State of the Union - Holy Smokes batman I agree with most of what Pres. Bush advocate

[baja]

And I really do not care for his administration.

What are your thoughts....

[watermock]

Go into the politics forum and tell THEM that Judas.

[Garcia Bronco]

It was a great speech. Very bold...he has asked congress to do several of these things before. But he went may steps further.

[Garcia Bronco]

And the Democratic response agreed on the surface to his domestic suggestions. Called out the war and the Economy. While Webb said the economy is good...the money amongst compnaies needs to be distributed more evenly.

[TheChamp247]

yea but thats not up to the government, thats up to the companies...unless we decide to become commies

[Garcia Bronco]

yea but thats not up to the government, thats up to the companies...unless we decide to become commies

He laid it out...when he was young...a CEO made 20 times more what the average worker made...now it's about 400 times. That's out of control no matter which way you slice it within the company dynamic. Perhaps even was a bad choice of word.

[TheChamp247]

oh yea i agree that it is out of control with CEO's and all but in no way is that Bush's fault

[SoDak Bronco]

Can you give an overview of the speech and what he said?

[Play2win]

yea but thats not up to the government, thats up to the companies...unless we decide to become commies

Don't you mean NEO-COMMIES... ;D

[Dudeskey]

Can you give an overview of the speech and what he said?

Basically a rinse & repeat of the last 3 ****ing SOTU speeches... energy independence, social security, iraq, & terrorism... At least he hs a congress that will do something about the energy thing now though

[TheChamp247]

he talked about the economy and how it is growing, talked about how the deficit was cut in half 3 years ahead of their scheldule and a plan to eliminate it in the near future

he talked about education and how the no child left behind policy has worked and raised standards, also giving parents whose kids go to failing schools an option (personally i believe all this is a joke, im a senior in a "good district" and our public education system is a joke and needs to be completly torn down and rebuilt)

Health care he talked about tax cuts for certian people single parents and people whose companies dont provide it for them, touched on social security and how it needs to be fixed

On immigration he talked about securing the border and a tempory worker program so the boarder patrol can focus on "durg smugglers and terrorists"

he talked about alternative fuel and doubling our nations stockpile, continuing research on alternative fules and progressing on relying on ourselves rather than forign countries

with the war on terror he touched on his previous speach with adding 20,000 troops and focused on the good points, afganistans democratic elections, talked about hezbolla and al-queda wanting chaos and that we need to stay there to keep our promise to thier people but that they need to show initive

[baja]

Go into the politics forum and tell THEM that Judas.

He's saying the things now that he should have been doing for the last six years,

[Garcia Bronco]

Can you give an overview of the speech and what he said?

His health plan was to basically give a tax deduction on health care costs. Basically a 7500 deduction if you are single.

He again outlined the need for worker program and secure borders.

He asked congress to over haul our law process and eliminate ear-marked money that gets snuck into bills. And cited 18 billon is lost each year...and this money isn't even listed on the laws he signs

He said we have a good country and we have good people.

He called for a 20 percent reduction in foreign imported oil over ten years. I would hope it would be more. He called for environmentally sound ways of extracting oil. He also called for congress to double the strategic reserves

[Garcia Bronco]

He's saying the things now that he should have been doing for the last six years,

Some of these things he's called for before. He again asked congress to fix social security. He again asked for tort reform. He again called for balance budget and announced we are ahead of schedule from when he asked for it before. He again asked that congress balance the buget without raising taxes. But there are many things he said that fit what you said.

[24champ]

yea but thats not up to the government, thats up to the companies...unless we decide to become commies

Webb also said he wants a "proper conclusion" to Iraq. Tells me everything I need to know right there, could've used the word victory but hey I'm not a speechwriter.

[Garcia Bronco]

Webb also said he wants a "proper conclusion" to Iraq. Tells me everything I need to know right there, could've used the word victory but hey I'm not a speechwriter.

He did say that..and I think if we leave....we do more harm than good

[Dudeskey]

Webb also said he wants a "proper conclusion" to Iraq. Tells me everything I need to know right there, could've used the word victory but hey I'm not a speechwriter.

Bush declared victory in 2003, didn't he? ??? its all semantics as far as I'm concerned

[Garcia Bronco]

Bush declared victory in 2003, didn't he?

Did he?

[24champ]

Bush declared victory in 2003, didn't he? ??? its all semantics as far as I'm concerned

Was Saddam still in power when he declared it? No he was in a f***ing spider hole, so yeah a victory in that respect.

[Dudeskey]

Did he?

http://gopspotlight.com/naked/bush_mission_accomplished.jpg

[TheChamp247]

yea a "proper conclusion" for him is for us to turn tail and run, BAD IDEA, these people will just follow us...i like his part about us and our allies to take the fight to them and be on the offensive. yea the whole declaration of victory was just about the "mission accomplished" thing on the navy carrier, but i don't think he meant it the way it is protrayed

[Garcia Bronco]

http://gopspotlight.com/naked/bush_mission_accomplished.jpg

He said misson accomplished.

[Garcia Bronco]

yea a "proper conclusion" for him is for us to turn tail and run, BAD IDEA, these people will just follow us...i like his part about us and our allies to take the fight to them and be on the offensive. yea the whole declaration of victory was just about the "mission accomplished" thing on the navy carrier, but i don't think he meant it the way it is protrayed

I agree...a mission in this case is a subset of the War...ergo it cannot be concluded to mean the entire war IMO, but I didn't hear the whole speech.

[TheChamp247]

yea same here i never listened to his speach but from the general look at it it means that the inital invasion was accomplished and probally got blow out of porportion

[yavoon]

Was Saddam still in power when he declared it? No he was in a ****ing spider hole, so yeah a victory in that respect.

its all the victory an aircraft carrier could give us really. I mean totally defeating like the sixth largest army on the planet in 2 weeks isnt too bad. but u can't make a population become a stable democracy, so thats where we are now.

this is like the hezbollah thing really. we just have to have more realistic asessments of the situation. israel stated that they were going to "totally disarm hezbollah, free the prisoners, and do it all while being super humane to every human shield in the way, and for good measure do it in about a month." well thats a farce of a goal, unachievable and a little laughable to even state. so because israel didn't accomplish this absurd goal "they lost."

[TheChamp247]

yea the acual war with Iraq was accomplished there, because we are not fighting Iraq now, thats all over and done with, its Al-Queda and Islamic extremeists that we are in conflict with now

[Garcia Bronco]

The President says some of it is funded by Iran.

[Dudeskey]

The President says some of it is funded by Iran.

the Shiite militants for sure

[baja]

I agree...a mission in this case is a subset of the War...ergo it cannot be concluded to mean the entire war IMO, but I didn't hear the whole speech.

Oh come on now, subset my ass....

[Barry Ramey]

Bush or whoever is President has no more power of controlling money to CEO's as he does money going to actors/actresses and players in sports. Anyone thinking it's a good idea for government to get involved in such matters should really think long and hard to what that would include and what that could eventually lead to in the future.

Bush when he said "mission accomplished" was talking of the removal of power from Hussein and people who care to think honestly know that. He has stated numerous times the fight of terrorism will be long and well after Bush is gone out of the White House. Seems some people spend too much time reading the elfty blogs to get their "news" and "info." that happens to be wrong 99% of the time. Still waiting for Rove to be indicted and charged which was considered a done deal by lefty blogs.

[Dudeskey]

Libby shredded those memos, he'll be the fallguy in the leak case, Ramey

[TheChamp247]

Bush or whoever is President has no more power of controlling money to CEO's as he does money going to actors/actresses and players in sports. Anyone thinking it's a good idea for government to get involved in such matters should really think long and hard to what that would include and what that could eventually lead to in the future.

Bush when he said "mission accomplished" was talking of the removal of power from Hussein and people who care to think honestly know that. He has stated numerous times the fight of terrorism will be long and well after Bush is gone out of the White House. Seems some people spend too much time reading the elfty blogs to get their "news" and "info." that happens to be wrong 99% of the time. Still waiting for Rove to be indicted and charged which was considered a done deal by lefty blogs.

exactly the majority of people who disprove of bush and the war in Iraq (not calling anybody out) simply read something some random guy posted on the internet, and believe every word of it and go tell their friends and it spreads, really i haven't seen to much of people thinking for themselfs anymore, when people talk about politics they are always quoting somebody

[Jetmeck]

I want go into every aspect of his speech but it a rerun. He has some good ideas but he only sees ways to go about them that hurt the middle class.

One thing....he said they are ahead of schedule in reducing the deficit ? Can you possible believe that with the hundreds of billions we have spent in IRAQ. What a
clown this guy is. THE TRUTH IS WE ARE FURTHER IN DEBT THAN EVER BEFORE.

CEO's multi million dollar golden parachute programs and grossly overpaid for
doing a crappy job. Must be nice we'd all like those gravy trains. Economy is good for those at the top.....for middle America it sucks...energy costs are sucking us dry
at the pump which has rolled into the groceries and everything else we buy while the majority of us don't get a yearly raise that even starts to keep up with this.

[Killericon]

I've always found that the State of the Union has always meant next to nothing. As expected, he presented a rather toned-down agenda, and tried to preach bipartisanship to an extreme.

As far as these things go, this one was a snoozer.

[TheChamp247]

I want go into every aspect of his speech but it a rerun. He has some good ideas but he only sees ways to go about them that hurt the middle class.

One thing....he said they are ahead of schedule in reducing the deficit ? Can you possible believe that with the hundreds of billions we have spent in IRAQ. What a
clown this guy is. THE TRUTH IS WE ARE FURTHER IN DEBT THAN EVER BEFORE.

CEO's multi million dollar golden parachute programs and grossly overpaid for
doing a crappy job. Must be nice we'd all like those gravy trains. Economy is good for those at the top.....for middle America it sucks...energy costs are sucking us dry
at the pump which has rolled into the groceries and everything else we buy while the majority of us don't get a yearly raise that even starts to keep up with this.

yea the whole ahead of the curve on getting the debt down made me curious but i don't know where we acually are on that so i have to go with what bush says...gasoline has plumeted recently tho, its below $50 a barrel, which is helping the middle class, and like u said other things will follow that...also with the national minimum wage increase it is designed to help keep up with the price increases

[Killericon]

yea the whole ahead of the curve on getting the debt down made me curious but i don't know where we acually are on that so i have to go with what bush says...gasoline has plumeted recently tho, its below $50 a barrel, which is helping the middle class, and like u said other things will follow that...also with the national minimum wage increase it is designed to help keep up with the price increases

That was one of the things that made me smile. He said you were ahead on cutting the Deficit, not the Debt. That means you're almost at the point where you're spending less than you're earning. Scary, huh?

[yavoon]

That was one of the things that made me smile. He said you were ahead on cutting the Deficit, not the Debt. That means you're almost at the point where you're spending less than you're earning. Scary, huh?

countries don't run surpluses anymore, just like no1 lowers the minimum wage. there is no cutting of the debt on any long term level, maybe for a limited amount of time, but thats it.

the minimum wage and debt are controlled by inflation.

[N.O.Bronco]

That was one of the things that made me smile. He said you were ahead on cutting the Deficit, not the Debt. That means you're almost at the point where you're spending less than you're earning. Scary, huh?

just for good measure and those intrested

http://www.uuforum.org/Images/deficit.gif

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

http://zfacts.com/p/461.html

http://zfacts.com/p/519.html

[Killericon]

countries don't run surpluses anymore, just like no1 lowers the minimum wage. there is no cutting of the debt on any long term level, maybe for a limited amount of time, but thats it.

the minimum wage and debt are controlled by inflation.

Oh, I know, I'm just saying. He's toting his "I'm getting us out of the Deficit" when he was the one who led you there, and he's nowhere even close to rectifying the situation.

I suppose I should keep out of Yankee politics for the rest of the night.

just for good measure and those intrested

http://www.uuforum.org/Images/deficit.gif

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

http://zfacts.com/p/461.html

http://zfacts.com/p/519.html

:thanku:

[N.O.Bronco]

Bush or whoever is President has no more power of controlling money to CEO's as he does money going to actors/actresses and players in sports. Anyone thinking it's a good idea for government to get involved in such matters should really think long and hard to what that would include and what that could eventually lead to in the future.

Bush when he said "mission accomplished" was talking of the removal of power from Hussein and people who care to think honestly know that. He has stated numerous times the fight of terrorism will be long and well after Bush is gone out of the White House. Seems some people spend too much time reading the elfty blogs to get their "news" and "info." that happens to be wrong 99% of the time. Still waiting for Rove to be indicted and charged which was considered a done deal by lefty blogs.

Got a source for that one? He honestlly should be charged if hes not its not because there is no evidence to do so. Cheney too.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/

Second Bush never said mission accomplished those that actually pay enough attention know that the words were originally in the speech but were taken out at the last minute by the request of those that knew the battle for Iraq was far from over, even though Bush and CO seemed to be willfully ignorant of that as history now tells us. The banner overhead however wasnt taken down which pretty much implies he shoulda just said it, however the truth remains Bush never said those words.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/01/iraq/main551946.shtml

[N.O.Bronco]

Oh, I know, I'm just saying. He's toting his "I'm getting us out of the Deficit" when he was the one who led you there, and he's nowhere even close to rectifying the situation.

