig, you are correct, our forces would still be in the Gulf - and that would still provide impetus for jihad - defensive actions to defend Islam - like suicide bombers. But had we done the job in Afghanistan radical Islamists would be demoralized and threat would be reduced. Further more, sending even more troops to the Gulf will only convince even more Islamist that Islam is threatened and needs to be defended - so your logic is flawed.

I opposed the war in Iraq from the very start for many reasons - so many that I cannot articulate all of them here. One is that I have never liked or trusted Bush and I am not always very rational were he is concerned.

I believe that Bush has led this country in the direction of proto-fascism. Fascism - a strong word. Fascism is defined as a patriotic, nationalistic, militaristic, dictatorship with racist overtones. Well.. we certainly are not a dictatorship… but no one gets elected in this country without big money and no one gets big money without selling out. Big money owns and controls the media - mostly big Republican money - and big money buys access to the rest of it. The American people - including me - are manipulated and controlled by their access to information, i.e. the media. So how democratic are we? Yet, we are not a dictatorship, but, Bush has abridged civil liberties in name of fighting terrorism. He has refused to extend the Geneva conventions to our enemies. He has created the preconditions that has allowed torture to flourish even down to the present. He has created a military doctrine of preemption - which is tremendously destabilizing and has driven North Korea and Iran to seek the bomb. After all he did tell them they were next. So this country is certainly extremely militaristic under his leadership. We are certainly highly patriotic. We are nationalistic. We do not have overtones of racism - but we certainly do have undertones of racism. The main stream conservative right is a noble political tradition in the United States. The main stream liberal left is also a noble political tradition in this country. The extreme left is communist. The extreme right is facsist. We need to be careful about how far we go in that direction and I believe that we have already gone far to far to right in this country.

That said.

We are like Rome - a powerful military - corrupt political leadership.

I was opposed to the war from the start. Now that we are there, I believe that we need to win. I believe in winning. The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that we really do need to win in Iraq. We did not need to involve ourselves in either war. Bush lied to get us into this one and Republican Eisenhower’s domino theory came from the wrong end of a bull (well I suppose that it is better than the end that charges at you - both ends are bad). But Iraq as a haven and training ground for terrorist is unacceptable. That is what it is now. Terrorist cut their teeth in Iraq. They become seasoned combat veterans. They fight the most powerful army in the world and become immensely more powerful as a result. I do not believe that we should involve ourselves in any war unless we are willing to sacrifice tens of millions of our own and kill hundreds of millions of our enemies. Watch the movie; Enemy at the Gates. That is the level of American commitment that should exist before we ever go to war. That is missing from the Powel doctrine. Of course, by that standard we never would go to war unless it really was as a last resort.

But now that we are in Iraq we really do need to win.

The problem is this: This worthless #$^%%# dry drunk piece of $%^$## incompetent commander and chief is rapidly creating a situation where we cannot win. As listed above the American people were not adequately prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to win. The American people are losing patience with the war and will soon demand our withdrawal. We went in without enough troops. We disbanded the Iraqi army there by leaving weapons all over the country for insurgents and creating millions of unemployed disaffected young men. We gave no-bid contracts to Haliburton instead of employing Iraqis. Bush either knew or should have known about the torture in Abu Ghireb. The list is just endless.

The point is this. We must win but Bush is creating the preconditions where we cannot win. Osama is winning. We are losing. But we must win… so in the end the only solution may be the facsist final solution and committing genocide against all Islamist. That is where this President has led us.

Bush wants Armageddon and he is creating the preconditions for it - you could say that he is a baby Antichrist - a precursor.

Let us all hope that it doesn’t come to that - but a dirty bomb in New York and the American people will want more blood than Count Dracula.

phx8,
As an Anti-Authoritarian by self-nature, I say question everyone and only only believe what you know to be right.

Drew,
Considering the fact that on average Americans have a 5th grade reading level so what if you don’t spell correctly. The fact that a person can figure out the word is more important isn’t it?

Anthony,
If Bush is leading this country than where are we going? Even Congress and members of his own party speak out about his “Total Incompetence” in handling Iraq. And Katrina with New Orleans flooding is a real good example of his leadership.

As far as Bush “being in a tight spot” before attacking Iraq, well lets just say Bush didn’t have the balls to confront the real issues of why Saddam had to go. What about Saddam directly paying for attacks against Israel and her Allies? Didn’t that put the USA directly in the cross hairs of terrorist with a $25,000.00 hit fee? Even the Republican Party demanded from Clinton proof before they would allow airstrikes so why not their own President? Trust, but varify I think was the words President Reagan used. As of yet, no proof has been offered privately or publicly.

esimonson

hehehehehehehehe!!!!!!!!
Illogical thinking like the sore loser Dems. Who will do anything to get to Bush because they hate him sooooo much even destroy our country. That’s alright just keep burying yourselves deeper and deeper. Do you think we are that stupid?????!!!!!

Vivian wrote:

Illogical thinking like the sore loser Dems. Who will do anything to get to Bush because they hate him sooooo much even destroy our country. That’s alright just keep burying yourselves deeper and deeper. Do you think we are that stupid?????!!!!!

You’re right Vivian, good point. It’s as though the anti-Bush crowd sets their side up in a way that everything that is good for the US is bad for them and everything good for them is bad for the US.

“more US soldiers died— good”
“more Abu Gharib incidents— good”
“Jobs report is lower than expected— good”

“The US economy is strong and 100 billion dollars of debt was erased b/c of the Bush tax cuts—- bad”

“Iraqi forces are capturing and killing terrorists— bad”

“Bush takes credit for spreading democracy throughout the middle east, making that place tolerable—- bad”

It’s disgusting, isn’t it? Isn’t it!

