home

Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again'

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Mon Dec 12, 2005 at 09:15:52 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

President Bush just gave a long speech on Iraq. He said knowing everything that he does now, he'd do it all again.

That's our President. He can never admit a mistake.

< Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged | Supreme Court Takes TX Redistricting Case >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' | 71 comments (71 topical)
    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#1)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Merry Christmas, George! Santa Claus is comin' to town.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#2)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    And the Dems, for the most part, agree since they back the Carter Doctrine. Bush Doctrine = Carter doctrine on steroids. If we are unable to set up a pliable, American friendly government in Iraq, without putting the whole region in conflict then our main supply of oil is gone. And that is the bottom line that drives most Repubs and Dems.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    A legitimately mentally disabled individual is Prez of the U.S.. He is incapable of self-examination or self-criticism, unless it comes with no risk attatched (like admitting he drank too much without saying he was ever an alcoholic). Saying he'd do it all over again is admitting, loudly and clearly, that he is INCAPABLE OF LEARNING FROM HIS MISTAKES. In other words, he is incapable of the thing we expect from our CHILDREN. Sad, pathetic, and dangerous for the nation.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#4)
    by Steven Sanderson on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    If Bush really is the epitome of perfection that he thinks he is, then we're one helluva failed species.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#5)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Dems think the war was wrong, etc... Repubs think it was right, somewhat mishandled but headed in the right direction. That's what the president is saying if you'll listen. If you only want to here what you know he won't say then you'll never be happy. But getting all miffed that he won't admit to being wrong is a little silly when he doesn't think he is and in my opinion he isn't. Look at the two messages and think to yourself which you'd prefer. Dems - The war was wrong, but we can't leave, we should leave, we should redeploy, we shouldn't redeploy, we should do exactly what bush is saying but just a little different. Repubs - We are winning and we will stay until we've won. Sometimes the simplest message is the right one.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    "Repubs - We are winning and we will stay until we've won."
    An increasing majority of Iraqi voters oppose the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq even as they express optimism over their future living conditions, a new poll shows.

    Two-thirds of those surveyed rejected the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, up 14 percentage points from a survey in February 2004. Fewer than half, 46 percent, say the country is better off than it was before the war, according to the poll by ABC News, Time magazine and other global news organizations.
    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#7)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Sailor you post is quite apt. On thursday millions of Iraqi's will show their belief in a new system of government by voting in a parlimentary election. Waiting for you negative reply. Victory!

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Slado, You seem to miss what, to me and many others, is the main point: our useless prez and administration and military-industrial complex think we can't leave until the problem is solved; while Iraqis clearly believe the problem can't be solved UNTIL we leave. That is much more illustrative than trying to reduce the opinions of tens of millions of Americans to one slogan or another.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#9)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Add Slado, Elections are great, do you expect any debate on this? Be serious. The difficult point is what do we do if the "wrong" candidates are elected? Are we willing to let the Iraqis stumble their way toward modern freedom as our own nation, the USA, was allowed? It took us a few hundred years to get there. Are we willing to give the Iraqis a fraction of that?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#10)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Sometimes the simplest message is the right one. Right... keep it simple (minded):
    "The guy across the street set fire to my house, but I can't find him." "I think I'll go around the corner and kill most of the family that lives there. Should be a cakewalk since they are too weak to defend themselves with." "Besides, I know they both don't like me."
    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#11)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    from the same Military Analysts who predicted before the war that Iraq would be a diaster if the occupation was not handled correctly
    . . . Although Iraq is set to pass another milestone in its democratic development on Thursday with elections for a new parliament and permanent government, Terrill said he holds out little hope that the ballot box is winning out over bullets. The minority Sunnis are so frustrated at their loss of power to the majority Shiites, he contends, that a day at the polls will not result in the abandonment of violence. "What many people don't understand is that voting is not a renunciation of violence," said Terrill. "It is just one way for the Sunnis to try and gain some power, but not the only way. The Sunnis will use all means to oppose the Shiites, and if that means violence they will use violence."
    LINK