I suppose I should keep out of Yankee politics for the rest of the night.



:thanku:

Oh i know i was just adding some visuals and background info to go along :thumbsup:

[Rigs11]

Oh, I know, I'm just saying. He's toting his "I'm getting us out of the Deficit" when he was the one who led you there, and he's nowhere even close to rectifying the situation.

I suppose I should keep out of Yankee politics for the rest of the night.



:thanku:

Exactly. It's like he crapped all over your yard but now he wants you to put that aside and work towards cleaning it up.the funniest part was when he said "Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq and I ask you to give it a chance to work”. WTF? Sending more troops is a new strategy? What a dimwit.

[yavoon]

Oh, I know, I'm just saying. He's toting his "I'm getting us out of the Deficit" when he was the one who led you there, and he's nowhere even close to rectifying the situation.

I suppose I should keep out of Yankee politics for the rest of the night.



:thanku:

yah I hate bush for spending. hate.

hate.

hatehate, hate.

[TheChamp247]

acually sending more troops to Iraq is a good move, its not the strategy...but having more men on the ground allows us to secure an area and keep it that way, as opposed to us clearing an area and leaving which allowed the terrorists to re-occupy it

[N.O.Bronco]

Exactly. It's like he crapped all over your yard but now he wants you to put that aside and work towards cleaning it up.the funniest part was when he said "Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq and I ask you to give it a chance to work”. WTF? Sending more troops is a new strategy? What a dimwit.

especially cosidering he is only "surging" to the level we had in the high point of 2005. it didnt work then, i dont think its gonna work now(for more reasons then that). Also good to note that his so called escalation is putting 21,000 troops in. The people he consultated that actually agreed with the surge idea said that at a absolute minimum you needed 35,00 to 50,000 troops any less was a waste.

Now the real consensus of the best regarded surge advocates(mosty militarial strategists probablly the best minds for this of course) suggested to secure baghdad one needed to have one soldier for every 40 to 100 people, bringing the total to at a minimum 100,000 and ideally 400,000 additional troops. That along with the policies he put in place. Now understanding that after all the places he sought out advice he decided on a plan every single one of them recommended against begs the question, why is he actually doing this?

[Rigs11]

acually sending more troops to Iraq is a good move, its not the strategy...but having more men on the ground allows us to secure an area and keep it that way, as opposed to us clearing an area and leaving which allowed the terrorists to re-occupy it

A good move? For who? So the insurgents have more of our soldiers to kill?Seriously man take the blinders off.

[TheChamp247]

blinders? hell im probally going to be going there, its not just more bait for them, its acually and attempt to win this and secure the country and region

[Rigs11]

blinders? hell im probally going to be going there, its not just more bait for them, its acually and attempt to win this and secure the country and region

Good luck.Seriously I hope you come back in one piece. Nothing against the troops, but we need a real strategy. 25,000 more troops aren't going to do squat.

[TheChamp247]

Thanks, plan fully on it, i have full faith in Bush to lead us in the right direction, and the commanders on the ground who acually plan and execute the new strategy

[N.O.Bronco]

Thanks, plan fully on it, i have full faith in Bush to lead us in the right direction, and the commanders on the ground who acually plan and execute the new strategy

buddy, read my post i was really aiming that question at you more then anybody else.

[TheChamp247]

ok yea, you quoted Riggs so i figured it was more of a comment, but from my perspective its not just 20,000 troops because they will be working not only side by side with the Iraqi forces, but also embedded in their units. but yes i do agree we need at a minimum of 40,000 more mabye around 60,000 to send there to really make a huge impact on the ground, but if executed properly these 20,000 will be enough to secure the area, really the only variable on this is are the Iraqi civillians and military ready to finally step up and fight for themselves, like Bush said if they don't we're gonna be gone

[N.O.Bronco]

ok yea, you quoted Riggs so i figured it was more of a comment, but from my perspective its not just 20,000 troops because they will be working not only side by side with the Iraqi forces, but also embedded in their units. but yes i do agree we need at a minimum of 40,000 more mabye around 60,000 to send there to really make a huge impact on the ground, but if executed properly these 20,000 will be enough to secure the area, really the only variable on this is are the Iraqi civillians and military ready to finally step up and fight for themselves, like Bush said if they don't we're gonna be gone

See and thats another reason i find this plan, well questionable. Bush knows full and well that we failed to properlly train the forces, police and military. After the stupid disbandment of the army we collected willing civilians and pushed them through training that equated to a weekend sleepover and on monday you got a gun and were told to police or be part of a battalion. to say most of these troops are undertrained and underprepared is an understatement. Bush knows this. Bush also knows that he is asking Maliki to basically stab the people who got him elected(sadr and his many followers and supporters) in the back for Bush, another unlikelly scenario. It would be like Bush in his first term telling every republican voter to F off and start signing laws supporting gay marriage and encouraging beastiality. for Both it would be political suicide. yet we arent focusing on training new troops the way many plans outlined, why? It seems illogical to think that somehow they are gonna train themselves when they have no structure to do so other then us. Again i question the motives of pressuring the iraqis in the way he is doing it, i agree they need to be pressured but this is definatlly in certain aspects applying the pressure in the wrong places before building up the pain threshold to take it.

[leon]

Bush & Al Davis Are As 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TheChamp247]

Yea their troops were trained initally for a quick response and temporary soloution but like many things our government has done (and not the Bush adminstration) like during WWII almost everything created then was a tempory solution that sliped through and became permanant, like social security and the U.N. There is a lot of work to be done in Iraq and this is simply a step forward, by no means is this the final step, but if this accomplshes anything positive it will allow some confidance and more reform to take place there

[TheChamp247]

Bush & Al Davis Are As 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

well hello to you too

[N.O.Bronco]

Yea their troops were trained initally for a quick response and temporary soloution but like many things our government has done (and not the Bush adminstration) like during WWII almost everything created then was a tempory solution that sliped through and became permanant, like social security and the U.N. There is a lot of work to be done in Iraq and this is simply a step forward, by no means is this the final step, but if this accomplshes anything positive it will allow some confidance and more reform to take place there

Like i said though i just feel once again we are going about this all wrong. If your gonna surge, do it right, if your gonna train do it right. Doing both right is necessary(although i dont agree with doing the former at all but thats beside my point), but to me this plan looks as if it is taking both ideas and half-assing them and if it fails setting up the blame for the iraqis as a political fall-back for Bush. I hope i am wrong and Bush suprises me but I am not getting my hopes up.

[TheChamp247]

I believe this surge will allow for a turn in events in Iraq, give us some confidance there and allow for us to be comfortable sending in even more surges, by no means is this war going to be over within the next 5-10 years, this is just a step forward

[N.O.Bronco]

I believe this surge will allow for a turn in events in Iraq, give us some confidance there and allow for us to be comfortable sending in even more surges, by no means is this war going to be over within the next 5-10 years, this is just a step forward

The thing is though who do we have left to send in? Are military is stretched thin as it is, to send more in we would have to take troops from other countries particularly Afghanastan which we are losing footing in because of too few troops. Second i dont think in anyway we are gonna stay in iraq for another 5-10 years, some permanent bases sure but at these high of levels i cant see it happening without a draft. With the war as hated by the public as it is now The next president will surelly have to concede that the war will not continue for much longer other wise he will have no prayer of winning. If he(or i guess maybe she) gets elected and doesnt do it the public outcry will be enormous and i would think congress in a heartbeat would excercise the power of the purse or make a huge public outrage. I guess though this is just two perspectives, nice to discuss it though without having a political rock throwing fight.

[Taco John]

I had physical therapy for Baby Z tonight (nothing serious, just some precautionary stuff), so I missed the SOTU. After reading the transcript, my thought is "too little too late." I'm struggling to think of something more disingenuous than the most spend happy president in the history of these united states coming before the American people in his seventh year in office and telling them that it's time to balance the national budget by imposing spending discipline in Washington D.C. It's sick. Now he's saying that he's submitting a budget that elminates the federal deficit within five years? Where were you with this proposal five years ago? So what am I supposed to believe better late than never?

This president is the biggest disappointment in the history of conservativism. He took a republican trifecta and turned it into a democratic majority and a red carpet into the whitehouse. And the business of his constituents? Trashed. No school vouchers. No social security reform. No balanced budget. No spending cuts.

I personally had high hopes for school vouchers. I'm a big believer in privatizing the school system and had hope that it would get accomplished with an all republican government.

In any case, it looked like Bush delivered the speech pretty well from the clips I saw. I just found the words to be hollow quacks from a lame duck.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I believe this surge will allow for a turn in events in Iraq, give us some confidance there and allow for us to be comfortable sending in even more surges, by no means is this war going to be over within the next 5-10 years, this is just a step forward

Geeeezus!! Once we get the extra 21,500 troops over there so they can be sacrificed for Bush's dream of grandeur
, we will have the same number there as we did a little over year ago.

We are now suffering around 1000 casualties a month in that sh*thole. The costs for VA benefits alone (American tax dollars) for Iraq veterans as of 2005 will be over 1.2 trillion dollars. 60% of all Iraqis think it's acceptable to kill Americans. 75% want us out of there NOW.

There is no "winning" over there, there never was. They don't want "our" freedom and democracy.

As fort Bush's speech, more of the same meaningless chatter. Republicans who want to be elected in 2008 will avoid him like the plague and Democrats have no reason to endorse anything he says.

[clarkster]

He did say that..and I think if we leave....we do more harm than good

ahhh, someone else with a little foresight to see that. thanks goodness, for a time there i was afraid i was the only one to believe that.

[Dedhed]

He did say that..and I think if we leave....we do more harm than good

We've already done more harm than good.

[clarkster]

The thing is though who do we have left to send in? Are military is stretched thin as it is, to send more in we would have to take troops from other countries particularly Afghanastan which we are losing footing in because of too few troops. Second i dont think in anyway we are gonna stay in iraq for another 5-10 years, some permanent bases sure but at these high of levels i cant see it happening without a draft. With the war as hated by the public as it is now The next president will surelly have to concede that the war will not continue for much longer other wise he will have no prayer of winning. If he(or i guess maybe she) gets elected and doesnt do it the public outcry will be enormous and i would think congress in a heartbeat would excercise the power of the purse or make a huge public outrage. I guess though this is just two perspectives, nice to discuss it though without having a political rock throwing fight.

agree that we are stretched thin,but i believe thats largely due to inefficiency and not using ALL of the resources at hand. before flamespraying begins, 21000 is alot of troops,but theres alot of military not being utilized as it should be. hell just in the Navy, theres a ton of experience and knowledge needed there thats going to waste on silliness. i volunteered last year and was told "no,youre needed here to get us through the training cycle in preparations for this hull swap". hullswap? get the **** out of here.
as far as getting out soon, hell, if anyone seriously thought we were going to be out in a year,then they need to be removed from the gene pool. on the level were at now, yeah we can be below that in a few years, but theres always going to be US military in that region. most dont know, but theres been US military in that region fighting and dying for alot longer than the past few years.
i dont have the answer either, but what i do know is that "just pulling up and leaving" would be detrimental not only to Iraq, but the US as well. no matter what you feel about the war or your connection with it, the answer cannot be to dump the whole thing like a psycho girlfriend.
heres something for you to think about as well. this war cannot be won using traditional tactics, but Joe Public and Mrs Celebrate Diversity dont want to hear that. Used to be the people wanted victory and that was it. now they want victory, they want it now and they want it easy.

[defenseman]

He's saying the things now that he should have been doing for the last six years,

And I'm thinking the democratic majority house will shoot down nearly everything he wants to do. Whether you agree with it or not, is not of consequence. The sticking point will be after when finger pointing starts with respect to who didn't fix what he listed in his speech. He'll try to get legislation passed for corrections, but it will be shot down. I gaurantee it...dman

[Bronco_Beerslug]

agree that we are stretched thin,but i believe thats largely due to inefficiency and not using ALL of the resources at hand. before flamespraying begins, 21000 is alot of troops,but theres alot of military not being utilized as it should be. hell just in the Navy, theres a ton of experience and knowledge needed there thats going to waste on silliness. i volunteered last year and was told "no,youre needed here to get us through the training cycle in preparations for this hull swap". hullswap? get the **** out of here.
as far as getting out soon, hell, if anyone seriously thought we were going to be out in a year,then they need to be removed from the gene pool. on the level were at now, yeah we can be below that in a few years, but theres always going to be US military in that region. most dont know, but theres been US military in that region fighting and dying for alot longer than the past few years.
i dont have the answer either, but what i do know is that "just pulling up and leaving" would be detrimental not only to Iraq, but the US as well. no matter what you feel about the war or your connection with it, the answer cannot be to dump the whole thing like a psycho girlfriend.
heres something for you to think about as well. this war cannot be won using traditional tactics, but Joe Public and Mrs Celebrate Diversity dont want to hear that. Used to be the people wanted victory and that was it. now they want victory, they want it now and they want it easy.

