Cut-and-runners
I have a short response to Kerry Neuville’s letter to the editor of Aug. 22, “Conservatives set to blame war on libs,” in which he assures us of the conservatives’ coming attempt to blame liberals for being cut-and-runners who will lose the war in Iraq: Too late! We have already said it because it’s true. If the yellow streak fits, wear it!
Stephen Maio, Westminster
Conservatives may blame the libs, but parents and loved ones of the troops know better.
Slogans at home don`t lose the war over there. That is magical thinking.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 10, 2007 01:05 AMWhat a slant. Spoken like a person who has never served. Way to go Sharon. You prove that you have no idea of what the military family culture is about.
Posted by on September 10, 2007 04:13 AMand now for the rest of the left wing liberals who lover their freedoms but will never stand up to protect them.
ok all of you Bush bashers have a fun time with this one.
Stephen how can we loose a war we already have won. I know we won it because I saw Bush land on a aircraft carrier and announce it. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
Posted by larrymc on September 10, 2007 05:49 AMOf course it's right to blame the left for a war in Iraq based on a series of lies from the right - after all, when the administration basically said that anyone opposed to the 'preemptive war' was a traitor, the Dems caved. The war in Iraq was started by Bush because (fill in your favorite lie here). The problem with the war in Iraq is two-fold:
1) Osama bin Laden (remember him - mastermind of 9/11) is still thumbing his nose at the US
2) it opened Iraq to AlQaeda & oher Islamic terrorist groups - as well as being a recruiting tool for those organizations (or do you honestly think that invading a sovereign nation didn't rile any members of Islam 'on the fence'). In addition, while Saddam Hussein was a terrible, horrible despot, but anyone who thinks that a despot would share the power in his country needs to look up the word despot in the dictionary.
If this so-called war on terror is as critical to the US way of life as Bush would have us believe, we need to do the following:
1) reinstate the draft - and this time include females since almost all career fields are now open to them. There should also be limited reasons for exemptions (if Cheney had really had health reasons during VietNam, he would have been classified 4F - physically unable to perform, instead of receiving 5 exemptions before the draft was stopped). There is no reasonable explanation for sending members of the military to 3rd, 4th and 5th tours of duty.
2) fix the broken VA hospital system. While 3762 members of the military have been killed there (almost 1000 more than were killed on 9/11 - which Iraq had nothing to do with); roughly 1 in 10 members of the military has suffered some form of injury. Those who have been sent home due to the severity of their injuries are sent to military hospitals which have been allowed to deteriorate for decades (which indicates that a member of the military is expected to die for his/her country - not live for it). Anyone who complains about the cost of supporting health problems caused by the war (and PTSD is NOT a pre-existing condition as some members of the military have claimed recently to avoid care) should immediately be sent to the front or have a family member sent there.
3) rescind all tax cuts - this is the first time since the Revolutionary War that taxes have been cut during a time of war.
4) the next time the GAO catches Halliburton (the main contractor in Iraq, which was awarded a no-bid contract courtesy of their former CEO, VP Cheney) - or any other contractor is found to have overcharged the government, not only should the company be fined, the US head of operations should be tried for war-profiteering. (Halliburton/KBR alone has been caught several times overcharging to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. The company has overcharges for importing gas from Kuwait & for meals served to the troops).
If this war in Iraq - which allowed the civil war to start (this result was forecast in 1991, when George HW Bush CHOSE to leave Hussein in power - it was known that while he was a despot, only he could maintain stability in that country - and at the time Cheney & Rumsfeld agreed with the decision) - is so important to the US way of life then EVERYONE should have to bear the cost of maintaining that way of life.
Posted by Mary on September 10, 2007 05:58 AMStephen, the US being in Iraq and Afghanistan is like the USSR in 1956 being in Hungary. We invaded the country and installed a puppet government, We now MURDER and arrest thousands of decent, honorable, brave and patriotic FREEDOM FIGHTERS that attack the puppet government. If we "cut 'n run" or do the "bug-out boogie", we would doing the MORAL and correct thing We should leave immeditely!