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#12)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    To all Any government is better then Saddam. If it turns out to be a shiite majority that acts like Iran then so be it. but that is worse case scenario and higly unlikely. More likely it will be Iran light with strong influences from Kurdistan and Sunni minorities. Let's wait and see but to declare misteps, or defeat now seems a little premature. The democratic process has been nothing short of remarkable and all the dire predictions have not panned out...as of now. Sure it's resonable to say things might still get screwed up but that an entirely different matter then decalaring defeat, failure, inevitable failure that I've heard for 3 years not matter what happens on the ground. The president is admitting mistake...misteps to use his phrase...if you'd actually listen or read the speeches but you don't want to here that. My original point is that the all negative all the time crowd won't be happy, or satisfied until he pulls out the troops and says...oops I screwed up. That's not going to happen.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Elections held under US military occupation are NOT remarkable. Sorry, Slado, but that is just not a sound statement. A superpower getting rid of a dictator they long supported out of selfish interest, then holding "free" elections while they militarily occuply the nation IS ANYTHING BUT REMARKABLE. What would be remarkable is exactly the opposite. As happened in, say, Nicaragua. Where those commies gave up power without violence. (As the right swore no commie government would EVER do.) And after consulting with the liberal failure Jimmy Carter, no less. Or even the Soviet Union itself. But no no, now we're dealing with radical Islamists, we certainly don't have the brains to defeat them at a game of our OWN making, and not simply the field of mindless violence our opponent is more than happy to draw our numbskulls into.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#14)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Any government is better then Saddam.
    This is utter nonsense. More Iraqis have been killed in the last 3 years than under Saddam. There is currently a low level civil war going on waitingto explode when it becomes clear that the Sunnis have been shut out of the government. Your "analysis" is just made up nonsense and you know it.
    If it turns out to be a shiite majority that acts like Iran then so be it.
    Making the ME into an area dominated by Iran is the worst possible outcome for the US and would be a diaster of monumental proportions to the US economy.
    More likely it will be Iran light with strong influences from Kurdistan and Sunni minorities.
    Got any more guesses based on wishfull thinking. This is followed by more empty rhetoric and slogans. Cant we get better propagandists

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#15)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    And to give myself a bit of an asskicking, I previously wrote That is much more illustrative than trying to reduce the opinions of tens of millions of Americans to one slogan or another. Which of course was preceeded by trying to reduce the argument myself. Hypocrites all. Tho I will give myself credit for factoring the Iraqi opinion into my reduction.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#16)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    here's a long article about how well things are really going. You don't have to read it sailor because you don't want to believe it. Victory! Opinion Journal

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#17)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    hey, if it makes it easier to live with the blood of 30,000+ iraqis and 2000+ Americans on your hands then by all means keep linking to extreme rw opinion pieces like they were facts. you aren't worth debating, you're just another rw troll who can't accept facsts when they conflict with your world view.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Sailor.... Two-thirds of those surveyed rejected the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, That's kinda like saying 2/3rds of those polled (here on TL) don't like Bush? DUH! Dadler.... while Iraqis clearly believe the problem can't be solved UNTIL we leave. Which pole (hole) did you pull that out of? Everyone...(including most Iraqis) know what will happen if we leave now... and in spite of what you say, it won't solve anything. soccerdad... More Iraqis have been killed in the last 3 years than under Saddam. Just keep repeating that over & over & eventually you might actually believe it. Cant we get better propagandists Yes...can't we soccerdad? Your stuff is waaaay out there!

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#19)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    BB writes:
    Dadler.... while Iraqis clearly believe the problem can't be solved UNTIL we leave. Which pole (hole) did you pull that out of? Everyone...(including most Iraqis) know what will happen if we leave now...
    • Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province; • 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops; • less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security; • 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation; • 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened; • 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces. The opinion poll, carried out in August, also debunks claims by both the US and British governments that the general well-being of the average Iraqi is improving in post-Saddam Iraq.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#20)
    by Andreas on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    Neither George W. Bush nor the leaders of the Democratic Party made a "mistake" by waging war on Iraq. They knew that they were spreading lies to promote an imperialist war.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#21)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    BB, Here's a link that will get you to the pit of truth polls I pulled those numbers out of. Victory isn't like a football game here. There's NEVER going to be the day you hope for, where it's so obvious we can leave there's no risk at all. We are the ones who decided to sh*t into the fan as we did, and we can't b*tch about splatter now. Get out of your paradigms. I try to get out of mine, as you'll see from my post a few clicks above this one, where I point out my own rhetorical stumble. You think Vietnam would be better off today had we stayed and just dropped more bombs and killed more people "as long as we had to"?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    slado... Great link... Too bad many on here won't read it .... or if they do...call it a lie!

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    oops, try again with that link.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#24)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    He'll do it again? What, is he going to invade Iran now?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#25)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    Ack, I'll try another poll link, this one to a Media Matters piece that addresses the issue.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#26)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    Slado, BB's link is to an OPINION piece, so I can only judge it as such. I printed it out, will read it and comment, but I shant use the "L" word.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#27)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    BB my my aren't you clear, not. You have yet to disprove anything I've said so just keep up the empty rhetoric. Thats all you have anyway.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#28)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    should have benn clever not clear