Trying to secure that country by sacrificing 21,500 more troops is assnine, ignorant and just plain stupid. How did it work out last year for us at about this same time (raising troop levels to 160,000)?

What's your justification for sacrificing just one more American over there?

------------------------------------------------
Retired Generals Criticize Bush’s Plan for Iraq (http://tinyurl.com/2n8nvp)

“Too little and too late,” is the way Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former chief of the Central Command, described the effort to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The additional troops are intended to help pacify Baghdad and a restive province, but General Hoar said American leaders had failed to understand the political forces at work in the country. “The solution is political, not military,” he said.

“A fool’s errand,” was the judgment of Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, who commanded troops in the first Gulf War. He said other countries had concluded that the effort in Iraq was not succeeding, noting that “our allies are leaving us and will be gone by summer.”


The American effort in Iraq has gone badly because the United States did not understand the consequences of deposing Saddam Hussein, said Lt. Gen. William E. Odom, a former director of the National Security Agency. He said the principal beneficiary of the war was Iran and Al Qaeda, not the United States.

“There is no way to win a war that is not in your interests,” he said.

One general warned that even a plan to start withdrawing American forces from the country carried the risk that the armed Iraqi population will step up the level of attacks. “We will be shot at as we are going out.” said Gen. Jack Keane, a former vice chief of staff of the Army.

[defenseman]

agree that we are stretched thin,but i believe thats largely due to inefficiency and not using ALL of the resources at hand. before flamespraying begins, 21000 is alot of troops,but theres alot of military not being utilized as it should be. hell just in the Navy, theres a ton of experience and knowledge needed there thats going to waste on silliness. i volunteered last year and was told "no,youre needed here to get us through the training cycle in preparations for this hull swap". hullswap? get the **** out of here.
as far as getting out soon, hell, if anyone seriously thought we were going to be out in a year,then they need to be removed from the gene pool. on the level were at now, yeah we can be below that in a few years, but theres always going to be US military in that region. most dont know, but theres been US military in that region fighting and dying for alot longer than the past few years.
i dont have the answer either, but what i do know is that "just pulling up and leaving" would be detrimental not only to Iraq, but the US as well. no matter what you feel about the war or your connection with it, the answer cannot be to dump the whole thing like a psycho girlfriend.
heres something for you to think about as well. this war cannot be won using traditional tactics, but Joe Public and Mrs Celebrate Diversity dont want to hear that. Used to be the people wanted victory and that was it. now they want victory, they want it now and they want it easy.


Amen brother, times certianly have changed. It appears to me anyway that some americans have lost their "stomach" for war. then again, I haven't agreed with the rank and file on every tactic employed. But, I'm certianly not an expert, ergo, I'm hoping they are letting the commander in the field win this one for the home team and not micromanaging based on Political correctness. On a side note, representative WEBB didn't call me and ask me. I'm calling him out on his statement that the military doesn't support the war. Names and interviews, I want to see them. I call him just short of a liar right now to be honest. I can't believe this guy was SECNAV, he knows he'll alienate alot of the military with statements that are blantantly false. Nearly to a man/woman, that I've talked too support squashing the enemy in iraq. However, most want to be left alone to do their job, not micromanaged from afar. Big mistake that micromanaging...dman

[defenseman]

Trying to secure that country by sacrificing 21,500 more troops is assnine, ignorant and just plain stupid. How did it work out last year for us at about this same time (raising troop levels to 160,000)?

What's your justification for sacrificing just one more American over there?

------------------------------------------------
Retired Generals Criticize Bush’s Plan for Iraq (http://tinyurl.com/2n8nvp)

Pull out of iraq the wrong way, we lose a hell of alot more than any of us know. The foothold in iraq for the bad guys will be tremendous and multiple times more difficult to deal with over the next two decades or so....dman

[Traveler]

If anyone can find a link, read Gen Petraeus' Counter-Insurgency Manual. By his estimation, he would require at a minimum 125,000 troops in Bagdad alone for them to have a shot at quelling the violence.

There's approximately that many troops in all of Iraq. Do the math. Get our men and women out of harms way!

[Rohirrim]

Darn! I had to miss it. I had to clip my toenails instead.

[Garcia Bronco]

I've always found that the State of the Union has always meant next to nothing. As expected, he presented a rather toned-down agenda, and tried to preach bipartisanship to an extreme.

As far as these things go, this one was a snoozer.

It was a rich agenda. There was nothing toned down about it...or perhaps I don't undestand your meaning

[Garcia Bronco]

All you people clowning Bush for "spending money" are way off the mark. Congress is the body that spends the money...not the President. And any money that the President spends is set by Congress...so look there for our spending problem

[Garcia Bronco]

A good move? For who? So the insurgents have more of our soldiers to kill?Seriously man take the blinders off.

What he said was correct.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Pull out of iraq the wrong way, we lose a hell of alot more than any of us know. The foothold in iraq for the bad guys will be tremendous and multiple times more difficult to deal with over the next two decades or so....dmanWrong way?? Are you kidding, what's the "right way"? How many more Americans should we maim and kill for the "right way"? There is NO justification for killing one more American in that sh*thole. The govermnet we put in place is in itself radical and aligned to a religious agenda of war against the other radical religious sect there. We can't get out of there fast enough!

[Garcia Bronco]

We've already done more harm than good.

The region is destablized...to leave now would be criminal.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

All you people clowning Bush for "spending money" are way off the mark. Congress is the body that spends the money...not the President. And any money that the President spends is set by Congress...so look there for our spending problemWrong, the president sets the budget.

[clarkster]

justification for one more life lost(mind you that one more could very well be mine, so im not blowing smoke here) is simply that no matter what your feelings are, no matter what my feelings are on the war, weve made a mess there, and to walk away would decimate American policy abroad, eradicate American morale at home, and if you think we have enemies there now, leave that country high and dry with no way to defend itself, i guarantee a few more folks will be hating us. Not only that, but if you believe that these radicals will just quit bombing us, youre sady mistaken. ugly and as painful as it seems, only course i see is to finish what we started. if you have a better option, please let me in on the secret.

[defenseman]

I want go into every aspect of his speech but it a rerun. He has some good ideas but he only sees ways to go about them that hurt the middle class.

One thing....he said they are ahead of schedule in reducing the deficit ? Can you possible believe that with the hundreds of billions we have spent in IRAQ. What a
clown this guy is. THE TRUTH IS WE ARE FURTHER IN DEBT THAN EVER BEFORE.

CEO's multi million dollar golden parachute programs and grossly overpaid for
doing a crappy job. Must be nice we'd all like those gravy trains. Economy is good for those at the top.....for middle America it sucks...energy costs are sucking us dry
at the pump which has rolled into the groceries and everything else we buy while the majority of us don't get a yearly raise that even starts to keep up with this.

23 Jan 07 Gallup poll says that 86% of america is happy with their quality of life. You must be one of the 14%. As for me, I'm living quite well and enjoying winding down from a 30 year military career. Most folks I know, are pretty happy with their quality of life.....dman

[TailgateNut]

Thanks, plan fully on it, i have full faith in Bush to lead us in the right direction, and the commanders on the ground who acually plan and execute the new strategy


"full faith in Bush"??? now that's some scary ass ****. It's like trusting a used car salesman!

[defenseman]

Libby shredded those memos, he'll be the fallguy in the leak case, Ramey

I'm interested in where this one goes. Not so sure about Libby..dman

[Bronco_Beerslug]

justification for one more life lost(mind you that one more could very well be mine, so im not blowing smoke here) is simply that no matter what your feelings are, no matter what my feelings are on the war, weve made a mess there, and to walk away would decimate American policy abroad, eradicate American morale at home, and if you think we have enemies there now, leave that country high and dry with no way to defend itself, i guarantee a few more folks will be hating us. Not only that, but if you believe that these radicals will just quit bombing us, youre sady mistaken. ugly and as painful as it seems, only course i see is to finish what we started. if you have a better option, please let me in on the secret.Finish what? We done finished it!!!!!! Iraq is now a theocracy created by Bush that is in a civil war. Our work is done, there is nothing that can be "fixed" there any longer.

This rhetoric sounds just like Nixon supporters who were crying "if we leave now the commies will rule the world".

[defenseman]

A good move? For who? So the insurgents have more of our soldiers to kill?Seriously man take the blinders off.

I'll be very interested in what your comment will be if this tactic works. Got a few army buddies in DC. The general is charge is very well respected by the troops and has knack for finding a way to get the job done according to them. Real mission guy. I'm thinking the real issue is going to be, once baghdad is secured, when do you call the iraqi security forces controlling the city/country "good enough to bail"? That in itself is the second part of the equation from where I sit..dman

*According to my army buds, this general does not like micromanagement. He is hard over with having total control of how the plan is executed and refuses any external pressure. Especially politicians. Very healthy approach.

[Rohirrim]

justification for one more life lost(mind you that one more could very well be mine, so im not blowing smoke here) is simply that no matter what your feelings are, no matter what my feelings are on the war, weve made a mess there, and to walk away would decimate American policy abroad, eradicate American morale at home, and if you think we have enemies there now, leave that country high and dry with no way to defend itself, i guarantee a few more folks will be hating us. Not only that, but if you believe that these radicals will just quit bombing us, youre sady mistaken. ugly and as painful as it seems, only course i see is to finish what we started. if you have a better option, please let me in on the secret.

Regardless of what we do, nothing will change. The Shiites are in charge. They are actively working against U.S. interests. They are receiving assistance from Iran, who Bush has made the regional powerhouse by eliminating Saddam and the Taliban, and by backing Israel's stupid adventure in Lebanon. Our effort to sustain the Maliki government will be as effective as our efforts were to sustain the South Vietnamese government. Waste another ten years and another 3,000 American lives and the outcome will change not one whit. What Bush and his cronies should have done is kept Humpty Dumpty secured to the wall. Once he fell off and broke, all the kings horses, and all the king's men, can't put this mess back together again (as Scowcroft and Bush 1 so eloquently pointed out). Bush's monumental malfeasance, arrogance and incompetence have stirred up a tempest in the middle East. To believe that this same administration will somehow, suddenly find some competent solution to their mess is to be hopelessly naive. The only thing to do know is get our people out before the roof falls on their heads. What is happening in Iraq right now is a carbon copy of what happened to the Brits in 1918. Bush's hamartia, his frat boy arrogance, will doom us all. Like the New Yorker pointed out, "He is the decider of decisions, not the learner of lessons."

All Bush and his cronies are doing now is playing a giant game of CYA, which is what Nixon did at the end of Vietnam. The question now is, how many more U.S. troops will die to provide Bush his political cover?

[clarkster]

are you kidding? the country is unstable, unable to defend its own streets, unable to defend its own government, unable to defend its own citizens. terrorism is rampant. every asshole that we dust there is one less asshole that can hit my daughters school here.
its hardly a "if we leave now the commies will take over" stance. simply a "if we leave now, alot more people will die, including American soldiers, this countrys fortitude is gone, and again i ask, if theres a better option, im all ears.

[Garcia Bronco]

Wrong, the president sets the budget.

The President proposes a budget...however..Congress votes on it. Congress spends the money..period.

[Garcia Bronco]

Finish what? We done finished it!!!!!! Iraq is now a theocracy created by Bush that is in a civil war. Our work is done, there is nothing that can be "fixed" there any longer.

This rhetoric sounds just like Nixon supporters who were crying "if we leave now the commies will rule the world".

Except Nixon is dead...and this has nothing to do with that conflict. In fact...they are almost mutally exclusive

[Rohirrim]

The President proposes a budget...however..Congress votes on it. Congress spends the money..period.

Many historians are already calling the 109th Republican led Congress which governed with Bush, the worst, do-nothing, spend-thrift Congress in the history of the United States. There's also something called the veto, which Bush did not employ ONCE, to stem his party's mad spending spree.

[clarkster]

Regardless of what we do, nothing will change. The Shiites are in charge. They are actively working against U.S. interests. They are receiving assistance from Iran, who Bush has made the regional powerhouse by eliminating Saddam and the Taliban, and by backing Israel's stupid adventure in Lebanon. Our effort to sustain the Maliki government will be as effective as our efforts were to sustain the South Vietnamese government. Waste another ten years and another 3,000 American lives and the outcome will change not one whit. What Bush and his cronies should have done is kept Humpty Dumpty secured to the wall. Once he fell off and broke, all the kings horses, and all the king's men, can't put this mess back together again (as Scowcroft and Bush 1 so eloquently pointed out). Bush's monumental malfeasance, arrogance and incompetence have stirred up a tempest in the middle East. To believe that this same administration will somehow, suddenly find some competent solution to their mess is to be hopelessly naive. The only thing to do know is get our people out before the roof falls on their heads. What is happening in Iraq right now is a carbon copy of what happened to the Brits in 1918. Bush's hamartia, his frat boy arrogance, will doom us all. Like the New Yorker pointed out, "He is the decider of decisions, not the learner of lessons."