Please, directly respond to the FACT that we invaded another country and are now trying to maintain a government that is compliant to our demands.
Posted by Dave on September 10, 2007 06:19 AMMary, do we truly want the Mastermind's, St. Elway's, Mitt's, and Billie Mae Owens' kids, serving in Iraq-NAM? Owens' son wouldn't qualify becasue he is a felon. Ooops! We already have recruited convicted felons who are serving in military uniform. Bush is a UCMJ-felon (AWOL-deserter), directing other felons in our military units and he even hired a fellow felon. USSC Judge Alito is also a UCMJ-felon (AWOL-deserter). Where are all those Bush Mile High '04' Iraq-NAM War cheerleaders now?
Posted by 40acresandmymuleandNAMvetbennies on September 10, 2007 06:53 AMDid we use the term "Cut and Run" when we left Vietnam? I suppose conservatives believe we should still be in Vietnam.
Posted by just sayin' on September 10, 2007 07:32 AMBush & and his administration are the original 'cut & runners'. They cut and ran from Bin Laden in Afghanistan to wage an oil war on a country who had never attacked the US.
Too bad, King George couldnt stay focused on pursuing the terrorists who attacked the US instead of turning Iraq into a breeding pool for new anti-US terrorists.
As for yellow streaks, I suggest 'brave' Mr. Stephen Maio has a bright wide one on his back since his idea of fighting the Iraq War is to do it safely from Westminster, Coloardo! How truly gutless you must be Stephen.
Apropos Mary's letter is an item in today's New York Times:
A U.S. General’s Disquiet
By ROGER COHEN
Can America win in Iraq when everyone’s at the mall?
Excerpt:
“The U.S. as a nation — and indeed most of the U.S. government — has not gone to war since 9/11,” he observes. While the military is fighting, “the American people and most of the other institutions of national power have largely gone about their business.”
Rarely, if ever, has daily death in combat been accompanied on such a scale by the maxing out of credit cards at the mall. President Bush likes to call himself a “war president.” More accurately he has been the war-and-shop, conflict-and-home-equity-credit president."
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 08:02 AMOur government chose to attack the wrong country. 15 Saudi Arabians attacked the U.S. on 9-11, and our president chose to attack Iraq. We can't win anything in Iraq, we can only continue to show the world how stupid our "leaders" are.
Posted by mike h on September 10, 2007 08:06 AMYou stupid liberals.If you clowns would ever check the facts or listen to what the troops are saying would know we are winning this war and that the dems. are trying to do everything possible to lose this war for political gain.They take advantage of the un-educated like mary,sharon b.,drew,charles b.,og,mike d.and unfortunately too many others.These clowns definitely don't support our troops.
Posted by Keith on September 10, 2007 08:06 AMlarry the ultra liberal mc, the mission accomplished banner was for the ship not the war. but the facts have never stopped all of the anti war liberal crowd before so why would it now.
it is so nice to see 40 acres is still mad at the world and is stuck and refuses to move on with his life. being a vicutm in his own mind is so easy for him.
Posted by on September 10, 2007 08:18 AMI wonder if the letter writer is posting on the website. The tone and content certainly bear great resemblance to the effluvium from the yappy puppy who needs to sleep with his AK47 replacement for his teddy bear at night.
Posted by Old Grouch on September 10, 2007 08:34 AMIt is interested to see revisionist history in action. The army and government of Iraq were destroyed and dismantled. This is only time in recorded history that this called "losing a war". I will file this bovine excrement with other revisionist facts: Lincoln was a democrat, Nazi's were not socialists they were republicans, and the faces on Rushmore are all Dems.
The General's report is due today. The Dems have already called him a liar. A General in the military service has more honor, in my book, than all those clowns in Washington. It is disheartening that political power is more important than our country or the lives in Iraq.