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    Dadler writes:
    You think Vietnam would be better off today had we stayed and just dropped more bombs and killed more people "as long as we had to"?
    Yes. I do. And the millions killed following our leaving would definitely be better off. Your problem is that you fail to understand that the war was being won until our radicals convinced the communists that they could win a political battle because our radicals would convince our chicken politicians to pull out. Now, on to Iraq. edgey - That poll is 4 months old. BTW - Most likely everyone involved would like to see us leave. The question is this: When? In the US the anti-war Left has called for our defeat since before the war. So nothing has changed. In Iraq, those who car bomb and booby-trap dolls has called for our defeat since before the war. So nothing has changed. In the US, some of those Demo politicians who called for us to invade, now call for our defeat. That is a reversal back to the position that the Demo Left had for Vietnam. In Iraq, no one wants us there, but know what will happen if we leave too early. In the US, no one wants us there, but know what will happen if we leave too early. Kinda clear and easy to understand, isn’t it.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#30)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    PPJ:
    Your problem is that you fail to understand that the war was being won until our radicals convinced the communists that they could win a political battle because our radicals would convince our chicken politicians to pull out.
    The war was being won???? Vietnam???? There were FIFTY EIGHT THOUSAND American casualties in Vietnam!!! Who do you think killed them, Jane Fonda?
    In the US the anti-war Left has called for our defeat since before the war.
    Yes, you would like that. Of course, what the antiwar movement has done is to demand an end to the war. Hence, you know, "antiwar". One of the main reasons for this being that soldiers are being killed or maimed, families destroyed, for no reason whatsoever.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#31)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    10 MILLION vietnamese died in their war for independence BEFORE the US left. Ho Chi Minh nad based his new constitution on the US Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. He had approached the US for help to get rid of the French occupiers. We decided to help the French, then take over and do the job ourselves. To go from advisors to combat status we lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, thereby costing the lives of 58k+ Americans. The US lied, people died. In iraq, the US lied and people are still dying. And just like the vietnamese, north or south, the iraqis want us out.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#32)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    Al - Get your facts straight. 58,000 had not died when Uncle Walter announced that we had lost Tet and Gen Giap as ready to sue for peace. Link Sailor - Nice try at a histiry rewrite. I seem to remember that we turned down France's request for air support. BTW - Shall we remove this to the Open Thread?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#33)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    JimakaPPJ
    Your problem is that you fail to understand that the war was being won until our radicals convinced the communists that they could win a political battle because our radicals would convince our chicken politicians to pull out.
    Are you familar with something called the Pentagon Papers? You see the Pentagon spent millions of dollares to produce this 40 volume, 7,000-page study of the Vietnam War. The Pentagon study concluded the war was a quagmire and contrary to your assertion the war was not going well or being "won". Of course, you know those radical commies in the Pentagon... Now, I would like to introduce you to another concept: Dolchstosslegende Just change the offenders from Jews, non-Germans and non-nationalists to Liberals, Radicals, Commies and Democrats and it is the same thing.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#34)
    by Al on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    Jim thinks that the war in Vietnam was a success until, inexplicably, Walter Cronkite said it wasn't, everybody believed him, and the politicians got scared and withdrew. (Pause while sensible readers pick up their jaws off the floor). That has to be the most asinine interpretation of the Vietnam war, ever. Sure, people were opposed to the war at home. You don't think people's opposition to the war, especially young people, had anything to do with, say, the draft? Being pressed to fight, and die, for ... the "domino theory"? Watch some reruns of M*A*S*H, Jim. And no, it's not about Korea. Or listen to Country Joe and the Fish sing at Woodstock in 1969, shortly after your great victory in the Tet offensive. Of course the current administration is not that stupid: They are not going to bring back the draft. But then they can't muster an army large enough to successfully occupy Iraq. And by that I mean that Iraqi oil production may live up to the expectations of the Iraqi "government", and that all this oil may come into the hands of, ahem, foreign investors.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    Of course GDub would do it again. He only does what he's told.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#36)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    The unfortunate part of this post is that ppj, once again, is trying to change the subject. BUSH LIED, and continues to lie, and is proud of it. How the hell would bush actually know what is going on!? Everone in the WH lies to him, else they would lose their jobs. Want links? (We have given these links to ppj over and over, so I expect more responsible folks to request them)

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    Sailor - I wrote:
    Posted by JimakaPPJ at December 12, 2005 04:28 PM Sailor - Nice try at a histiry rewrite. I seem to remember that we turned down France's request for air support. BTW - Shall we remove this to the Open Thread?
    Sailor wrote:
    The unfortunate part of this post is that ppj, once again, is trying to change the subject.
    Why don't you start reading? Nice slur, Sailor.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    How the hell would bush actually know what is going on!? Everone in the WH lies to him, else they would lose their jobs.
    Or at least miss out on a promotion, or a shiny medal of freedom.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#39)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Your problem is that you fail to understand that the war was being won until our radicals convinced the communists that they could win a political battle because our radicals would convince our chicken politicians to pull out.
    You're great and glorius leader has become a chicken in your eyes now? An he can win your battles for you only if the left lets him? Some glorius leader:
    “When the president says he is staying the course it reminds me of the man who has just jumped from the Empire State Building. Half-way down he says, ‘I am still on course.’ Well, I would not want to be on course with a man who will lie splattered in the street. I would like to be someone who could change the course."