All Bush and his cronies are doing now is playing a giant game of CYA, which is what Nixon did at the end of Vietnam. The question now is, how many more U.S. troops will die to provide Bush his political cover?

i dont disagree with this, however, i do not see how just leaving is going to make anything better for anyone other than the average citizen sick of seeing on CNN? show me the way. all im asking for is someone to come up with plan that other than "pull out immediately". thats just ridiculous.

[Rohirrim]

Except Nixon is dead...and this has nothing to do with that conflict. In fact...they are almost mutally exclusive

Actually, in some ways, they are mirror images.

[TailgateNut]

Regardless of what we do, nothing will change.
Bush's arrogance is the hamartia, his frat boy arrogance, will doom us all. Like the New Yorker pointed out, "He is the decider of decisions, not the learner of lessons."

All Bush and his cronies are doing now is playing a giant game of CYA, which is what Nixon at the end of Vietnam. The question now is, how many more U.S. troops will die to provide Bush his political cover?

Well said Ro!
Bush is like a billygoat, he keeps ramming his head against the tree, thinking that eventually the tree will move, in lieu of learning that it's much easier to walk around it to get to the other side.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

are you kidding? the country is unstable, unable to defend its own streets, unable to defend its own government, unable to defend its own citizens. terrorism is rampant. every a-hole that we dust there is one less a-hole that can hit my daughters school here.
its hardly a "if we leave now the commies will take over" stance. simply a "if we leave now, alot more people will die, including American soldiers, this countrys fortitude is gone, and again i ask, if theres a better option, im all ears.
No, if we STAY "alot more people will die".

There is no "better" option. There is one option that may secure that country but I'm pretty sure you and most other Americans including the ones in DC have no stomach for it.

Except Nixon is dead...and this has nothing to do with that conflict. In fact...they are almost mutally exclusiveI lived it, seen it, it's almost the exact same thing.

[worm]

...so I missed the SOTU. After reading the transcript, my thought is "too little too late." I'm struggling to think of something more disingenuous than the most spend happy president in the history of these united states coming before the American people in his seventh year in office and telling them that it's time to balance the national budget by imposing spending discipline in Washington D.C. It's sick. Now he's saying that he's submitting a budget that elminates the federal deficit within five years? Where were you with this proposal five years ago? So what am I supposed to believe better late than never?

This president is the biggest disappointment in the history of conservativism. He took a republican trifecta and turned it into a democratic majority and a red carpet into the whitehouse. And the business of his constituents? Trashed. No school vouchers. No social security reform. No balanced budget. No spending cuts.

I personally had high hopes for school vouchers. I'm a big believer in privatizing the school system and had hope that it would get accomplished with an all republican government.

In any case, it looked like Bush delivered the speech pretty well from the clips I saw. I just found the words to be hollow quacks from a lame duck.


Last night was just a taste of what the Dems have in store for us til '08. Focused on the past instead of the future. Pointing fingers. Ensuring that everybody knows that this is a Dem-led Congress now and if change comes...it is because of them....if it doesn't whom do you think they will blame?

Listening to Webb and Clinton last night made me ill. Obama was the only one willing to discuss the merit of Bush's statements...on a policy by policy perspective.....instead of regurgitate some memorized, tired party-line.

I don't agree with most Bush policy....but hearing presidential hopefuls more willing to trash than to offer tangible alternatives is a bigger turnoff to me than having an idiot in the White House.

The sheer amount of presidential candidates and the complete political nature of some of them, such as Clinton, almost guarantees that this term of Congress will be rendered ineffective.

The groundhog saw his shadow and there is at least two more years of winter. THAT is the biggest shame of all.

No matter where you want to assign blame for past failings.

[Garcia Bronco]

Many historians are already calling the 109th Republican led Congress which governed with Bush, the worst, do-nothing, spend-thrift Congress in the history of the United States. There's also something called the veto, which Bush did not employ ONCE, to stem his party's mad spending spree.

There is some fault there....however...it's not always cut and dry....The President mentioned last night how some of this money gets into bills without him even knowing about it, your toenail clipper was probably to loud for you to hear. :)

You also have to consider bills that needed to be passed, but had money tied to it for the purposes of compromise. Our former republican led congress was terrible, and the voters spoke about it last Novemeber by kicking some of those bastards out. the question is will our balanced congress be better this term...I think they are off on the right foot....if the enact and act on some of the Presidents suggestions last night....we'll do even better IMO.

[clarkster]

heres what i see as the problem with this country- everyone is quick to throw the blame, but i fail to see how thats getting anything accomplished. everyone wants the easy way out. does our staying in Iraq mean another thousand troops dying? likely, but leave now and whats that do for us? yeah our soldiers are safe at home, what else?

[Garcia Bronco]

Actually, in some ways, they are mirror images.

Are we the same? I think that's the problem...we lack the resolve as a country, as a people, to do what is neccesary to achieve victory...which ultimately was the problem in Vietnam.

[Rohirrim]

i dont disagree with this, however, i do not see how just leaving is going to make anything better for anyone other than the average citizen sick of seeing on CNN? show me the way. all im asking for is someone to come up with plan that other than "pull out immediately". thats just ridiculous.

You missed the point. Things are so effed up now that there is no hope of making "anything better" for anybody. The only thing we can possibly hope to do now is what the Iraq commission suggested, remove our troops, and open channels with everybody in the region to see if we can't come up with some collective plan to keep Iraq from igniting an all out ME war between the Sunnis and the Shiites. We're going to take some hits for Bush's failures. There's no way around that. It appears that Bush's plan might be to attack Iran, or to goad them into attacking us. If that happens, we will spend the rest of our lives in war. As will our children, probably.

[Arkansas Bronco]

And I really do not care for his administration.

What are your thoughts....

I changed the channel when he started. Actually loaded up the North side practice.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Are we the same? I think that's the problem...we lack the resolve as a country, as a people, to do what is neccesary to achieve victory...which ultimately was the problem in Vietnam.You really don't understand what's happened there do you? The Shia's (Iran aligned) are in control now and are at war with the Sunnis. We are in the MIDDLE of it.

[TailgateNut]

Are we the same? I think that's the problem...we lack the resolve as a country, as a people, to do what is neccesary to achieve victory...which ultimately was the problem in Vietnam.

Geeesuz! Achieve a victory??? Sorry to burst your bubble GW, but that's above and beyond what can be accomplished in the ME, if you could even define Victory.

BTW, I'm sick of hearing the word "RESOLVE"!

What we should do is throw the ****er out of the WH, and show the world that we do and will hold our leaders accountable for their failures and their criminal actions.

[Rohirrim]

Are we the same? I think that's the problem...we lack the resolve as a country, as a people, to do what is neccesary to achieve victory...which ultimately was the problem in Vietnam.

I think that's just a response to the lies of our leaders. Once the American people realized there were no WMDs, no link to 911, and no link to Al Queda, they understood they had been manipulated into a war that shouldn't have happened. It's the same thing that happened during Vietnam. Nixon ran on a program of ending the war, "honorably," but then he got into office and secretly started bombing Cambodia. Once the truth got out, the people turned against the war. It's not in the American tradition to follow dishonorable leaders, especially when we realize their cause is a lie.

It's times like these I wish we had some elements of the parliamentarian system. Then, we could give Bush a vote of "No confidence," throw him and all his cronies out on the streets, and elect a new governement now, when we need it. As it is, we have to wade through two more years of Bushocracy.

[clarkster]

There is no "better" option. There is one option that may secure that country but I'm pretty sure you and most other Americans including the ones in DC have no stomach for it.

there it is. since when did the average citizen actually know or care enough about anything to dictate what the best course for war is? at what point did we take OUR generals power and abilities away? at what point do we sacrifice political correctness for victory? at what point do we as a country realize again that NO LEADER, NO REGIME will EVER please EVERYONE...
im not the expert here, and clearly neither is anyone else here. im just another asshole that is committed to this task. i dont like it, i really could care less if poor little Iraq is a democracy or not. All I know is that WERE over there, and the "American way" lately is to say "**** it, it isnt working. lets quit" and that too me is an atrocity.

[Sassy]

September 11, 2001 ~ This is why we don't pull troops out. We need to finish what THEY started.

[Dedhed]

Are we the same? I think that's the problem...we lack the resolve as a country, as a people, to do what is neccesary to achieve victory...which ultimately was the problem in Vietnam.

Holy $h!t. We lacked the resolve to achieve victory in Vietnam! Are you insane? We lacked the means, exactly like we do in Iraq.

[Garcia Bronco]

Geeesuz! Achieve a victory??? Sorry to burst your bubble GW, but that's above and beyond what can be accomplished in the ME, if you could even define Victory.

BTW, I'm sick of hearing the word "RESOLVE"!

What we should do is throw the ****er out of the WH, and show the world that we do and will hold our leaders accountable for their failures and their criminal actions.


Have you ever failed?

And yes...at this point we need resolve.

What would you define as victory?

[Rohirrim]

September 11, 2001 ~ This is why we don't pull troops out. We need to finish what THEY started.

Who's "they?" The Iraqis?

[Garcia Bronco]

September 11, 2001 ~ This is why we don't pull troops out. We need to finish what THEY started.

Amen...this is so often forgotten

[Dedhed]

September 11, 2001 ~ This is why we don't pull troops out. We need to finish what THEY started.

One huge effing flaw there Sass. WE AREN'T FIGHTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11.

[Garcia Bronco]

Who's "they?" The Iraqis?

Muslims

[Garcia Bronco]

One huge effing flaw there Sass. WE AREN'T FIGHTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11.

Yes we are

[Garcia Bronco]

You really don't understand what's happened there do you? The Shia's (Iran aligned) are in control now and are at war with the Sunnis. We are in the MIDDLE of it.

And we need to clean their clocks

[Traveler]

There is some fault there....however...it's not always cut and dry....The President mentioned last night how some of this money gets into bills without him even knowing about it, your toenail clipper was probably to loud for you to hear. :)

You also have to consider bills that needed to be passed, but had money tied to it for the purposes of compromise. Our former republican led congress was terrible, and the voters spoke about it last Novemeber by kicking some of those bastards out. the question is will our balanced congress be better this term...I think they are off on the right foot....if the enact and act on some of the Presidents suggestions last night....we'll do even better IMO.

Please clear up something for me. Why sign a bill into law if you don't know what amendments are attached to it? :gripe: He doesn't know because he doesn't want to know, nor does he care. I call bull**** on the Prez for that one!

[Garcia Bronco]

Please clear up something for me. Why sign a bill into law if you don't know what amendments are attached to it? :gripe:

Ear marks. He asked Congress to put a stop to it.

[Sassy]

One huge effing flaw there Sass. WE AREN'T FIGHTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11.
Oh really...then who do you THINK was responsible?

[Dedhed]

Have you ever failed?

And yes...at this point we need resolve.

What would you define as victory?
Let's use Bush's definition. A peaceful democracy in the Middle East. Sorry folks, but that's as likely as erasing the fact that 9/11 happened, which seems to be what most of those who still favor this war are really trying to do.

There is no feasible victory over there.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Oh really...then who do you THINK was responsible?The Saudis.

[OrangeShadow]

I was busy watching one of the maybe 4 or 5 channels the damn thing was on! :cuss:

[Dedhed]

Oh really...then who do you THINK was responsible?

Bin Laden. Remember him? You're aware that we're in Iraq now, right?

[Rohirrim]

Holy $h!t. We lacked the resolve to achieve victory in Vietnam! Are you insane? We lacked the means, exactly like we do in Iraq.

We didn't lack the means. We just came to the understanding that the purported reason for being there was a lie, just like in Iraq. Imagine you get into a fight with some guy because somebody told you he said something nasty to your wife. Then, half way through the fight, while you're still swinging away at each other, your wife shows up and says, "He didn't say anything to me. I don't know what you're talking about? The person who told you that was lying." Do you go back to fighting? The truth is, we had no CAUSE in Vietnam, and we have no CAUSE in Iraq. It's got nothing to do with resolve. It's got a lot more to do with some lying POS holding high office.

[Sassy]

On the other hand, we can't just leave it unfinished and hope that something like 9-11 never happens again. Don't you think we are opening ourselves to more attacks if we don't finish what we start...well...actually "we" didn't start it...but you know what I mean.

[BroncoInferno]

Yes we are

No, we aren't. Not one single Iraqi was among the hijackers or known conspirators. Not one.

[clarkster]

What we should do is throw the ****er out of the WH, and show the world that we do and will hold our leaders accountable for their failures and their criminal actions.

i hardly believe that the world would be like" oh wow, look how good America is. they just canned their president are running out of the country. yeah im certain that would "resolve" alot. come on guys, is this really the best answer "we the people" can come up with?

[Rohirrim]

Muslims

So we should declare war on the world's 4.5 billion muslims?