Whenever I hear the term "Cut and Run", it reminds me of that idiot older Congresswoman from Ohio, dressed up in a patriotic jumpsuit. bellowing out that only cowards cut and run, Marines never do. Of course she was taking a shot at John Murtha who happens to have a chest full of medals from his days as a Marine. When she was informed that she was calling out an actual war hero she just plead ignorance. I think all the Republicans will be pleading ignorance soon.
Posted by just sayin' on September 10, 2007 08:56 AMOld Grouch
"The tone and content certainly bear great resemblance to the effluvium from the yappy puppy who needs to sleep with his AK47 replacement for his teddy bear at night."
I think I have to disagree with you on this one, my friend. While the sentiment coincides, the grammar and spelling are too good for the normal spewing coming forth from the unhinged one.
Perhaps a clone...
Posted by mongoose on September 10, 2007 09:23 AMNothing gets my dander up more than listening to (or reading) peoples requests to re-institute the draft. Either they never went through the draft or knew someone politically connected who could get them out of it. It isn't the politician's son (or daughter) who faces the draft. It isn't the CEO's son (or daughter) who faces the draft, it's the poor slob who is working to support his family whose son (or daughter) is facing the draft. There has never been a draft where the people in power were not able to exempt someone they wanted out of the draft. Since it's the people in power who will be writing the legislation to implement the draft, what makes you think they won't include the same exemptions? Do you really trust them to be fair? And/or honest?
Posted by Greg - Been there, done that, never again! on September 10, 2007 09:28 AMTom- If a general,presumably solely because of his stars, has more "honor" how much more would a naval flag officer-Petraus' superior Admiral Fallon have?
Here's what the honorable generals commanding officer has to say:. Fallon, who took command of Centcom in March, worried that Iraq was undermining the military's ability to confront other threats, such as Iran. "When he took over, the reality hit him that he had to deal with Afghanistan, the Horn of Africa and a whole bunch of other stuff besides Iraq," said a top military officer.
And if that mission accomplished banner, necessary for the modeling of the C-in C's codpiece, was for the ship, why was it produced by Andy Card and the white house staff?Further how could their mission be accomplished when they'd not yet berthed safely, being kept at sea and out of sight of land to facilitate the brave display by the codpiece-in -chief?
Tom- it's apparently not only the Democrats who think the honorable general is being less than truthful. Apparently the folks for whom we're bleeding don't think much of it either:About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military "surge" of the past six months, an opinion poll suggests.
The survey by the BBC, ABC News and NHK of more than 2,000 people across Iraq also suggests that nearly 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified.
This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared to 50% for Shia.
But then again what do they know they're only a bunch of brown-skinned ragheads and hajis.
Sharon B. is wrong, parents and loved ones that I know think it is exactly what it is "Cut and Running". She may have a child in the military but I can assure you that opinion she states is held by a lot fewer people then finishing what we started. Also I know people who have lost loved ones there that are so disgusted with the cut and run crowd because it makes them feel their loss is for nothing if we leave.
Posted by on September 10, 2007 10:35 AM I know that the pro-war crowd will never be persuaded by the fact that this war has unnecessarily killed thousands upon thousands of US troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians.
But maybe this will persuade the hawks: Ending this war sooner rather than later will save MONEY, TAX-money.
And ending this war will free up the military to attack other countries, such as Iran.
(This is actually the best argument I can think of AGAINST pulling our troops out of Iraq soon.)
Leroy, coochie, coochie coo...
Suck on that pacifist pacifier a little harder...
Posted by on September 10, 2007 11:21 AMLetter writer Stephen Maio must have attended one of my classes where I tought about the two wings of the Democrat party,the coward and US hating wings.I give my student an "A".