    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Uh...edgey.... Read the whole comment. It was about Vietnam. And the politicians were D e m o c r a t s... with a few rat fink Repubs.... Or are you just being snarky? And in your case, is there a difference? Al – Let me get this straight. You are telling me to watch a TV sitcom for information about US history? That is ludicrous. I mean honestly… No wonder you are so misinformed. Oh, wait! I now understand: Fake but accurate. You know that it is fake, but you think it is accurate. That is moonbatiest at its best. You write:
    Or listen to Country Joe and the Fish sing at Woodstock in 1969, shortly after your great victory in the Tet offensive.
    Thanks for making my point. BTW – Were you in the US during Vietnam? And were you old enough to be paying attention? Molly – When my enemy acknowledges that he was beat, I don’t put much faith in histories written by the people who were involved in then loosing the war. Let me introduce into the conversation something that appears to be in short supply around here. Common Sense. Try it.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#41)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Uh...edgey.... Read the whole comment.
    Posted by JimakaPPJ at December 11, 2005 03:22 PM What I do know is what you said... In context, out of context, upside down, inside out, sideways, or any way you like. But it was in context, and you can't claim otherwise.
    You're great and glorius leader has become a chicken in your eyes now? An he can win your battles for you only if the left lets him? Some glorius leader...

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#42)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Q. The president doesn't believe in plain ol exits. When he's stuck in a building an the building's on fire he doesn't say "where's the emergency exit?" He says "where's the emergency victory!" A. The emergency victory is located on either side of the main hallway under the flashing blue lights. Break glass for triumph over Islamism! Q. Does the new plan stay the course? I'm a big fan of the course. A. Yes absolutely! If you liked what the course had to offer you're definitely gonna like the strong elements of coursiness in the new plan. Q. I dunno... it IS a new plan. Are you sure we haven't switched to another course somewhere? Did we even wobble a little? A. This course is the same course as the previous course but is now served on a bed of fresh leafy green victory along with a side of pasta salad and your choice of vegetable. Q. Mmmm, sounds delicious! How come the old plan didn't have this much victory in it? A. It did! We just didn't tell you about it. This is newly declassified top secret victory.
    --Hat tip to Sailor at December 12, 2005 08:07 PM... ;-)

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    It is so much fun watching these lefties. It looks like there heads are going to pop off. You might as well admit it, what pisses you off so badly is that you have lost so completely. Come on admit it, you believed GW was a moron and you figured with your natural superiority you were going to crush him in the election. Then after suffering that humiliating defeat you mustered up just enough hate and energy and figured the least we can do to this bumbling idiot is destroy his legacy, for payback for Clinton. Now you are confronted with being utter and complete losers because it is becoming obvious that GW's legacy will be introducing democracy and hope to the ME. Admit it, it's killing you. You should all understand where you went wrong........when you begin with a purpose as evil as crushing someone you think a moron and end with a purpose as twisted as destroying the name of good man because he exposed your weakness.........you simply cannot win, because GW's God, being a just God, simply won't allow it.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#44)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    I see Variable has been promoted to assistent leader of propaganda and incomprehensible delusions. When do you graduate middle school?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#45)
    by SeeEmDee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    To return to the main topic: Of course Mr. Bush says he'd 'do it all over again'. The fact is, however, he isn't the one 'doing it'. It's all those who've been sent to their deaths at his behest that are 'doing it'. All those kids from poor backgrounds who thought a stint in the military would be a way out of their poverty, and all those innocent Iraqis who wanted nothing more than to be left alone. They're the ones 'doing it'. Or perhaps more correctly, they're being 'done'...in the British sense as in "He'll *do* you, (as in 'f*ck you up' if it isn't clear enough) mate!" In that one respect, Mr. Bush has been 'doing it' to this country and this world quite a bit of late...

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#46)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Bush wants to win in Iraq and thinks the eventual outcome of a democracy in Iraq and the removal of Saddam makes this country safer. If you agree with that idea then you don't question our going to war and the necessity that we stay. If you don't you are welcome to your opinion. But the Bush lied crap just makes you look silly. Please provide resonable arguments for us leaving. Because that's the real issue. In 2004 the American people settled the Bush lied argument by re-electing him. Drudging up campaign 2004 arguments only means that you haven't gotten over it and you don't want to discuss the situation that exists now.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#47)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Please provide resonable arguments for us leaving. Because that's the real issue. It's been my experience in the entire time I've commented and read comments here, that this question has been asked repeatedley by war supporters. And it's been my experience as well that when people ask this question they usually have absolutely no intention of considering any other path than continuing the war, and that nothing else will satisfy them. For what it's worth, here is another path:
    In his last piece for NiemanWatchdog.org, retired Gen. William Odom argued that all the terrible things the Bush administration says would happen if we pulled our troops out of Iraq are happening already. In a new postscript, Odom writes that the converse is true as well: Bush says he wants to bring democracy and stability to the greater Middle East -- but in fact the only way to achieve that goal is to get out of Iraq now. link