[Garcia Bronco]

Let's use Bush's definition. A peaceful democracy in the Middle East. Sorry folks, but that's as likely as erasing the fact that 9/11 happened, which seems to be what most of those who still favor this war are really trying to do.

There is no feasible victory over there.

There exist peaceful people over there and I have met more than a few. We owe it to them at this point to stay and fight Iran

[Bronco_Beerslug]

there it is. since when did the average citizen actually know or care enough about anything to dictate what the best course for war is? at what point did we take OUR generals power and abilities away? at what point do we sacrifice political correctness for victory? at what point do we as a country realize again that NO LEADER, NO REGIME will EVER please EVERYONE...
im not the expert here, and clearly neither is anyone else here. im just another a-hole that is committed to this task. i dont like it, i really could care less if poor little Iraq is a democracy or not. All I know is that WERE over there, and the "American way" lately is to say "**** it, it isnt working. lets quit" and that too me is an atrocity.

Sorry, but this isn't and wasn't ever a "war". Americans aren't and weren't involved (except those few hundred thousand troops doing multiple tours there) to begin with. Bush has now exhausted our military with his "Iraq exercise" evidenced by the Pentagon rescinding all active duty time limits last month.

The only atrocity is sacrificing more Americans for this "excercise". Like the Bush's bi-partisan panel said, the only way out is to completely leave or pull back to the sidelines.

[Garcia Bronco]

So we should declare war on the world's 4.5 billion muslims?

No...but we have declared war on the muslim ideals of kill people that don't agree with us. People forget Islam was founded by a warlord.

[BroncoInferno]

On the other hand, we can't just leave it unfinished and hope that something like 9-11 never happens again. Don't you think we are opening ourselves to more attacks if we don't finish what we start...well...actually "we" didn't start it...but you know what I mean.

No. I think we open ourselves to more attacks by continuing to alienate that part of the world and thereby creating more angry young Muslim men who want to attack us. And we did "start" it with Iraq. They've never attacked us.

[Rohirrim]

There eist peaceful people over their and I have met more than a few. We owe it to them at this point to stay and fight Iran


:stirstir: ;)

[Garcia Bronco]

No, we aren't. Not one single Iraqi was among the hijackers or known conspirators. Not one.

That really doesn't matter....it's not a particular country...it's ideals of the terrorist militants over there.

[Garcia Bronco]

No. I think we open ourselves to more attacks by continuing to alienate that part of the world and thereby creating more angry young Muslim men who want to attack us. And we did "start" it with Iraq. They've never attacked us.

Thomas Jefferson had to send what was our Navy at the time over there to straighten out the ****ers during his presidency. They've always been like this.

[baja]

i dont disagree with this, however, i do not see how just leaving is going to make anything better for anyone other than the average citizen sick of seeing on CNN? show me the way. all im asking for is someone to come up with plan that other than "pull out immediately". thats just ridiculous.

"Find a way" you say, OK hear you go. You get a time machine see and then you go back to the week before Bush decided against all reasoned judgment to attack a sovereign nation and you don't do it.

[defenseman]

i dont disagree with this, however, i do not see how just leaving is going to make anything better for anyone other than the average citizen sick of seeing on CNN? show me the way. all im asking for is someone to come up with plan that other than "pull out immediately". thats just ridiculous.

Fact is, they have no plan, but will not admit it....and at the same time refuse to discuss the ramifications of pulling chocks and heading home. Agreed, propose an acceptable way out and I'll listen for one. However, just pulling chocks won't work..dman

*Pretty soon, the guy who sits on the sidelines and throws darts at others peoples ideas, and in turn sits on his own hands well enough will be the one to get ahead in DC. Pretty sad state of affairs in politics these days.

[Dedhed]

On the other hand, we can't just leave it unfinished and hope that something like 9-11 never happens again. Don't you think we are opening ourselves to more attacks if we don't finish what we start...well...actually "we" didn't start it...but you know what I mean.

In now way does leaving Iraq open us up to more attacks. Every day we're there we're creating more people who want to do harm to the US than we are killing. Not to mention the BILLIONS of dollars that could be applied to resources, intelligence and technologies that could actually protect us if someone were planning another attack.

[Garcia Bronco]

In now way does leaving Iraq open us up to more attacks. Every day we're there we're creating more people who want to do harm to the US than we are killing. Not to mention the BILLIONS of dollars that could be applied to resources, intelligence and technologies that could actually protect us if someone were planning another attack.

Dude...they've always been like this. and we are spending money in those area's to protect us better. However, the best protection will always be the people in this country, not the widgets produced in a labor or technical factory

[TailgateNut]

Have you ever failed?

And yes...at this point we need resolve.

What would you define as victory?


1. Yes, I have failed at times, but if I consistantly failed I would not be as successful as I am. The problem with GW is that he does not succeed at anything he starts. It's all a game to him, and he knows he doesn't have to put away the pieces, because he will bow out before it's over.

What good has he done for this country in the 6 years he has "ruled his kingdom"?

2. The only "resolve" we need is to hold our leaders accountable for their actions and/ or lack thereof. Only then will we regain the respect of the rest of the world. The respect which we have lost due to the arrogance of our President.

3. Victory would have been to hunt down the "ACTUAL" perpetrators of 9/11.

There is NO VICTORY IN IRAQ! No matter how much you beat a dog, he will never meow!

[clarkster]

"Find a way" you say, OK hear you go. You get a time machine see and then you go back to the week before Bush decided against all reasoned judgment to attack a sovereign nation and you don't do it.

baja,youre a smart guy. thats the dumbest **** ive ever heard. i guess thats the way were heading here though huh? "ah, **** it, the last guy screwed up,what are we supposed to do about it? not my fault, i voted for the other guy" tell you what, do me a favor and stay in your present occupation

[Bronco_Beerslug]

There exist peaceful people over there and I have met more than a few. We owe it to them at this point to stay and fight Iran

How much do we owe it to them, enough to start the draft to replenish out troops to carry out this attack of yours? And are you going to lead by example and join the Marines today or maybe you don't think we owe it to them quite that much?

[defenseman]

No, if we STAY "alot more people will die".

There is no "better" option. There is one option that may secure that country but I'm pretty sure you and most other Americans including the ones in DC have no stomach for it.

I lived it, seen it, it's almost the exact same thing.

Me too, disagree with you......dman

[Dedhed]

Thomas Jefferson had to send what was our Navy at the time over there to straighten out the ****ers during his presidency. They've always been like this.

And yet, you imagine that Bush, in his infinite wisdom and leadership, is going to turn them into peaceful upstanding members of the international community. Sorry, but that is laughable.

[Sassy]

baja,youre a smart guy. thats the dumbest **** ive ever heard. i guess thats the way were heading here though huh? "ah, **** it, the last guy screwed up,what are we supposed to do about it? not my fault, i voted for the other guy" tell you what, do me a favor and stay in your present occupation

Blaming it on Bush kills me...Bin Laden and Saddam were around way before Bush. I'd rather blame it on CLinton :wiggle:

[Garcia Bronco]

How much do we owe it to them, enough to start the draft to replenish out troops to carry out this attack of yours? And are you going to lead by example and join the Marines today?

The Marines won't take me...nor will the Navy, the Army, or the Airforce. I was accepted to VMI, but couldn't pass the physical because of an injury to my arm. I would have graduated a 2 Lou...and gone in without question. And we are no where near starting a draft, but I did register with selective services on my 18th birthday as is my duty as an Amercian male and would proudly take up arm should my country call.

[defenseman]

I changed the channel when he started. Actually loaded up the North side practice.

Well, that accomplished nothing. Sounds familiar...dman

[Garcia Bronco]

And yet, you imagine that Bush, in his infinite wisdom and leadership, is going to turn them into peaceful upstanding members of the international community. Sorry, but that is laughable.

It is laughable, and no one is suggesting that. Those people have to be given an opportunity to do what you say, Iran and Syria and the like are keeping that from happening by funding this insurgency...as well as our failed strategy on providing that opportunity

[defenseman]

You really don't understand what's happened there do you? The Shia's (Iran aligned) are in control now and are at war with the Sunnis. We are in the MIDDLE of it.

this is just one reason why an additional carrier battle group, Stennis I believe is headed to the gulf. Standing passively by and letting them get away with this won't help iraq. Trust me the nuclear enrichment is just one reason we have deployed the stennis...dman

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Blaming it on Bush kills me...Bin Laden and Saddam were around way before Bush. I'd rather blame it on CLinton :wiggle:Yeah, that's just silly blaming this incredible mess on Bush. If you want to blame someone lets go right to where it all started (the Reagan administration for supporting and empowering both of these outstanding citizens). :wiggle:

[clarkster]

bottom line is, the American people have spoke, and will again, in volumes, i hope they like what theyre asking for...

[Stormontheplains]

Have you watched the "Truth of Black Hawk Down". All the soldiers after the battle wanted to go back in, and clinton pulled them out. These soldiers have hatred towards clinton for that. They wanted to go back in and win the war. Our soldiers believe they can be victorious, and if we pull them, that is a lack of confidence vote. Mark my words, if we pull out, 9/11 will be back. The terrorist love democrats, all talk and no action. It is hard to plan attacks when your on the run.

[Garcia Bronco]

Yeah, that's just silly blaming this incredible mess on Bush. If you want to blame someone lets go right to where it all started (the Reagan administration for supporting and empowering both of these outstanding citizens). :wiggle:

Why stop there....you should go back to King Richard, Raynald of Chatillon, and Saladin. ;D

[defenseman]

there it is. since when did the average citizen actually know or care enough about anything to dictate what the best course for war is? at what point did we take OUR generals power and abilities away? at what point do we sacrifice political correctness for victory? at what point do we as a country realize again that NO LEADER, NO REGIME will EVER please EVERYONE...
im not the expert here, and clearly neither is anyone else here. im just another a-hole that is committed to this task. i dont like it, i really could care less if poor little Iraq is a democracy or not. All I know is that WERE over there, and the "American way" lately is to say "**** it, it isnt working. lets quit" and that too me is an atrocity.

What bothers me is the politicians. The american folks that sucscribe to taking charge of the "generals" well they truly don't have a clue. However, the politicians don't have a clue and can bend the happenings in the name of political correctness. Webb, really screwed up when he said the military didn't support the war. He needs to provide data to show, along with steny hoyer. They both have just short of lied on a national level, and I want to see the data. They both make me sick to my stomach....dman

[defenseman]

Holy $h!t. We lacked the resolve to achieve victory in Vietnam! Are you insane? We lacked the means, exactly like we do in Iraq.

We didn't win in Vietnam, because, we didn't fight to win in vietnam. That is the only reason why we didn't come away with a "W" ....dman

[Garcia Bronco]

What bothers me is the politicians. The american folks that sucscribe to taking charge of the "generals" well they truly don't have a clue. However, the politicians don't have a clue and can bend the happenings in the name of political correctness. Webb, really screwed up when he said the military didn't support the war. He needs to provide data to show, along with steny hoyer. They both have just short of lied on a national level, and I want to see the data. They both make me sick to my stomach....dman

Having voted for Webb, I was disappointed with some of his comments. that was one of them. I like the way McCain is approaching this.

[TailgateNut]

No...but we have declared war on the muslim ideals of kill people that don't agree with us. People forget Islam was founded by a warlord.

That's funny! I tend to think that's excactly what we are doing! Here's our way of life, please allow us to shove it down you throat!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

this is just one reason why an additional carrier battle group, Stennis I believe is headed to the gulf. Standing passively by and letting them get away with this won't help iraq. Trust me the nuclear enrichment is just one reason we have deployed the stennis...dman

It's all for show hopefully since attacking Iran would unite most of the rest of the world against us and create a never ending line of terrorists whose sole purpose in life would be to kill Americans.

[Garcia Bronco]

It's all for show hopefully since attacking Iran would unite most of the rest of the world against us and create a never ending line of terrorists whose sole purpose in life would be to kill Americans.

We are not going to let Iran develop nuclear missles. Listem to their dictator and the language he uses. It's trash and he's a danger. Same thing with that jackass is south america

[Rohirrim]

Have you watched the "Truth of Black Hawk Down". All the soldiers after the battle wanted to go back in, and clinton pulled them out. These soldiers have hatred towards clinton for that. They wanted to go back in and win the war. Our soldiers believe they can be victorious, and if we pull them, that is a lack of confidence vote. Mark my words, if we pull out, 9/11 will be back. The terrorist love democrats, all talk and no action. It is hard to plan attacks when your on the run.

It's takes like that that keep me out of the politics forums. Thanks for the reminder.

[defenseman]

So we should declare war on the world's 4.5 billion muslims?