Posted by An American on September 10, 2007 11:25 AMPeople talk about bringing the draft back in order to get the American public involved again. Why is there no massive outcry against this war? Because it doesn't involve Joe Sixpack or his kids. Everyone may 'know' someone in the warzones, but that's not the same as getting that letter in the mail (will they text message now?) saying you're going to get your head shaved and kicked into a war. Bring that back and it will look like the 60's again.
Posted by Roger on September 10, 2007 11:44 AMI know how to get the terrified Cons to cut-n-run. Institute a tax increase equivalent to paying in cash for all future operations in Iraq. If George Bush wants an extra $200 billion to prop up a Shia dominated government in Iraq then every Con has to pony up $2,000 for this year. If he wants another $200 billion for next year then the Cons cough up another $2,000 next year. No more paying for this occupation with the Chinese credit card. We can all sit back then and see how quickly the Cons start screaming about how wrong it is to pay for massive government projects that have little or no bearing on solving the actual problem (hatred towards the US that fosters acts of political violence).
Posted by Wes on September 10, 2007 12:07 PMThus ends the bravest thing Stephen Maio ever did. Then he buffed the yellow ribbon on his SUV before dragging his fat gutless ass behind the wheel.
Posted by on September 10, 2007 12:14 PMSlowly cut Iraq and run to Afghanistan where our real problem is.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 01:10 PM"Slowly cut Iraq and run to Afghanistan where our real problem is."
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 01:10 PM
Which is?
Bin Laden is most likely hiding in Pakistan, and the Rangers and Special Forces brigades are helping Afghanistan forces decimate the Taliban in all confrontations.
As a serious inquiry, do you think we would gain anything other than a psychological victory by catching or killing Bin Laden? Do you think it would put an end to the terrorist jihad?
Posted by SF 18D on September 10, 2007 01:26 PMDid anybody see the General this morning? What an honerable man! I can't believe how disgusting those Democrats are acting towards a person who has and is serving his country with honor. How dare these Liberals who are totally bought off by George Soros and Moveon.org to think they are any more knowledgeable then a man who has been in the midst of the war and the Iraqi people. We should all be disgusted with these so called Americans who call themselves Democrats. This country has reached a new low. You Democrats should be proud!
Posted by on September 10, 2007 01:29 PMWhich is?
Bin Laden is most likely hiding in Pakistan, and the Rangers and Special Forces brigades are helping Afghanistan forces decimate the Taliban in all confrontations.
As a serious inquiry, do you think we would gain anything other than a psychological victory by catching or killing Bin Laden? Do you think it would put an end to the terrorist jihad?
Posted by SF 18D on September 10, 2007 01:26 PM
***********************************************
Considering Terrorism is 99% psychological in the first place, getting its poster boy would be a great feat, methinks...
Every american that has sacrificed his or her life in Iraq is nothing more than a waste of life, just like Korea or Vietnam, WE DO NOT CONTROL other countries!! There will never be peace in the middle east! Staying the course is not a political ideaology, People are making money off this war, off our dead troops, off creating more terrorist! I am a Republican that tends to use my brain rather than to blindly follow the worst president in history down the course of wasting young American lives! Pull out and let them all die or watch them evolve! either way, it is out of our hands
Posted by Terry on September 10, 2007 01:40 PMThe posting above is right on the money.The Democrats have to attack General Petraeus because his facts do not match their "feelings".The Democrats "feel" we should not be in Iraq so they will destroy any General or anyone who dares to tell the truth.The Democrats will think of some other lies to back up their being cowards and wanting to leave Iraq.
Posted by An American on September 10, 2007 01:42 PMGrim Reefer, you said "Considering Terrorism is 99% psychological in the first place, getting its poster boy would be a great feat, methinks..."
I believe it would be a great psychological feat for Americans, not for the jihad. The terrorists, I believe would receive a short term psychological boost as they would consider Bin Laded a martyr for the cause, and then it would be life as usual. From my experience he is more a figure head than a commanding general.
I have to leave for awhile. I'll be back later today.