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    edgey - You aren't clever enough to make such an argument. Unlike you, I didn't say what you claimed, and you know it. Here it is in full context.
    Posted by JimakaPPJ at December 12, 2005 02:50 PM “Dadler writes: You think Vietnam would be better off today had we stayed and just dropped more bombs and killed more people "as long as we had to"? (my response) “Yes. I do. And the millions killed following our leaving would definitely be better off. Your problem is that you fail to understand that the war was being won until our radicals convinced the communists that they could win a political battle because our radicals would convince our chicken politicians to pull out. Now, on to Iraq.”
    So your snarky remark is again exposed for what it is. An attempt to make a retort by dishonest means. But what can I expect from someone who doesn’t think car bombers are terrorist and tells me to shoot myself? SeeEmDee – That is a hollow argument. No President has ever fought the war he declared. What he didn’t say was that he would do several things differently. In case you don’t understand, think of any large project that you have been involved in. Say building a home. As it completes there are any number of things, with 20-20 hindsight, you would do different. But you can’t, so there is no need to sit around and moan about it. People who do things file the mistakes under “experience” and get on to doing other things. edgey – I think Odum’s comments are incorrect. The answer is simple. If we had not went in it would have happened anyway. But the real deal is this. If we stay we can win. As for this statement:
    Odom writes that the converse is true as well: Bush says he wants to bring democracy and stability to the greater Middle East -- but in fact the only way to achieve that goal is to get out of Iraq now.
    IF Odom actually said that I really wonder about him. Here we are in the middle of a war and an ex-General thinks we can bring democracy and stability to the region by just quitting? Evidently he never read CNN’s Peter Arnett’s interview with bin Ladin.
    REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States and against the US ? BIN LADIN: The cause of the reaction must be sought and the act that has triggered this reaction must be eliminated. The reaction came as a result of the US aggressive policy towards the entire Muslim world and not just towards the Arabian peninsula. So if the cause that has called for this act comes to an end, this act, in turn, will come to an end. So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.


    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#49)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    IF Odom actually said that I really wonder about him. Here we are in the middle of a war and an ex-General thinks we can bring democracy and stability to the region by just quitting? And you obviously did not read his article, or you would not be making that statement. Thanks for showing yourself to be an example of my point:
    Please provide resonable arguments for us leaving. Because that's the real issue. ...it's been my experience as well that when people ask this question they usually have absolutely no intention of considering any other path than continuing the war, and that nothing else will satisfy them.
    ...as well as the point made often here by others that you never read links. TTFN, Whizzy

