Bush Now Says Some Vietnam Comparisons to Iraq May Be Right

[Bronco_Beerslug]

But he denies it's getting worse? And this latest brilliant quote from him...
I define success or failure as whether we're seeing a democracy grow in the heart of the Middle East

------------------------------------------------------------
Bush accepts Iraq-Vietnam echoes
President George W Bush has accepted that the surge in violence in Iraq may be equivalent to America's traumatic experience in the Vietnam War.

Mr Bush told ABC News that it could be right to compare Iraq's situation to the 1968 Tet offensive, widely seen as a key turning point in the conflict.

But he denied that the rising number of Iraqi and US military deaths meant the Iraq campaign was failing.

October is on course to be one of the bloodiest months for US forces in Iraq.

So far about 70 troops have died, and with an average of three Americans dying every day this is one of the highest casualty rates sustained by the US military since January 2005.

CONT (http://tinyurl.com/ycsx3k)

[Rohirrim]

I don't know what he could possibly know about Vietnam, having spent most of that war drinking, snorting and dodging duty.

[bendog]

What an idiot to even accept the comparison. Losing vietnam cost us nothing strategically, and our allies in Nato never understood why we were fighting over there for the French, who hated us as much as Ho did.

Losing Iraq might ignite a sunni-shiaa conflict in the entire region. Not outright war so much as terror attacks.

[Crushaholic]

What an idiot to even accept the comparison.

I agree with this statement. Once Bush (as the leader of this effort) plants the idea that this is a quagmire like Vietnam, we've already lost it...

[loborugger]

Losing Iraq might ignite a sunni-shiaa conflict in the entire region. Not outright war so much as terror attacks.

Undoubtedly true. However, much like a couple involved in a domestic dispute, as soon as the cops leave, they go back to whacking each other. And to be blunt, I am perfectly content with that. Better themselves than us.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Bush Now Says Some Vietnam Comparisons to Iraq May Be Right

http://www.bartcop.com/plan-nam-iraq.jpg

[Rigs11]

YOu know wahat really pisses me off? When jagoffs like Tony Snow make statements like "He’s not somebody who gets jumpy at polls,” or "the president is not going to alter his approach based on political considerations" Hey numbnuts does the president get jumpy at American casualties? Will American soldiers dying alter his approach? How about Iraqis dying? Does that make him jumpy?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

YOu know wahat really pisses me off? When jagoffs like Tony Snow make statements like "He’s not somebody who gets jumpy at polls,” or "the president is not going to alter his approach based on political considerations" Hey numbnuts does the president get jumpy at American casualties? Will American soldiers dying alter his approach? How about Iraqis dying? Does that make him jumpy?

That's the question every reporter and media personality in America should be asking right now.

Unfortunately, however, right-wing media have captured unparalleled access to power in return for whoring themselves out as propagandists while left radio is all but DOA.

[baja]

But he denies it's getting worse? And this latest brilliant quote from him...


------------------------------------------------------------
Bush accepts Iraq-Vietnam echoes
President George W Bush has accepted that the surge in violence in Iraq may be equivalent to America's traumatic experience in the Vietnam War.

Mr Bush told ABC News that it could be right to compare Iraq's situation to the 1968 Tet offensive, widely seen as a key turning point in the conflict.

But he denied that the rising number of Iraqi and US military deaths meant the Iraq campaign was failing.

October is on course to be one of the bloodiest months for US forces in Iraq.

So far about 70 troops have died, and with an average of three Americans dying every day this is one of the highest casualty rates sustained by the US military since January 2005.

CONT (http://tinyurl.com/ycsx3k)

Damn those roses must have some big ass thorns

[gunns]

What an idiot to even accept the comparison. Losing vietnam cost us nothing strategically, and our allies in Nato never understood why we were fighting over there for the French, who hated us as much as Ho did.

Losing Iraq might ignite a sunni-shiaa conflict in the entire region. Not outright war so much as terror attacks.

It's not idiotic at all. Both were losing causes from the beginning and political in nature. The way they were both run and our reasons for being there were what is idiotic. I've said from the beginning this was Vietnam II.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/stay-the-sheep.jpg