Posted by SF 18D on September 10, 2007 01:49 PMOf course we know that Terry is a Democrat trying to act like a Republican.Because Democrats are dishonest they do not mind using those types of tactics.Everything he says comes right from the Democrat party and Bin Laden's talking points.
Posted by An American on September 10, 2007 01:51 PMhttp://www.breitbart.tv/html/5420.html
Posted by John II on September 10, 2007 02:10 PMIt is a canard that GWB's administration (cabinet level and up) have ever equated Democrats' peacenik positions with being traitorous.
Let me save you the trouble. Here are various statements that have been made by administration officials that "clearly show" that GWB's personnel have claimed that Democratic opponents are "traitorous."
* George Bush : "However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win and America loses."
* Dick Cheney : "It’s absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on November 2nd, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we’ll get hit again,"
* George Bush : "I asked Congress to give me the flexibility necessary to be able to deal with the true threats of the 21st century by being able to move the right people to the right place at the right time so we can better assure America we're doing everything possible. The House responded, but the Senate is more interested in special interests in Washington and not interested in the security of the American people." [Bush remarks in Trenton, New Jersey, 9/23/02, emphasis added]
* John Ashcroft : "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists - for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies, and pause to America's friends." [Washington Post, 12/7/01;]
* Karl Rove : "Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers." Conservatives, he said, "saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."
In analyzing the above statements, in each and every case, the statements are reflecting the judgements of GWB's political opponents, not their patriotism. GWB and his staff have gone out of their way to not attack their opponent's patriotism but their JUDGEMENT!
Mary, please get your facts straight in the future.
Posted by Nostra Damus on September 10, 2007 02:29 PMPosted by Nostra Damus on September 10, 2007 02:29 PM
You cherry pick your quotes almost as well as Petraeus cherry picks his facts.
What I find interesting is that Petraeus is going to go directly from his Congressional testimony straight to Fox News for an exclusive interview with Brit Hume ala Dick Cheney. And to think that folks are wondering is the Bush Administration has politicized the DOD like they did the DOJ.
Posted by Wes on September 10, 2007 03:09 PMMary said:
"1) Osama bin Laden (remember him - mastermind of 9/11) is still thumbing his nose at the US"
OBL has been reduced to making home videos of himself in a cave. He has been rendered impotent.
"2) it opened Iraq to AlQaeda & oher Islamic terrorist groups - as well as being a recruiting tool for those organizations (or do you honestly think that invading a sovereign nation didn't rile any members of Islam 'on the fence'). In addition, while Saddam Hussein was a terrible, horrible despot, but anyone who thinks that a despot would share the power in his country needs to look up the word despot in the dictionary."
I think it's a good thing that Iraq has been opened up to al Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups; it saves us the time of having to hunt them down. As to your comments about the despot, I have no idea what you were trying to say.
"1) reinstate the draft - and this time include females since almost all career fields are now open to them. "
I've heard this before. I think Hillary Clinton recently said something about drafting women. Is this really what liberals want? Girls getting drafted for war?
"3) rescind all tax cuts - this is the first time since the Revolutionary War that taxes have been cut during a time of war. "
Oh, this tired line again. Here we go: tax rates were cut and revenue went up. We paid more in taxes, not less. By the way, was there an income tax during the Revolutionary War? Back then, taxpayers had balls; they even revolted when the government taxed their whiskey.
"4) the next time the GAO catches Halliburton (the main contractor in Iraq, which was awarded a no-bid contract courtesy of their former CEO, VP Cheney) - or any other contractor is found to have overcharged the government, not only should the company be fined, the US head of operations should be tried for war-profiteering."
Halliburton? You libs are still yelling about Halliburton? Give me a break.
Here's something traitorous: calling your general a traitor while he's trying to win a war and bring troops home.