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#50)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    BTW, you insist on trying to sell a solution to a problem which any thinking person knows to be a complete farce, fraud, and lie. Here is a little hint for you: Try selling the problem first if you ever want to have even a miniscule chance of closing a sale on the solution.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    Edgey writes:
    Here is a little hint for you: Try selling the problem first if you ever want to have even a miniscule chance of closing a sale on the solution.
    Since I was not a consultant, but instead a sales person interested in fixing problems, I always let the customer define the problem and their goals. Actually an ethical sales management would think selling “problems,” which is typical of the Left, might very well be dishonest. BTW - I confess to never paying much attention to such as ex-Gen Odom. His attempt to excuse his comment were really quite weak, and, as I pointed out, completely ignores OBL’s comments while posturing on how we can get aid from our (mostly ex) allies if we will only do what they want us to do. “Get out so we can make a deal with whoever winds up in charge.” But your complaint that I didn’t read the link ignores:
    edgey – I think Odum’s comments are incorrect.
    IF Odom actually said that I really wonder about him.
    My second comment obviously refered to your paraphrase/summation directly above that states:
    In a new postscript, Odom writes that the converse is true as well: Bush says he wants to bring democracy and stability to the greater Middle East -- but in fact the only way to achieve that goal is to get out of Iraq now.
    What I was referring to was this from Odom:
    "What’s wrong with cutting and running?”, I recognize that one critical point does not come through to many readers. The problem may stem from the words "cut and run" in the title. In the minds of some, that seems to imply leaving the region for good. My argument is fundamentally different.
    Now, who didn’t read the article? Remember edgey, I’m the guy in the back of the room grinning at your BS.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#52)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    I always let the customer define the problem... Then why are you here try to sell people on your WOT scam? The only people who believe it are the people whose propaganda you parrot here everyday. To the rest, you are trying to sell bogeyman and an imperialistic war of profit as a solution to an invented problem. You are selling lies only. Lies that have been sold to you and that you are too blinded to recognize as lies. The lie that the ordinary people are seriously at risk of being killed by a terrorist. And the lie that the government can protect you from terrorists. ----- "Terrorists do not have a grievance against Microsoft, General Motors or KFC. They do not have a grievance against your local supermarket. They do not have a grievance against YOU or your family. They have a grievance against your government. The IRA had a grievance against the British government. They wanted the British out of Ireland. So they waged a terror "war" for ages until it became apparent they could not win by military means - so the two parties sat down to talk. People in the Middle East have a grievance against some governments in the west, not because they "hate our freedoms," but because they hate our governments interfering in their affairs. If they are in our back yard threatening us, it's precisely because our governments have been in their back yard for ages. Of course, not ALL the West is a target for terrorists, only those countries that have been actively intruding on the Middle East. That's why countries like Norway or Switzerland are not reporting any terrorist attacks. The reason is simple. The terrorists do not have a grievance against those governments." ----- You'd have much more credibility if you admitted that the real reasons for attacking Iraq are money, oil, and positioning military power because China, down the road, will need the oil. But then you'd have even less success convincing anyone that attacking Iraq was justified than you're having now. Boy, you're simply a liar, and a propagator of other peoples lies. Pathetically transparent, too, to everyone except yourself. Enjoy your delusions, but don't expect anyone capable of reason to join you in them.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#53)
    by SeeEmDee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    Jim, let me see if I understand you correctly: SeeEmDee – That is a hollow argument. No President has ever fought the war he declared. Perhaps, not, Jim, but the fact is that plenty of Presidents have fought in wars; Teddy Roosevelt felt so strongly about the Spanish-American War that he quit his job, rounded up a bunch of like minded Volunteers, and inserted himself into the fray. Whereas Mr. Bush has done everything humanly possible to avoid that opportunity, i.e. his dropping out of the Champagne Unit of the TXNG when it looked like it may be heading to Viet Nam. Yet, he's sure all fired up to send some poor dumb kid who thought the military might be either a meal ticket or a way out of a ghetto to fight - and die - for a patch of ground that 'just happens' to have lots of lovely sweet crude he and his Big Oil buddies (fellow military shirkers, all) want to get their paws on. If he believes in the war so strongly, why not provide moral leadership of the TR fashion, hitch up his drawers and put on a set of BDUs. I'll even loan him my old ones, but he'll have to get the rifle from somebody else. What he didn’t say was that he would do several things differently. In case you don’t understand, think of any large project that you have been involved in. Say building a home. As it completes there are any number of things, with 20-20 hindsight, you would do different. But you can’t, so there is no need to sit around and moan about it. People who do things file the mistakes under “experience” and get on to doing other things. Ah, yes, while scores of thousands die while he 'learns the job'? How many innocent "Eye-rackees" and how many brave American kids have to get whacked while Mr. Bush stumbles and bumbles his way through Presidency 101? This ain't flipping burgers, where if you miss one and it hits the floor you sweep it up and pitch it out. Those coffins coming back aren't empty props. And what's in them is often barely recognizable. And all because he gave the order. This Veteran knows only too well what happens when those who have the least to lose but most to gain force those who suffer exactly the opposite in situation to fight and die for 'causes' that later turn out to be sloganeering to hide greed. If Mr. Bush's Elitist friends want the oil so damn bad, let them take the place of some kid who's seen his share of Hell. But they won't. They never do.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#55)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:58 PM EST
    Jim, Save Cambodia, where the Khmer Rouge were empowered by our secret bombings of that nation, the Vietnamese government, for all its faults, doesn't come close to the killing power we unleashed. And CHOSE to unleash. And saying radicals ended Vietnam is just not something I can take seriously. It was a slow exposition of the disaster we'd gotten into that finally became apparent. Yeah, people took to the streets, an incredibly broad cross-section of people, as I'd HOPE would occur in a free nation where the only thing freedom means is the right to say "No" to the powers that be. Jesus H., what's the old true cliche, when Cronkite finally called the war unwinnable it was like finally hearing your trusted grandfather say it was hopeless and an error. Cronkite's a radical like Bin Laden's a feminist.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:59 PM EST
    Darkly writes:
    PPJ, you would do well to remember that edger, SD, SED, SSS and I are the guys in the peanut gallery giggling at your pathetic BS attempts at the 'back of the room'.
    Enjoy. I am here only to serve. And your "would do well to" has me most eager to suggest several physical acts to you. Dadler writes:
    Cronkite's a radical like Bin Laden's a feminist.
    Dadler - Never said OBL was a feminist. Or that Walter C. was a radical. What I said was that he incorrectly described Tet as a loss by the US forces. That is a fact. General Giap, as I noted/linked to, described it as a loss by his forces to the US. Who you going to believe? A media dude who was in NYC or the General in charge of the North Vietnam? And yes, acts and statements that tell the enemy that you don't support the war are helpful to that enemy. SeeEmDee writes:
    Whereas Mr. Bush has done everything humanly possible to avoid that opportunity, i.e. his dropping out of the Champagne Unit of the TXNG when it looked like it may be heading to Viet Nam.
    That is an interesting charge. Can you provide any proof? BTW - Before you start, you should figure out what type of aircraft TANG was flying, their mission, and compare that to what was required in Vietnam at the time of Bush's leaving flight duty. It will help keep you from looking too silly. And there were plenty of Presidents who did not fight in a war. Among them we have FDR and Lincoln, who oversaw the two largest wars in our history. BTW - Bush, at least joined TANG. Clinton, on the other hand, resigned from the reserve as soon as he knew he had a high draft number. A man of principle. Always. BTW - Glad to know you served. I did 10 years in Naval Aviation myself. What branch and time did you do? edgey writes:
    Then why are you here try to sell people on your WOT scam?
    Who in the world told you I am trying to sell anything? I mean really, you are always making false assumptions. I am here to be instructed by such stellar intellectuals as Darkly and edgey. You write:
    If they are in our back yard threatening us, it's precisely because our governments have been in their back yard
    Thanks. That explains a lot. Not only do I now know that you do not think car bombers are terrorists, but that the US deserved 911. You write:
    Boy, you're simply a liar,
    And "boy?" Hmmm, well, as one boy to another, edgey, what going to do? Tell me to shoot myself, again? Boy, you are funny. BTW - Not that I think you capable of explaining this, but I'll give you a chance. What is it about OBL's statement that the jihad is world wide, and the only way to avoid it is not bother the radicals. Tell us why you ignore that? Is it a case of misunderstanding, or simple fear, edgey boy??