Only fanatical terrorists muslims and ANYONE that supports them. And, I do mean ANYONE. And we have already declared war on them. It's game on. As far as the rest of the muslims, let them have the guts to denounce the terrorists for what they are, pitch in to rid the world of these murderers, and I'll shake their hand and thank them personally. Until they pitch in, and help reign in the fanatics, they are part of the problem...dman

[Garcia Bronco]

Only fanatical terrorists muslims and ANYONE that supports them. And, I do mean ANYONE. And we have already declared war on them. It's game on. As far as the rest of the muslims, let them have the guts to denounce the terrorists for what they are, pitch in to rid the world of these murderers, and I'll shake their hand and thank them personally. Until they pitch in, and help reign in the fanatics, they are part of the problem...dman

Amen.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

We didn't win in Vietnam, because, we didn't fight to win in vietnam. That is the only reason why we didn't come away with a "W" ....dman

Yeah, we sacrificed 55,000 Americans "to lose". Should have just nuked them all and then when the Russia and China retaliated we could nuke them too. :oyvey:

We are not going to let Iran develop nuclear missles. Listem to their dictator and the language he uses. It's trash and he's a danger. Same thing with that jackass is south americaYeah, we are, just like NK and any other country that wants to.

[defenseman]

No. I think we open ourselves to more attacks by continuing to alienate that part of the world and thereby creating more angry young Muslim men who want to attack us. And we did "start" it with Iraq. They've never attacked us.

Sometimes, the remedy taste bad going down, but, it is still the remedy. You are either proactive or reactive. I prefer proactive, definitely don't want to play a "home" game with terrorists, I'll stick with the "away" schedule..dman

[Garcia Bronco]

That's funny! I tend to think that's excactly what we are doing! Here's our way of life, please allow us to shove it down you throat!

It's the only thing they understand.

[BroncoInferno]

Only fanatical terrorists muslims and ANYONE that supports them. And, I do mean ANYONE. And we have already declared war on them.

We have? You do realize that Sadaam's Baathist regime was secular atheist?

[baja]

baja,youre a smart guy. thats the dumbest **** ive ever heard. i guess thats the way were heading here though huh? "ah, **** it, the last guy screwed up,what are we supposed to do about it? not my fault, i voted for the other guy" tell you what, do me a favor and stay in your present occupation

You miss my point Clarker, there is no way to fix this. We destabilized the region and we can not rectify that now. Many said when we went in this would be the result and we were right but unfortunately there is no way to turn back the hands of time. We are in agreement on one thing here though I also have no clue as to what to do now.

[defenseman]

1. Yes, I have failed at times, but if I consistantly failed I would not be as successful as I am. The problem with GW is that he does not succeed at anything he starts. It's all a game to him, and he knows he doesn't have to put away the pieces, because he will bow out before it's over.

What good has he done for this country in the 6 years he has "ruled his kingdom"?

2. The only "resolve" we need is to hold our leaders accountable for their actions and/ or lack thereof. Only then will we regain the respect of the rest of the world. The respect which we have lost due to the arrogance of our President.

3. Victory would have been to hunt down the "ACTUAL" perpetrators of 9/11.

There is NO VICTORY IN IRAQ! No matter how much you beat a dog, he will never meow!

I'll agree with you on one point, even if we achieve VICTORY, the left and their media pundits will ensure it is percieved as a loss. Agreed. Freaking hilarious..dman

[clarkster]

Sometimes, the remedy taste bad going down, but, it is still the remedy. You are either proactive or reactive. I prefer proactive, definitely don't want to play a "home" game with terrorists, I'll stick with the "away" schedule..dman

word...every bastard we dust there is one less here. yeah there may be 3 more in line,but theyre on borrowed time. its a mistake to think that it wouldnt get worse if we got out.
sad as it is, but if its between me and 1000 fellow soldiers, or one innocent child at school, well, ill see them boys on the other side...

[Rohirrim]

Only fanatical terrorists muslims and ANYONE that supports them. And, I do mean ANYONE. And we have already declared war on them. It's game on. As far as the rest of the muslims, let them have the guts to denounce the terrorists for what they are, pitch in to rid the world of these murderers, and I'll shake their hand and thank them personally. Until they pitch in, and help reign in the fanatics, they are part of the problem...dman

Most of the writers I've read and pundits I've listened to, who know anything about the subject, point out that the Saudis are the number one funders, and participants, in carrying out 911. They are still the number one funders of the radical madrassah movement around the world which is the birthing ground for radical, anti-Western fundamentalism. Last I looked, which was about two weeks ago, Bush was kissing the Saudi leadership on both cheeks and Condy was handing out hugs and kisses as well while Exxon was rolling in unprecedented Saudi wealth. Meanwhile, our troops are fighting in Iraq. You got me.

[defenseman]

Yeah, we sacrificed 55,000 Americans "to lose". Should have just nuked them all and then when the Russia and China retaliated we could nuke them too. :oyvey:

Yeah, we are, just like NK and any other country that wants to.

We could have won that, hands f**king down and you know it. I was very aware of what was going on over there just like you. They didn't play to win, they got bit and pulled chocks. LBJ was a freaking idiot..dman

[Garcia Bronco]

word...every bastard we dust there is one less here. yeah there may be 3 more in line,but theyre on borrowed time. its a mistake to think that it wouldnt get worse if we got out.
sad as it is, but if its between me and 1000 fellow soldiers, or one innocent child at school, well, ill see them boys on the other side...

"No poor bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making other bastards die for their country."

-General Patton

Except there is no country in this case, but ideals

[BroncoInferno]

word...every bastard we dust there is one less here.

I see...so every person "dusted" in Iraq was a terrorist who would have eventually killed an American? Gotcha Uhh

[TailgateNut]

It's the only thing they understand.

This arrogant attitude is excactly how we alienate the rest of the world. Do as I say, not as I do! A nation of hard headed uninformed imbiciles just following the tide. Beat them into submission and hope they will never rise up to bite you in the ass.
All I can do when I hear this type of comment is shake my head in disbelief.

[clarkster]

You miss my point Clarker, there is no way to fix this. We destabilized the region and we can not rectify that now. Many said when we went in this would be the result and we were right but unfortunately there is no way to turn back the hands of time. We are in agreement on one thing here though I also have no clue as to what to do now.

you may be right, i certainly hope not,and i definitely believe we can rectify it, it comes down to what the politician asshole in charges fortitude is.
at the same time, who really knew then what we know now? i didnt, and apparently neither did anyone in charge to speak of.
and im definitely in agreement on 2 things, we cant go back and change it, and theres no answer that will please everyone.
only thing i can think of is get wet, get dirty, keep the cameras away

[Rohirrim]

We could have won that, hands ****ing down and you know it. I was very aware of what was going on over there just like you. They didn't play to win, they got bit and pulled chocks. LBJ was a freaking idiot..dman

If I remember correctly, more Americans got killed on Nixon's watch, than LBJ's.

[clarkster]

I see...so every person "dusted" in Iraq was a terrorist who would have eventually killed an American? Gotcha Uhh

you dont think so? its fairly clear to me. aside from the innocents that are being killed by their OWN people, every asshole toting an AK47, or RPG there is just that. i am interested in your view otherwise

[Bronco_Beerslug]

We could have won that, hands ****ing down and you know it. I was very aware of what was going on over there just like you. They didn't play to win, they got bit and pulled chocks. LBJ was a freaking idiot..dmanComplete BS! Where's your excuse for Nixon not "winning"? And what happened to your "commies are going to rule the world" mantra if we pull out?

you dont think so? its fairly clear to me. aside from the innocents that are being killed by their OWN people, every a-hole toting an AK47, or RPG there is just that. i am interested in your view otherwiseOh please, the collateral damage in that country is extensive!

[clarkster]

Oh please, the collateral damage in that country is extensive!

not disagreeing, but how much of that collateral damage is directly from US attacks?

[Garcia Bronco]

This arrogant attitude is excactly how we alienate the rest of the world. Do as I say, not as I do! A nation of hard headed uninformed imbiciles just following the tide. Beat them into submission and hope they will never rise up to bite you in the ass.
All I can do when I hear this type of comment is shake my head in disbelief.

Like I said..Islam was founded by a warlord...it should be no surprise. Sometimes you have to whack the dog with a rolled up newspaper, because it's the only thing he understands. they have been jumping on us and innocent people forever....it's time we blow them all to hell.

[defenseman]

Have you watched the "Truth of Black Hawk Down". All the soldiers after the battle wanted to go back in, and clinton pulled them out. These soldiers have hatred towards clinton for that. They wanted to go back in and win the war. Our soldiers believe they can be victorious, and if we pull them, that is a lack of confidence vote. Mark my words, if we pull out, 9/11 will be back. The terrorist love democrats, all talk and no action. It is hard to plan attacks when your on the run.

I know one guy who was there. He stated the same as you. Pres. Clinton from my understanding though, harbored some desire to go back in. However, if I recall correctly, many of the house, and some of them were republican, were against it. He eventually capitulated. I hold it against him that he didn't tell them f**k off, we are going in and cleaning up mogadishu. As far as the House that shut him down, they are just as screwed. We should have finished it off, the right way...dman

[defenseman]

Having voted for Webb, I was disappointed with some of his comments. that was one of them. I like the way McCain is approaching this.

Gotta watch out for McCain, for an old guy, he still knows how to break out the ole top hat and cane, put on a show, and say nor commit to anything. Drives me nuts about the guy...dman

[defenseman]

That's funny! I tend to think that's excactly what we are doing! Here's our way of life, please allow us to shove it down you throat!

If that's what it takes, to keep playing an "away" game with the terrorists, I'm for it. Don't want to play a "home" game with those a$$holes...dman

[Garcia Bronco]

Gotta watch out for McCain, for an old guy, he still knows how to break out the ole top hat and cane, put on a show, and say nor commit to anything. Drives me nuts about the guy...dman

I have seen him 4 times or so be very consistent on his stance. Right now he is the front runner for my 08 vote, but there is a ways to go

[Bronco_Beerslug]

American casualities are estimated up to 100,000 by some now but 50,000 is a generally accepted number. For those advocating the continued sacrificing of Americans in Iraq, I guess it's easy to do that if you don't actually have to see what the policy has lead to on a daily basis.

----------------------------------------------------------


http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/wyatt2.jpg


http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/boggs.jpg


http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/kelly_ryan2.jpg


http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/nejm_unknown2.gif


http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/martinez_jose.jpg



http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/jackson_robert.jpg


http://tinyurl.com/rocb

[clarkster]

i have a hard time liking clinton or his admin at the time after the Cole and lack of response for it. guess i can say the same about the American public as well...

[Garcia Bronco]

American casualities are estimated up to 100,000 by some now but 50,000 is a generally accepted number. For those advocating the continued sacrificing of Americans in Iraq, I guess it's easy to do that if you don't actually have to see what the policy has lead to on a daily basis.

----------------------------------------------------------



And God Bless them.

[TailgateNut]

Like I said..Islam was founded by a warlord...it should be no surprise. Sometimes you have to whack the dog with a rolled up newspaper, because it's the only thing he understands. they have been jumping on us and innocent people forever....it's time we blow them all to hell.

...and the US is a democracy, and the people have made it clear that we (the majority) do not support nor condone GW's Iraq whack-a-mole game.

[Garcia Bronco]

...and the US is a democracy, and the people have made it clear that we (the majority) do not support nor condone GW's Iraq whack-a-mole game.

How do you figure that?

[clarkster]

American casualities are estimated up to 100,000 by some now but 50,000 is a generally accepted number. For those advocating the continued sacrificing of Americans in Iraq, I guess it's easy to do that if you don't actually have to see what the policy has lead to on a daily basis.

----------------------------------------------------------




number one, estimated based on what?
number two, in your opinion what war/conflict has the US been in is worth it?
number three, as horrible as it sounds, the last thing those soldiers need is you to blame someone else for their injuries and call it a senseless war.

[defenseman]

I see...so every person "dusted" in Iraq was a terrorist who would have eventually killed an American? Gotcha Uhh

You need to accept a simple fact, war in itself, is an imperfect business. Sometimes innocent folks die, however, you can't be afraid to make mistakes IF you plan on winning such an endeavor. You accept them, make corrections and move on smartly to the end game. simple as that .....dman

[Garcia Bronco]

number one, estimated based on what?
number two, in your opinion what war/conflict has the US been in is worth it?
number three, as horrible as it sounds, the last thing those soldiers need is you to blame someone else for their injuries and call it a senseless war.

Amen...It as if to say your sacriface was worthless. It's one of the worst things that is said in all this. That's way McCain is against this phoney resolution against increased troops...which they (congress cannot stop).

[TailgateNut]

How do you figure that?

Do you live in a frigging cave, or is it a deaf, dumb and blind thing? I hate to put it so harshly, but to question the lack of support is just plain ignorant of the facts!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

number one, estimated based on what? VA and independent numbers.


number two, in your opinion what war/conflict has the US been in is worth it? No wars are "worth it" some are necessary, the Iraqi grudge match is neither.

number three, as horrible as it sounds, the last thing those soldiers need is you to blame someone else for their injuries and call it a senseless war. The last thing our soldiers need is to continue this sacrifice and create more American casualties. Killing and maiming more Americans doesn't make it right, no matter how long you do it.