Wes, you're such a partisan putz that if a Rethuglican farted you'd claim that he was trying to gas civilians. Your opinions are tarnished by constantly trying to spin every action into a rightwingnut conspiracy. You're the kind of leftwingnut that gives us Democrats a disadvantage when debating anything in a logical manner.
Posted by on September 10, 2007 03:44 PM
Catching Ben Laden quickly, and putting him in prison would have knocked the wind out of a lot of young men who look up to him. That moment has passed.
Killing him would make him a martyr.
Standing up for the families who want their loved ones home is traitorous now. Thanks Bush etal.
it is still magical thinking that our thoughts go over to Iraq and change anything.
And "cut and run" is a navy term, yes?
Bush said the fighting in Iraq was over. However he put it on that ship. He didn`t stand in front of that banner by accident did he?
Posted by Sharon B. on September 10, 2007 04:10 PMSharon B. Sharon B.,
Did Did you you just just take take more more Benadryl Benadryl? Are Are you you seeing seeing double double?
.nonsensical are comments Your
.nonsensical are comments Your
Code Code Pink Pink! Code Code Pink Pink! All All crazy crazy women women to to battle battle stations stations. All All crazy crazy women women to to battle battle stations stations.
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/5420.html
Posted by John II on September 10, 2007 04:30 PMI wonder who hates Bush more?
The Terrorists, The Democrats, or The MSM?
Posted by Get Real on September 10, 2007 04:35 PMPosted by on September 10, 2007 03:44 PM
Isn't this one of those "I know what I am but what are you" arguments. Boo Hoo anonymous poster. Probably still hiding under your bed afraid those nasty terrorists are going to cut off your head. Be so afraid that you can't even use a pseudo name.
FACT: Petraeus is giving an exclusive interview on the Republican Network and his testimony is a report on a plan that he devised. I wish I could have graded my papers when I was in school. I'm sure I would have been doing swell as well.
Posted by Wes on September 10, 2007 05:21 PMJohn II, before you completely melt down.
(1) list my comments and describe how they are nonsense.
(2) seperate my 6 statements from my 2 questions.
(3) don`t let your blood sugar fall so low again.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 10, 2007 06:10 PM"Catching Ben Laden quickly, and putting him in prison would have knocked the wind out of a lot of young men who look up to him. That moment has passed."
Do you really believe that? 9/11 showed what was possible against America. Catching OBL would have just gave the Muslims the rallying cry of "Free Osama!".
Nonsense.
"Standing up for the families who want their loved ones home is traitorous now. Thanks Bush etal."
I don't even know what you're referring to. By the way, it's et al not etal.
Nonsense.
"it is still magical thinking that our thoughts go over to Iraq and change anything."
Huh? Nonsense.
"And "cut and run" is a navy term, yes?"
OK, therefore what? Nonsense.
"Bush said the fighting in Iraq was over. However he put it on that ship. He didn`t stand in front of that banner by accident did he?"
Yes, so what? He was obviously wrong. He has made a lot of speeches about the war since then hasn't he? That "Mission Accomplished" thing is old news and not relevant to anything currently being discussed.
Nonsense.
Posted by John II on September 10, 2007 06:32 PMJohn II: "I think it's a good thing that Iraq has been opened up to al Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups; it saves us the time of having to hunt them down."
"Save us the time of having to hunt them down". Wow. John II apparently hasn't had a chance to read the papers these last four and a half years. He should tell the troops over there how easy their job is.
I suppose that if al Queda comes to America John II will consider that a good time saver as well.
But just because he sounds like it, I don't think that John II is really on their side. But I guess I could be wrong.
I wonder if John II will really be glad if al Queda comes tI presume John II will really like it if al Qaeda rears its ugly head in America, making it even easier for us to hunt then down.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 06:46 PMNice try, Truth:
"He should tell the troops over there how easy their job is."
I never said or suggested their job was easy. You made that up.
"I suppose that if al Queda comes to America John II will consider that a good time saver as well."