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#58)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:59 PM EST
    Jim, I never said you said Bin Laden was a feminist. Sigh. I was making an analogy, based on your statement that "radicals" ended the Vietnam war. Cronkite, as the nation's foremost anchor at the time, was one key piece in changing public opinion. And he was no radical. Trot out Gen. Giap all you want, you're stating the obvious, that protest worked. Sorry it helped "the enemy", but no Vietnamese communist fighting Western colonialism ever did a thing to me. How you fail to see our folly baffles me, but that's nothing new. The West NEVER had a chance in post-colonial Indo-China, and didn't deserve one. Had we used a bit of self-critical humanity we might have gotten a better result. But you don't agree, blah blah blah, we know how far apart we are. So be it. Have a good one.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:59 PM EST
    Darkly - Well, I was thinking of a cake walk, or hop scotch, maybe a game of marbles. My goodness, what were you thinking of? Potty brain. Dadler - I have swooned and am dreaming. You actually wrote:
    Trot out Gen. Giap all you want, you're stating the obvious, that protest worked. Sorry it helped "the enemy", but no Vietnamese communist fighting Western colonialism ever did a thing to me.
    Now you have said on several occasions that you support the troops. Yet you now agree that protests, anti-war statenents, etc., help the enemy. And you also indicate your self interst by noting that an enemy has never harmed you. Do you see a little disconnect there? BTW - Can you tell me why the Left never sees anything good about the country when it is opposing an enemy?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#61)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    What is it about OBL's statement that the jihad is world wide, and the only way to avoid it is not bother the radicals. Heh! Heh, heh... Heh, Heh, Heh... Heh, Heh! You're making a funny, no? That's simple enough even for you to figure out, whiz! Come on, I know it's early, but try. Write down a few of your best guesses, and maybe I'll let you know how you're doing next time I pass this thread... if I pass this thread again. I'm sure a few others here will too. Sigh... Fly swatting gets so boring after awhile, you know?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#62)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    edgar, PPJ has sorted through the mountains of OBL writings and tapes and found one sentence that he could pruposely misinterpret to make his erronous point. BTW this has been explained to him at least 10 times, but that doesn't phase him. There will always be flies about PPJ, I think we all know why.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#63)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    My earlier link was disgarded by the pessimists as an opinion piece. Fine. Here's an opinion piece by someone actually doing the fighting. I find it fascinating that reporters are given more credibility on this issue then the commander in cheif, the pentagon and now the military officers on the ground. Major on Iraq Here is the opinion of a mid level officer who's putting his life on the line. I'll take his opinion over those of arm chair generals and skeptics who refuse to change their mind no matter what happens on the ground. Does this complaint sound familiar?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#64)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    Hey Soccerdad? Know what you mean... kids can be so exasperating at times can't they? Heh, Heh, Heh. Ah well... Don't forget though, "They's a terrist behin' ever Bush!" and PPJ, I mean Whizzy, I mean Jim, is only here to serve and to save us from the bogeymen! Have a good day, Soc.. and happy hol.. I mean, Merry Christmas!