[Garcia Bronco]

Do you live in a frigging cave, or is it a deaf, dumb and blind thing? I hate to put it so harshly, but to question the lack of support is just plain ignorant of the facts!

I see Congressmen yapping on the TV and media people, but those are few voices. Basically what I am saying is what you claim is impossible to determine unless you polled every Amercian Citizen. So I ask...how do you figure what you claimed?

[defenseman]

This arrogant attitude is excactly how we alienate the rest of the world. Do as I say, not as I do! A nation of hard headed uninformed imbiciles just following the tide. Beat them into submission and hope they will never rise up to bite you in the ass.
All I can do when I hear this type of comment is shake my head in disbelief.

the rest of the world's attitude would alienate us with or without us waging war. don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise, we are despised for who we are and the liberties we enjoy, as well as most likely the war we wage. With or without the iraq war, they would have still hated us and continued to attack us. The fact of the matter is, sit on your hands as a nation and you welcome wholesale attack. On that note, I presume you prefer a "home" game with the terrorists? If so, I'd get qualified on a weapon and step up to the plate before I offered them an "away" schedule..dman

[BroncoInferno]

you dont think so? its fairly clear to me. aside from the innocents that are being killed by their OWN people, every a-hole toting an AK47, or RPG there is just that. i am interested in your view otherwise

Some are people who want nothing more that the US presence in Iraq gone. Some want control of their particular territory for whatever nefarious reason. Some are paid mercenaries who don't care about the US one way or the other. Some are terrorists in training. The notion that large numbers of them would have found their way to the US, much less successfully pull off an attack, is painfully absurd.

[defenseman]

you may be right, i certainly hope not,and i definitely believe we can rectify it, it comes down to what the politician a-hole in charges fortitude is.
at the same time, who really knew then what we know now? i didnt, and apparently neither did anyone in charge to speak of.
and im definitely in agreement on 2 things, we cant go back and change it, and theres no answer that will please everyone.
only thing i can think of is get wet, get dirty, keep the cameras away

Yep, agreed. How about we let the commanders in field do their job and keep our big traps shut, including the freaking politicians and the damn media. Tired of the lot of them..dman

[defenseman]

If I remember correctly, more Americans got killed on Nixon's watch, than LBJ's.

LBJ was in a position to freaking annihilate the SOB's, however he micro managed the war from his office , literally in some cases and screwed it totally up. What a goddamn moron he was.....dman

[BroncoInferno]

You need to accept a simple fact, war in itself, is an imperfect business. Sometimes innocent folks die, however, you can't be afraid to make mistakes IF you plan on winning such an endeavor. You accept them, make corrections and move on smartly to the end game. simple as that .....dman


If most of the folks we were killing were terrorists who would have eventually made their way to the US and attempted an attack, fine. That is not the case. Only an tiny percentage fall into that category.

[clarkster]

The notion that large numbers of them would have found their way to the US, much less successfully pull off an attack, is painfully absurd.

if you ask me, the notion that large numbers of them wouldnt have, is what leads to terrorist attacks ala WTC, and to me whats painfully absurd is to assume that they cant or wont.

[Garcia Bronco]

if you ask me, the notion that large numbers of them wouldnt have, is what leads to terrorist attacks ala WTC, and to me whats painfully absurd is to assume that they cant or wont.

How many planes got highjacked in the 80's? Do people remember the TWA flight that was held hostage for what seemed a year. All these ****ers, aka Islamic Militants, are cut from the same cloth. Doesn't matter if it's Syria, Jordon, Saudi, Iran, or Iraq. It's how they roll, and damn skippy they'd find a way

[defenseman]

Some are people who want nothing more that the US presence in Iraq gone. Some want control of their particular territory for whatever nefarious reason. Some are paid mercenaries who don't care about the US one way or the other. Some are terrorists in training. The notion that large numbers of them would have found their way to the US, much less successfully pull off an attack, is painfully absurd.

I suggest you get up to speed on how far and sophisticated terrorism has come. Sit on your hands, they'll pick you apart, in small chunks. Best keep it overseas...dman

[worm]

Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later [makes squish gesture] get squish just like grape.

Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do "yes" or karate do "no." You karate do "guess so," [makes squish gesture] just like grape.

[clarkster]

VA and independent numbers.

No wars are "worth it" some are necessary, the Iraqi grudge match is neither.
The last thing our soldiers need is to continue this sacrifice and create more American casualties. Killing and maiming more Americans doesn't make it right, no matter how long you do it.

VA and independent numbers know about as much as you or me...not much. not saying it wont be that high or higher, just not quick to throw numbers like that around without being able to see what the future will bring.
Youre correct, no wars are worth it, but some are neccessary, however, who are you to say this one isnt? who am i to say it is?
nope, killing and maiming more isnt right, but ive yet to see any other option. i agree a change is needed, i will not agree that tucking tail and running is the answer.

[BroncoInferno]

if you ask me, the notion that large numbers of them wouldnt have, is what leads to terrorist attacks ala WTC, and to me whats painfully absurd is to assume that they cant or wont.

You can't argue with this kind of absurdity. 9/11 did not happen because droves of terrorists were in our country. It only took 19.

[defenseman]

If most of the folks we were killing were terrorists who would have eventually made their way to the US and attempted an attack, fine. That is not the case. Only an tiny percentage fall into that category.

I'd need to see a bit of data on that one. We are not knowingly killing civilians I can tell you that, however, they are...dman

[defenseman]

You can't argue with this kind of absurdity. 9/11 did not happen because droves of terrorists were in our country. It only took 19.

Exactly my point...they are very resourceful, cunning and well supplied these days. Iran is just part of the problem. Unless, you take the head off and cut their heart out, they'll keep coming...in droves I might add...dman

[sirhcyennek81]

I found the democratic response to the State of the Union address typical of the Democrats the last 8+ years. Explain to me the difference between Precipitous (sp) withdrawal and Withdrawal in short order. It is a flowery version of cut and run. Apparently Vietnam in 1975, Iran in 1979 and Somalia in 1993 has taught the democrats nothing about what it means to pack up and leave, and the chaos that ensues because of it.
I really dont get the servile nature of some people in this country, do you really care if you lost the respect of Venezuela, or Liberia, or Syria? Russia or Germany? Tarnished image...US should always take the attitude I cant hear your bitching over the sound of me getting **** done. Thats not arrogance, but reality. Terrorists are not coming after us because we are just here, but because we can actually prevent their vision of the world's future.

:Broncos:

[BroncoInferno]

I'd need to see a bit of data on that one. We are not knowingly killing civilians I can tell you that, however, they are...dman

So, you think that the majority of the thousands of dead or wounded Iraqis would have otherwise eventually made it to the US and attempted an attack? Do you really need data to support that idea?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Exactly my point...they are very resourceful, cunning and well supplied these days. Iran is just part of the problem. Unless, you take the head off and cut their heart out, they'll keep coming...in droves I might add...dmanShakes head in disbelief.

Terrorists are not coming after us because we are just here, but because we can actually prevent their vision of the world's future.
Anyone who thinks that there are no terrorists in this country and we aren't creating more terrorists is as naive as Bush is.

[BroncoInferno]

Exactly my point...they are very resourceful, cunning and well supplied these days. Iran is just part of the problem. Unless, you take the head off and cut their heart out, they'll keep coming...in droves I might add...dman

So, you agree...that's precisely why mowing down thousands of Arabs is a totally worthless strategy, because the terrorists can accomplish their mission with as few as one individual.

[clarkster]

You can't argue with this kind of absurdity. 9/11 did not happen because droves of terrorists were in our country. It only took 19.

not the point. point was that if you assmue they wont or cant, they will, and then where are you? pissed because nothing was done ahead of time to prevent it. if youve got a better way of preventing it, please write your local police department, military base and SECDEF.
and if you think there isnt DROVES of terrorists in our country, youre part of the problem.

[TailgateNut]

the rest of the world's attitude would alienate us with or without us waging war. don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise, we are despised for who we are and the liberties we enjoy, as well as most likely the war we wage. With or without the iraq war, they would have still hated us and continued to attack us. The fact of the matter is, sit on your hands as a nation and you welcome wholesale attack. On that note, I presume you prefer a "home" game with the terrorists? If so, I'd get qualified on a weapon and step up to the plate before I offered them an "away" schedule..dman

Actually we have generally been envied for the freedoms and liberties we enjoy by most of the world, we are however dispised for our better than thou attitude.
I never said anything about sitting on our hands, but we should also refrain from being the self proclaimed world police.
As far as your weapons qualification comments are concerned, I have no concern. I am well qualified, willing and able to defend my country, and am not one to make any medical excuses if called upon, although I could if I wanted to.

[Garcia Bronco]

You can't argue with this kind of absurdity. 9/11 did not happen because droves of terrorists were in our country. It only took 19.

Exactly...it only took 19.

[BroncoInferno]

Exactly...it only took 19.

Which is why mowing down thousands is worthless. They don't need thousands. That is what you don't seem to get.

[defenseman]

Shakes head in disbelief.

Everyone has an opinion, and the right to disagree, however I continue to support an away schedule for iraq and terrorism in general....dman

*the fact of the matter is, IF we were allowed to take the gloves off, really take them off, we'd be done over there right now. None of this would be an issue. But, we didn't, so we aren't done yet..

[sirhcyennek81]

Complete BS! Where's your excuse for Nixon not "winning"? And what happened to your "commies are going to rule the world" mantra if we pull out?

Oh please, the collateral damage in that country is extensive!


So...from 1945 to 1990, over half the earth's surface was in communist hands, and you dont consider that an attempt at "ruling the earth"? Ever since the fall of communism, we have had to clean up the results of soviet imperialism. Also, we did win in Vietnam, we left an independent south vietnam. Our democrat-dominated congress decided watergate was more important that defending an ally after the north vietnamese violated the peace deal worked out in Paris. Its easy to blame Nixon.

:Broncos:

[defenseman]

Which is why mowing down thousands is worthless. They don't need thousands. That is what you don't seem to get.

the "thousands"? of iraqiis? And what percentage are we responsible for and what percentage is the insurgency/terrorists responsible for? Lay that out please...dman

[BroncoInferno]

the "thousands"? of iraqiis? And what percentage are we responsible for and what percentage is the insurgency/terrorists responsible for? Lay that out please...dman

Thousands have been killed by the US. That is undeniable.

[sirhcyennek81]

we are however dispised for our better than thou attitude.


Its not an attitude, its a reality. You dont have people trying to kill you because you are the same as everyone else.


:Broncos:

[Garcia Bronco]

the "thousands"? of iraqiis? And what percentage are we responsible for and what percentage is the insurgency/terrorists responsible for? Lay that out please...dman

And how many are actually Iraqi and not syrians and Iranians

[defenseman]

Thousands have been killed by the US. That is undeniable.

More by the terrorists and iran supported folks I'm sure. In any case, war in itself, is an imperfect business. It always has been , always will be, however occassionally war is necessary...dman

[sirhcyennek81]

Thousands have been killed by the US. That is undeniable.


For every one iraqi we kill on accident, there are 100 killed by the "insurgents" on purpose. But we are the evil, right?


:Broncos:

[Garcia Bronco]

Everyone has an opinion, and the right to disagree, however I continue to support an away schedule for iraq and terrorism in general....dman

*the fact of the matter is, IF we were allowed to take the gloves off, really take them off, we'd be done over there right now. None of this would be an issue. But, we didn't, so we aren't done yet..

Exactly

[defenseman]

And how many are actually Iraqi and not syrians and Iranians

Very good question. But of course, why muck up the water, we'll just call them civilians what do you say Mr. murdoch?...dman

[TailgateNut]

the "thousands"? of iraqiis? And what percentage are we responsible for and what percentage is the insurgency/terrorists responsible for? Lay that out please...dman

How many were being killed on a daily basis before we went in and ****ed it all up, and in turn lured thousands of terrorists into Iraq and created the "insurgency".

It has always been a unjust attack based on fabrications and LIES! The true recipient of vengeance were not funded by IRAQ. Iraq had no WMD. This has always been a GW game, and we, to this date still have citizens who believe otherwise.

[defenseman]

For every one iraqi we kill on accident, there are 100 killed by the "insurgents" on purpose. But we are the evil, right?


:Broncos:

According to many sources within this country, Yes. Pretty damn amazing. War is imperfect, deal with it...dman

[clarkster]

Actually we have generally been envied for the freedoms and liberties we enjoy by most of the world, we are however dispised for our better than thou attitude.

I never said anything about sitting on our hands, but we should also refrain from being the self proclaimed world police.


As far as your weapons qualification comments are concerned, I have no concern. I am well qualified, willing and able to defend my country, and am not one to make any medical excuses if called upon, although I could if I wanted to.

and rightfully so. if you dont agree, the exits that way.

agreed, but last i checked, it has to be done, and in case you havent noticed, nobody else has sacked up to do it.

please dont, last thing i want when im in the sh*t is someone telling me why we shouldnt be in the sh*t.