I suppose it would be a time saver. But, they're not here, they're in Iraq; We're fighting them in Iraq.
"But just because he sounds like it, I don't think that John II is really on their side. But I guess I could be wrong."
What are you talking about?
"I wonder if John II will really be glad if al Queda comes tI presume John II will really like it if al Qaeda rears its ugly head in America, making it even easier for us to hunt then down."
Uh, I don't think so, Truth. Like I said in my original statement, I'm glad Iraq has been opened up to al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists. It saves us the time of having to hunt them down elsewhere. It's kind of like those glowing bug zappers people hang in their backyards during the humid summers. The light attracts the bugs to their death.
Posted by John II on September 10, 2007 07:01 PMJohn II once again, Catching OBL quickly is what we were promised right? Or at least catching him. That would have him look less omnipotent to the young Muslim men. Sure they would have yelled "free him" so what, as you usually ask.
if we killed him, he is a martyr, but as a prisoner, much like Saddam was, boy that film of him getting his mouth checked really added to his glamour didn`t it. Think of the same for OBL.
What we think here doesn`t effect what happens over there. What we do can, but so far all we could do was vote in some people who are not getting the job done.
Cut and run is usually used be men, who don`t know where it came from. Kind of like you running around yelling code pink, as if women did that.
We should all stay in our places, you don`t pretend to be a woman, the men who were never in the Navy, quit using that term.
The bug zappers usually kill the beneficial insects and the little nasty ones stay away.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 10, 2007 07:33 PMHey Posters,
Good thing you keep up the good fight, keep going and going because the longer you fight and argue amongst yourselves the longer we get to loot the US treasury. And don't worry about the Billions of $ missing it is well taken care of. I want to thank the good Americans who swallow the whole Liberty, Freedom and fight them there scenario becasue they may come here and overtake the whole USA. I mean they can almost take over some neighborhoods there right? What is to stop them from taking over the whole US with IED's and AK47's. Remember progress is still being made in Iraq because they are still stealing our US treasury, so progress needs to continue until the elections when they've got all they can cart away from the patriotic scared US citizens. And remember if you are educated and thinking if getting educated you are just falling into that liberal brainwashing, so stay away from education!!!!
Posted by Karl Cheney on September 10, 2007 07:59 PMSo now John II is comparing our troops to bug zappers. Of course, one difference is that bugs don't shoot at bug zappers. Nice, John II. But I still think you are on our side, probably.
John II says that al Queda is in Iraq. I wonder if he can spell Afghanistan and the names of all those other countries where al Queda can be found.
John II has a habit of saying things that no intelligent human being would say. Such as liking the fact that by invading Iraq Bush brought al Queda to Iraq. And as thinking that al Queda in Iraq are easy targets. He needs to remind the people getting killed and wounded looking for al Queda of that.
John II will say almost anything that makes him look silly.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 08:17 PMJohn II: "That "Mission Accomplished" thing is old news and not relevant to anything currently being discussed."
Bush has been repeating various versions of the Mission Accomplished crap periodically for the last four years.
Posted by Truth on September 10, 2007 08:19 PMThis is such a meaningless exercise in body counts. I thought we learned our lesson in Vietnam that body counts don't mean a thing. In Nam we were fixated on how many V.C. were counted. In Iraq it is defining who gets to be counted. Was this death Sunni vs Shia or Shia vs Shia. To count or not to count that is the Bush question. What a crock of crap.
The only real question that the coward George Bush will never answer is when this fiasco of foreign policy is done. I remember how he dismissively said that he would NEVER allow the foreign policy of the United States to be dictated by another country. What a colossal liar. Our entire strategy in Iraq is based on the Iraqis reconciling their century old hatreds. What a loser George Bush has been for the American people. Even if the Iraqi government is able to stand up and carry out minimal functions with a minimum of corruption what have we gained?