Several of you posters need to step back, quit smoking whatever, set the bottle down, sober up, put the vulgarity aside, and put forth an argument that makes sense

“why isn’t Bush/Cheneys kids fighting in war‎, it’s because we HAVE AN ALL VOLUNTEER MILITARY!!
————-
So…if its all volunteer, how come college republicans are NOT voluntering by the hundreds??? They have more drunk parties than enlistment parties…or how about republican fund raisers to repair ALL the horrible damage Bush’s bombs did on innocent Iraqi homes/business…etc…?

They were funded by Iraq, saddam is the leader of Iraq…

Famous words said by Anne Coulter! Change the channel dude and learn how to get the real news!
————————-
You cry Saddam killed alot of humans…true…but so did GEORGE BUSH! Oh, but because he’s the ruler of the world appointed by God, its ok…I get it!
———————-

I was only using Russia - Iran as examples…could be a attack on usa soil from Australians and once again…that would give Boosh the perfect excuse to kill even more kids in Iran…

I’m just totally against killing human beings…esp. innocent woman and children…
If only Republicans were…

What will we do if another country attacks hundreds of thousands of OUR civillians because they reason…Bush is a bad man…he killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civillians…guess that makes it ok, right?

If only the republicans can put all their hatred and anger towards the real terrorist who killed 3000 americans on 9-11…
Bin Laden…NOT Saddam!

Tom,
“Several of you posters need to step back…”
Ok.
“… quit smoking…”
Stopped two months ago.
“…set the bottle down, sober up…”
Ok. For now.
“…put the vulgarity aside…”
But I live in Oregon!
“…and put forth an argument that makes sense.”
Well said. Critique the message, not the messenger. Save flames for other sites.

“more US soldiers died— good‎
BUSH DOES LOVE GETTING HIS DAILY DEATH
REPORTS…LOOK HOW MUCH HE LAUGHS AND
EVEN HAS A COMEDY GAG…OF LOOKING FOR
WMD…TWISTED MAN!

“more Abu Gharib incidents— good‎
BROUGHT ON BY THEIR HATRED OF HAVING
BUSH’S HOLY ARMY THERE…

“Jobs report is lower than expected— good‎
JOBS ARE BEING ALL OUTSOURCED OVERSEAS…
REPUBLICANS SAY THATS A GOOD THING!

“The US economy is strong and 100 billion dollars of debt was erased b/c of the Bush tax cuts—- bad‎
CLINTON LEFT WITH A SURPLUS…BUSH TAX CUTS
IS GIVING YOUR GRANDKIDS THE BIGGEST DEFICIT
EVER IN THE HISTORY OF USA! THATS GOOD SAYS
REPUBLICANS.

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 24 Oct 2005 at 04:25:42 AM GMT is:
$ 8 , 0 0 7 , 2 8 1 , 4 5 9 , 0 0 3 . 7 4

The estimated population of the United States is 297,514,454
so each citizen’s share of this debt is $26,913.92. (Pay up grandkids!)

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.62 billion PER day since September 30, 2004!

“Iraqi forces are capturing and killing terrorists— bad‎
AMERICANS ARE TORTURING PRISIONERS, AMERICANS
ARE TRADING WAR PICTURES FOR PORN, AMERICANS
ARE KILLING CHILDREN…

“Bush takes credit for spreading democracy throughout the middle east, making that place tolerable—- bad‎
YOU CALL ALMOST DAILY BOMBINGS MORE TOLERABLE?
WE WENT THRU 9-11 FOR A COUPLE HOURS…
IRAQI’S ARE HAVING 9-11 FOR 2 YEARS NOW!
BUT THATS GOOD SAYS REPUBLICANS…BETTER
TO HURT OTHERS SO THEY DON’T HURT US…

ALL WE ARE SAYING….IS GIVE PEACE A CHANCE…
(Course peace isn’t $$$ to republicans!)

And with this posting, I’m off to bed to have
SWEET dreams…for this week…Fitzgerald is going
to bring the Bush adminstration to its knees and
baby…xmas is coming early this year! Thank you Santa!

(1) So are we going to leave Iraq after we “win” the war?
(2) Is anyone concerned about Iraq becoming an Islamic State?
(3) Do you think Syria will be next?
(4) Is Syria worth it?
(5) Do you think Iran will be next?
(6) Is Iran worth it?
(7) Is esimonson retarded?
(8) Should esimonson be institutionalized?
(9) Are we screwed no matter what, even if esimonson comes out of the closet?
(10) Do you think the Democracts would do anything different right now if they were in power?

Jack,

Ask a stupid question….get 90+ stupid answers.

Rahdigly,
IMO you and Vivian have your argument backwards.

“more US soldiers died— Bad; lack of personal armor and numbers prevent suring areas fought for”

“more Abu Gharib incidents— Bad; Shows weak leadership and high stress of troops”

“Jobs report is lower than expected— Bad; without a strong economy the dollar weakens causing all Americans to lose money.”

“The US economy is strong and 100 billion dollars of debt was erased b/c of the Bush tax cuts—- Wrong; March 2005 saw a 20% lose in the value of the dollar (not intended) and Bush believes that we can inflate our way out of the money problem”

“Iraqi forces are capturing and killing terrorists— Wrong; After 2 years only one unit can stand alone the rest are killing and being killed right beside our own troops”

“Bush takes credit for spreading democracy throughout the middle east, making that place tolerable—- Wrong; Iraq has yet to establish a constitution and in looking at the current one the word democracy does not come to mind.”

However, feel free to oppress your political opponents and tell them that they are no good and undeserving of any rights. Do it in the name of President Bush and your republican party, please. Because when reality hits the conservatives directly in the face, no one will be laughing.