[TailgateNut]

Its not an attitude, its a reality. You dont have people trying to kill you because you are the same as everyone else.


:Broncos:

So, if someone is different, he/she should be killed! That's why we are in Iraq!
Now I get it!

[BroncoInferno]

For every one iraqi we kill on accident, there are 100 killed by the "insurgents" on purpose. But we are the evil, right?


:Broncos:

I love this argument. It's OK if we do it because they do it more. Brilliant.

And you guys don't seem to understand my argument anyway. The goal of this is to prevent terrorist attacks on the homeland, right? So, how many of the killed would have ever actually got into the US and attempted an attack? The numbers are meniscule. This strategy of just mow'em all down is an ineffective needle in the haystack strategy. Of every thousand indivduals killed maybe a couple (and very possibly none) would have ever gotten into the US, to say nothing of successfully pulling off an attack. Fighting terrorism as a convential war is nothing short of retarded and is not effective.

[defenseman]

How many were being killed on a daily basis before we went in and ****ed it all up, and in turn lured thousands of terrorists into Iraq and created the "insurgency".

It has always been a unjust attack based on fabrications and LIES! The true recipient of vengeance were not funded by IRAQ. Iraq had no WMD. This has always been a GW game, and we, to this date still have citizens who believe otherwise.

Are we going down this road AGAIN? The discussion point is, will the surge of troops into baghdad get it done. I vote yes. Anyone else?..dman

*Lured terrorists? Good, makes them easier to find and put a bullet in them.

[Garcia Bronco]

Very good question. But of course, why muck up the water, we'll just call them civilians what do you say Mr. murdoch?...dman

Indeed

[TailgateNut]

please dont, last thing i want when im in the sh*t is someone telling me why we shouldnt be in the sh*t.

I've done my time! ....and if it's a matter of country, don't question my loyalty, piss-ant!

[sirhcyennek81]

According to many sources within this country, Yes. Pretty damn amazing. War is imperfect, deal with it...dman


More people died in one day invading Okinawa then has died in 4 years of war in Iraq, thats perspective, and the idea that if you bleed america long enough, she will give up and go home is being proven in Iraq. That is a dangerous precedent to set.


:Broncos:

[Garcia Bronco]

How many were being killed on a daily basis before we went in and ****ed it all up, and in turn lured thousands of terrorists into Iraq and created the "insurgency".

It has always been a unjust attack based on fabrications and LIES! The true recipient of vengeance were not funded by IRAQ. Iraq had no WMD. This has always been a GW game, and we, to this date still have citizens who believe otherwise.

Who cares if they had WMD's. We had every right to go into that region after what they did. What their way of life caused on our soil. The WMD portion was just a selling point. True or not does not matter. And Saddam's governement did have ties to terrorist and funded terrorist training.

[TailgateNut]

Are we going down this road AGAIN? The discussion point is, will the surge of troops into baghdad get it done. I vote yes. Anyone else?..dman

*Lured terrorists? Good, makes them easier to find and put a bullet in them.


No it will not make a damn bit of difference, aside from the numbers buried and maimed on both sides of the aisle!

[Garcia Bronco]

More people died in one day invading Okinawa then has died in 4 years of war in Iraq, thats perspective, and the idea that if you bleed america long enough, she will give up and go home is being proven in Iraq. That is a dangerous precedent to set.


:Broncos:

and that's exactly where we are at right now.

[N.O.Bronco]

the rest of the world's attitude would alienate us with or without us waging war. don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise, we are despised for who we are and the liberties we enjoy, as well as most likely the war we wage. With or without the iraq war, they would have still hated us and continued to attack us. The fact of the matter is, sit on your hands as a nation and you welcome wholesale attack. On that note, I presume you prefer a "home" game with the terrorists? If so, I'd get qualified on a weapon and step up to the plate before I offered them an "away" schedule..dman


honestlly that is the stupidest reasoning i have ever heard. It sounds like Bush trying to talk about the motives of the insurgency. No i repeat no one, democrat or republican said to sit on their hands, everyone agrees something needed to be done about terrorism after 9/11. And the whole western world was behind us 100% in the beginning until we decided to invade Iraq and 10s of millions protested all around the world because they knew the reasons given were shaky at best(which turned out to be true) and this invasion was a diversion from the task at hand. The free world doesnt hate us they hate or arrogant stupididty about Iraq.

[TailgateNut]

Who cares if they had WMD's. We had every right to go into that region after what they did. What their way of life caused on our soil. The WMD portion was just a selling point. True or not does not matter. And Saddam's governement did have ties to terrorist and funded terrorist training.

Are we talking Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan.....which one did it? ......which one is "they"? Where were the 9-11 perpetrators from?

[N.O.Bronco]

Who cares if they had WMD's. We had every right to go into that region after what they did. What their way of life caused on our soil. The WMD portion was just a selling point. True or not does not matter. And Saddam's governement did have ties to terrorist and funded terrorist training.

give me one link to that BS you are spouting out there, casue it is a complete lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq-al_Qaeda_Connection

every single military and political agency(even the president admits this) there was no link from 9/11 and/or terrorists that were meant to carry out attacks on us.

[sirhcyennek81]

Who cares if they had WMD's. We had every right to go into that region after what they did. What their way of life caused on our soil. The WMD portion was just a selling point. True or not does not matter. And Saddam's governement did have ties to terrorist and funded terrorist training.


Iraqi WMD are true, they found the corpses of the Kurds and Iranians it was used on. We waited 10 years, 6 months to go into Iraq, in that 10 years, 6 months, who knows where Iraqi WMD stockpiles had been moved to and who they were given to.

:Broncos:

[BroncoInferno]

More people died in one day invading Okinawa then has died in 4 years of war in Iraq, thats perspective, and the idea that if you bleed america long enough, she will give up and go home is being proven in Iraq. That is a dangerous precedent to set.


:Broncos:

There is not a single similarity between WWII and the war in Iraq. Not one.

What you people don't get is that there is no Republic of Terror like there is a Germany or Japan. One Arab youth sitting in his apartment in France can wake up one morning pissed off at America, buy a bomb making book, buy a ticket to America, strap the bomb on and detonate himself in a New York subway. How does the war in Iraq do anything to help hunt down and find such individuals or groups with the same goal?

[Garcia Bronco]

Are we talking Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan.....which one did it? ......which one is "they"? Where were the 9-11 perpetrators from?

Good question...I think they are all to a degree guilty because they allow the mentality to grow amongst themselves.

[TailgateNut]

honestlly that is the stupidest reasoning i have ever heard. It sounds like Bush trying to talk about the motives of the insurgency. No i repeat no one, democrat or republican said to sit on their hands, everyone agrees something needed to be done about terrorism after 9/11. And the whole western world was behind us 100% in the beginning until we decided to invade Iraq and 10s of millions protested all around the world because they knew the reasons given were shaky at best(which turned out to be true) and this invasion was a diversion from the task at hand. The free world doesnt hate us they hate or arrogant stupididty about Iraq.


attempting to beat knowledge into the Bushbots is as futile as creating a free democracy in the ME! Beating a dead horse!

[sirhcyennek81]

People act like we have never faced religious extremism before. We did, in Imperial Japan, and that type of warfare is what it is going to take to win.

:Broncos:

[TailgateNut]

Iraqi WMD are true, they found the corpses of the Kurds and Iranians it was used on. We waited 10 years, 6 months to go into Iraq, in that 10 years, 6 months, who knows where Iraqi WMD stockpiles had been moved to and who they were given to.

:Broncos:


Certified KOOL AID CONSUMER!

[clarkster]

I've done my time! ....and if it's a matter of country, don't question my loyalty, piss-ant!

brilliant...name calling. blame storming. what else is in your arsenal?
nobody was questioning your loyalty, simply stating a FACT. when im in the ****, i dont want you there telling me why we shouldnt be there.

[N.O.Bronco]

Are we going down this road AGAIN? The discussion point is, will the surge of troops into baghdad get it done. I vote yes. Anyone else?..dman

*Lured terrorists? Good, makes them easier to find and put a bullet in them.

and i quote myself

especially cosidering he is only "surging" to the level we had in the high point of 2005. it didnt work then, i dont think its gonna work now(for more reasons then that). Also good to note that his so called escalation is putting 21,000 troops in. The people he consultated that actually agreed with the surge idea said that at a absolute minimum you needed 35,00 to 50,000 troops any less was a waste.

Now the real consensus of the best regarded surge advocates(mosty militarial strategists probablly the best minds for this of course) suggested to secure baghdad one needed to have one soldier for every 40 to 100 people, bringing the total to at a minimum 100,000 and ideally 400,000 additional troops. That along with the policies he put in place. Now understanding that after all the places he sought out advice he decided on a plan every single one of them recommended against begs the question, why is he actually doing this?

and again

See and thats another reason i find this plan, well questionable. Bush knows full and well that we failed to properlly train the forces, police and military. After the stupid disbandment of the army we collected willing civilians and pushed them through training that equated to a weekend sleepover and on monday you got a gun and were told to police or be part of a battalion. to say most of these troops are undertrained and underprepared is an understatement. Bush knows this. Bush also knows that he is asking Maliki to basically stab the people who got him elected(sadr and his many followers and supporters) in the back for Bush, another unlikelly scenario. It would be like Bush in his first term telling every republican voter to F off and start signing laws supporting gay marriage and encouraging beastiality. for Both it would be political suicide. yet we arent focusing on training new troops the way many plans outlined, why? It seems illogical to think that somehow they are gonna train themselves when they have no structure to do so other then us. Again i question the motives of pressuring the iraqis in the way he is doing it, i agree they need to be pressured but this is definatlly in certain aspects applying the pressure in the wrong places before building up the pain threshold to take it.

[Garcia Bronco]

give me one link to that BS you are spouting out there, casue it is a complete lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq-al_Qaeda_Connection

every single military and political agency(even the president admits this) there was no link from 9/11 and/or terrorists that were meant to carry out attacks on us.

Doesn't matter...what's the difference between terrorist A and terrorist B? One is A and one is B...but it's still a terrorist. Again an Islamic Militant Terrorist is an Islamic Militant Terrorist. And they grow them over there in droves.

[BroncoInferno]

People act like we have never faced religious extremism before. We did, in Imperial Japan, and that type of warfare is what it is going to take to win.

:Broncos:

The key is that the extremism was centrally located in Japan, and they were using an army to carry out their imperialistic goals. A terrorist can and does come from practically anywhere on the globe and use small groups, or even just themself, to carry out their attacks. To compare Imperial Japan to terrorism is absolutely absurd.

[Garcia Bronco]

The key is that the extremism was centrally located in Japan, and they were using an army to carry out their imperialistic goals. A terrorist can and does come from practically anywhere on the globe and use small groups, or even just themself, to carry out their attacks. To compare Imperial Japan to terrorism is absolutely absurd.

they are not mutally exclusive either

[N.O.Bronco]

Iraqi WMD are true, they found the corpses of the Kurds and Iranians it was used on. We waited 10 years, 6 months to go into Iraq, in that 10 years, 6 months, who knows where Iraqi WMD stockpiles had been moved to and who they were given to.

:Broncos:

Agian i call you out as a a lier or severlly misinformed, provide a link before you spout off this crap that once again every militarial and intilegence agency this country has agrres that Iraqs WMD programs at best at the time of invasion was years off from even getting to useable level and that was a huge stretch because the economy was it and crumbling beneath saddams feet. so again you spout it off provide a link.

[BroncoInferno]

they are not mutally exclusive either

There is no Republic of Terror army. It is mutually exclusive.

[defenseman]

More people died in one day invading Okinawa then has died in 4 years of war in Iraq, thats perspective, and the idea that if you bleed america long enough, she will give up and go home is being proven in Iraq. That is a dangerous precedent to set.


:Broncos:

Very dangerous I might add....not willing to do what has to be done? Bad Karma, welcomes all kinds of s**t right down on top of all our heads..dman

[sirhcyennek81]

There is not a single similarity between WWII and the war in Iraq. Not one.

What you people don't get is that there is no Republic of Terror like there is a Germany or Japan. One Arab youth sitting in his apartment in France can wake up one morning pissed off at America, buy a bomb making book, buy a ticket to America, strap the bomb on and detonate himself in a New York subway. How does the war in Iraq do anything to help hunt down and find such individuals or groups with the same goal?


Detroying Saddam removed one source of financing and weapons that Al qaeda, Hammas, Hezbollah, ect could buy from and use. You can deny there is no comparison between WWII and Iraq, but willfully not seeing them means they do not exist. We are fighting a suicidal, extreme enemy who wants us dead. We fought two enemies in WW2 who ended up being suicidal and wanted us dead. There is no real difference between the nature of the enemy we face, just the circumstances under which we have to fight them.

:Broncos:

[Garcia Bronco]

There is no Republic of Terror army. It is mutually exclusive.

Not in belief...what's the difference between a shinto soldier on a suicide misson and bomb jacket wearing terrorist? What's the different result?