Biden asks the questions a bit more succinctly;
What then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ehzEgU-oVI
Posted by Wes on September 10, 2007 08:24 PMmary,I see you have spent the time to learn how to write,now spend some time learning the facts before you make a fool out of yourself.
Posted by Keith on September 10, 2007 08:36 PMSharon B., your nutty explanations of your nuttiness are nuttier than your original nutty statements.
Truth,
I know I promised to be your tutor but I think you're too far gone to be helped.
"John II has a habit of saying things that no intelligent human being would say. Such as liking the fact that by invading Iraq Bush brought al Queda to Iraq."
Are you saying that al Queda existed in Iraq before the invasion? Do you deny that al Queda is present in Iraq now?
Posted by John II on September 10, 2007 08:50 PMEveryone agree with John II so he will go to bed now.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 10, 2007 09:23 PMWes,
What facts did Patreus "cherry pick" and how the hell would you know since you are sitting behind a computer screen in Colorado and have not been on the ground in Iraq?
Did moveon.org tell you he made stuff up? And if so where would they get their facts?
John II offered:
"I'm glad Iraq has been opened up to al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists. It saves us the time of having to hunt them down elsewhere."
Our invasion of Iraq has created many more terrorists than have been killed, yet here comes John II to tell us the virtues of Dear Leader's "bug zapper" theory, because what matters to John II is his bottom line. Thousands of dead soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's be damned. He wants to cut out large swaths of the Middle East and take their oil. He accepts collateral damage as a necessary side-effect of war for profit -they're "savages" anyway- and it could just be that he likes the sound of zapping and the smell of burnt tissue...
His ethics are well defined...and the ladies love him doncha know.
Posted by Charles B on September 10, 2007 11:27 PMsharon b.,clinton's refusal to take Bin Laden and allowing him to put cells in 60 countries before Bush was elected.And this is when Bin laden was out in the open.Just think if clinton would of did his job.
Posted by Keith on September 11, 2007 08:33 AMB-B-But Clinton...
Clinton stopped going after Bin Laden after the conservatives started howling that he was just trying to cover up his sexual infidelities.
And, um, wasn't al Qaeda already in Afghanistan? Couldn't we have fought them there rather than invading a whole other country?
Posted by Roger on September 11, 2007 10:18 AMKeith, now think for a moment. If Clinton had killed or captured Ben Laden, the 19 hijackers were already in this country, going on with their plans. Ben Laden could have given us some information on them, but he may not have known exactly where they were and what they planned.
I suspect 9-11 would have happened no matter what Clinton did.
How many years were the 19 here planning this?
so we capture him tomorrow, there are new cells here, he know nothing about them and we get hit again.
See, Keith, Ben Laden is only a symbol now, he isn`t the problem any more.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 11, 2007 12:15 PMSharon B.
Well done, but I don't think Keith is smart enough to pick up on sarcasm..
Posted by Charles B on September 11, 2007 09:50 PMHell, he can barely pick his nose. There was a time when he made some sense and wasn't always rude.
He is back on my "fly over" list.
Posted by Sharon B. on September 11, 2007 10:40 PMKeith you are doing a great job.The Democrats are attacking you with statements that are even dumber than the ones in the past.You are getting "flak" that means you are on target!!Way to go!! The more Democrats are hit the dumber they sound.
Posted by An American on September 12, 2007 03:34 PMLet's face it, no one in thios country (including the jackass conservatives in this blog) weres woried about terrorists until 9/11 happened. All the republicans cared about ( 'playing politics' as W likes to say) was whether or not Clinton had a girlfriend on the side. The Reps didnt give a damn about security or anything elese, for some reason who Clinton was poking was greater than the economy, health care and national security ( I beleive the GOP controlled the senate back then)
Posted by on September 13, 2007 07:02 AMthank you An American, you make em feel all tingly inside ~giggle~ You make me feel liek a schoolgirl when you speak!
since we are so intimate wd each other could you hep me change my underpants I had an accident ~blush~