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#65)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    One more link... DLC Please explain to me what the democrats position on the war is? The top two links on this page not only defend Liberman but call for Victory in Iraq.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#66)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    slado, dems don't drink the kool aid so they are bound to have differing opinions. The 1st link was an opinion piece. So was the second. Opinions aren't facts. I can link to many articles by soldiers that have a different opinion. BTW, ben connable is a propaganda and intel officer; what did you think he was gonna say? He also said, even by his count, that 36% of OFFICERS don't believe the war is winnable.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#67)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    SD writes:
    PPJ has sorted through the mountains of OBL writings and tapes and found one sentence that he could pruposely misinterpret to make his erronous point.
    Actually it is an interview. And his statement was pretty plain. I would think even you could understand it.
    So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.


    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#68)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    I understand perfectly well, its you with your major reading comprehension deficts who doesn't. We've been through this. But nice try in isolating a single sentence, misinterpreting it to fit your own sorry delusions. What is clear that OBL and Muslims in general what the US to stop meddling in their affairs, primarily in the ME. Remember whizzy its the US that has been meddling in the ME since at least 1953, maybe they are just tired of the US being there. But you will never accept this point of view since your whole house of cards justifying this disgrace of an administration would come tumbling down. You also need it to maintain your racist attitudes towards muslims and Islam.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#69)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    Oh and lets not forget that the US has been meddling in many Muslim coutries outside of the ME for a lomg time

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#71)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    That's correct Sailor. Dem's have never really supported the mission so how can they be trusted to lead us to victory? The only real policy they support is leaving. Or not going in the first place which is not a real option. . Other then that they can't be taken seriously. Bush hasn't done the best job but it's sure better then any democrat....maybe not Liberman...could do. How's the Kool Aid taste? So a majority of actual people fighting do support the war but because a minority don't your point is correct? I don't understand? Also is the DLC wrong because their piece is opinion?

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#72)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:00 PM EST
    slado, given the fact that there were no WMDs and the numbers of American and iraqi deaths and the instability, would you do it all over again if it was your choice? And I didn't say most of the troops support it, I said enev Maj. ben says a bare majority of the OFFICERS support it. Given the skewed sample, wouldn't you expect the numbers to be much higher? Also, major ben lies for a living, so I don't think his data are correct especially, just like yourself, he cite no facts.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#73)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:01 PM EST
    molly... The Pentagon study concluded the war was a quagmire and contrary to your assertion the war was not going well or being "won". As someone who was there.. I can tell you the MAIN problem with that war was that is was run back here by the Pentagon instaed off on the field there. Our hands were tied (thanks in part by the anti war movement here) and we were not allowed to do certain things (like bomb Hanoi) But finally in the end, we did and it only took 11 days to bring it to a hault. Sorry to say , the same type of thing is happening in Iraq now! Edgar... The lie that the ordinary people are seriously at risk of being killed by a terrorist. Lie??? I think the news should be required to show people jumping out of the WTC every day for people like you who have seemed to have forgotten that terrible day!

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#74)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:01 PM EST
    BB:
    Lie???
    Yes. LIE. 9/11 was a awful day. No question. Days rarely come worse than that day. I can remember just about every minute of that day, every word spoken around me and by me, every step I took, everthing I did... as I'm sure you can, and everyone else can. 3000 people. People jumping from windows to avoid burning. Absolute terror.
    Benjamin Friedman writing in Foreign Policy asks: What are the odds that you will die in a terrorist attack? Answer: Minuscule. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the odds are about 1 in 88,000. The odds of dying from falling off a ladder are 1 in 10,010. Even in 2001, automobile crashes killed 15 times more Americans than terrorism. In his article, "Homeland Security," Friedman also makes some incisive points about how much money the Feds are wasting in a variety of futile anti-terrorist activities. In any, case I'm gonna keep a closer eye on any stepladders I run across.
    But, calmly do the research and reading and look at the numbers if you really want to know the odds that you will die in a terrorist attack. I will die. You will die. Everyone you and I know will die. Someday. From some cause. ALL of us. We have a choice. Live life, or live in fear.
    The question you need to be asking yourself is this: "What exactly are the odds of my dying at the hands of a terrorist?" Life is not risk-free. You have to live your life in the face of constant risks. Your job is to assess these on a scale of probability, and act accordingly. You know that driving a car carries certain risks. But even then, you still drive your car. Why? Because the benefits outweigh the statistical risks.
    The lie is that the ordinary people are seriously at risk of being killed by a terrorist.

    Re: Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' (none / 0) (#75)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:01 PM EST
    Scare Tactics - Article by John Schettler The politics of fear and persuasion in America today, and why Americans consistently fear the wrong things.

    Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' | 71 comments (71 topical)