Bush says critics must offer alternative »
Posted by: STONERS 1 year, 7 months ago341 Comments Report this Story
President George W. Bush made clear on Saturday that he was going ahead with his plan to send more troops to Iraq despite an angry reaction in Congress , and accused his critics of failing to offer an alternative.
Read Full Story at news.aol.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 341
-
100%
bubba21 year, 7 months ago
There IS an alternative!
We WITHDRAW our troops and REDEPLOY. Everyone that disagrees likes to ignore this and continue the empty argument that Bush's opponents "don't have a plan".
Iraq is in a C-I-V-I-L W-A-R! Our troops are only glorified policemen and women trying to control some of the violence while being caught in the crossfire.
Iraq needs to take care of ITSELF. If we continue to stay there, they will NEVER support themselves.
The only foreign "terrorists" in Iraq are a few from Iran that are helping the Shia and a few from the Saudis (yes, our 'allies' ...) to help the Sunni. (but you NEVER hear the white house talking about that one ...) The rest are LOCALS who are fighting each other for control of their country.
More people will die in Iraq REGARDLESS of whether we stay or not. We need to get out and bring our troops home to take care of THIS country.
Reply-
-
0%
m-simon1 year, 7 months ago
So suppose Iran or Saudi Arabia invades Iraq as Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990.
Do we then have to go back and liberate Iraq as we did Kuwait?
Suppose the slaughter gets as bad as Rawanda?
Do we have to go back and prevent that level of genocide?
If not then I don't want to hear any more from Democrats about we have to save this or that people from slaughter. Not one word.
Reply
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 7 months ago
It's called "the stripe down my back is yellow". Just pull out, redeploy your troops somewhere else. Give it up to Iran and Syria. Sounds like Viet Nam to me. We had the war won, then the wackos convinced our enemy they were winning, so instead of guns, they used the wackos as mouthpieces...worked then, and it looks like the same old tactic again.
What more than 9/11 do you need to realize these radical terrorists are OUR enemy, no matter where they come from, whose mothers breasts they fed on, if they even had mothers? Because Jimmy Carter's Administration did nothing in Iran, the sore continued to fester, and each administration inherited the sore. Only a Texan would say, We've had enough. Its time to get out the can of whoopass! Of course we can withdraw our troops, but the next strike will again be in NY, LA, Dallas, Florida, or Miami? I guess if you didn't live there and lose anyone, you could care less?
Reply-
0%
bubba21 year, 7 months ago
I can see why you don't get it. If you think we had the Vietnam war won, you really are deluded. YOu need to go back to school and take some American history courses.
PLEASE don't even TRY to credit Bush or the 'war' in Iraq with NO attacks on the U.S. since 9/11.
We have only been LUCKY. Anyone could have smuggled - can smuggle right now - ANYTHING into this country via cargo shipping and NO one would even KNOW it. That is because Bush and the Republicans did NOTHING about security for any cargo shipping.
Speaking of Iran - you can thank your wonderful REPUBLICANS like Reagan for Iran having weapons capability. While Iraq was supposedly our ally, Reagan got arms and weapons smuggled to Iran.
Reply -
100%
Lurch1 year, 7 months ago
Good lord you are deluded.
The insurgents and terrorists have killed 3,000 plus Americans since Bush`s invasion, without leaving their neighborhood. Only a anti-American con would call this a positive thing. How many Americans would be dead now from the terrorists if Bush had stuck with the plan of going after the terrorists like OBL (you know, the people who attacked us on 9/11) instead of hijacking the war on terror to invade Iraq and enrich his cronies.
Bush has not only brought the terrorists and especially AQ back from the brink of extinction, he has wasted a trillion or two of our dollars to train them. He is a terrorists dream come true.
>Because Jimmy Carter's Administration did nothing in Iran, the sore continued to fester, and each administration inherited the sore.
Dude, there were over 400 hostages, wth do you think he was supposed to do? No alternatives, just beyatching.
Oh, and don`t get me started on Iran. IranContra, nuf said.
Reply -
100%
betruthful1 year, 7 months ago
lordylordy - Thank the Lord 70% of the country (at least )is not deluded like you. Moral, religious, spirtual and intellectual people have to simply cringe when someone that thinks like you let thoughts escape into the air.
Reply
-
-
0%
jeffery11 year, 7 months ago
Clinton went after Bin Laden prompting Bin Laden to rataliate. This was the warning that Bush chose to ignore, presented in a Presidential Daily Brief on August 6, 2001, thus leading directly to the 9/11 attacks. At least Clinton tried to get Bin Laden while Bush focused on Saddam. Bush kept troops out of Afghanistan for use in Iraq thus allowing Bin Laden to escape. Bush then invaded Iraq, ignoring Afghanistan and thus allowing the Taliban and Al Qaeda to rebuild.
Now the ONLY hope is to engage in regional diplomacy with Iran and Syria, but you wouldn't understand diplomacy at any level.
You right-wingers are great. Keep showing people why you should never hold power again. You guys haven't done anything right, ever.
Reply-
100%
MisterYar1 year, 7 months ago
Bush would have had Bin Laden on a silver platter had it not been for the wall Clinton built between agencies. Clinton gutted intelligence left and right.
Bush is hitting the terrorists where they craft their murderous plans, unlike clinton who couldn't do anything more than bomb an aspirin factor. What a complete failure to the American people. The blood of 9/11 is on Clintons hands.
Snipers had Bin Laden in their sights, Clinton just refused to take the call, instead went to play golf. The only thing worse than that would have been another 4 years of Lies.
Reply
-
-
100%
bubba21 year, 7 months ago
Give it UP!
Bin Laden is in AFGHANISTAN, or apparently now in PAKISTAN (supposedly our ally) - he is NOT in IRAQ! Never HAS been!
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, had NO connection to Al Qaeda, and had NO WMDs that were any more recent than 1991!
ONE MORE TIME --
The ONLY foreign "terrorists" in Iraq are a few from Iran that are helping the Shia and a few from the Saudis (yes, our 'allies' ...) to help the Sunni. (but you NEVER hear the white house talking about that one ...)
The rest are LOCALS who are fighting each other for control of their country.
Reply -
100%
Lurch1 year, 7 months ago
According to OBL and history, that was Reagan who encouraged the terrorists to attack Americans in 1983. Then it was the Republican Congress that wanted to cut and run from Somalia after Black Hawk Down, but smartly Clinton stood firm and didn`t bow to the cowardly cons or the war lords. Please study a little bit of history before posting.
Clinton was the first and still the only one who has seriously gone after OBL. Remember, Dubya has had the only legit chance to get OBL but he let OBL go and let all the bin ladin family go after 9/11.
Reply-
0%
joemont1 year, 7 months ago
Lurch
You have the Nads to tell someone to study a little history before they post? YOU need to study your history. Just like the Liberal, Leftie you are you come here and spew out incorrect facts and expect us to buy into your lies.
It was not the Rep Congress that wanted to cut and run after Black Hawk down. It was BJ Clinton that held back. The MAIN reason Black Hawk Down failed is because BJ Clinton wanted and ordered all heavy tanks and PAC's pulled out before we went into Mogadishu. He was afraid it might be perceived by the MSM as too forceful and didn't want to look like a bully. Your normal Leftist, America Bad, America Mean screed. He was also very politically involved here at home at the time and was trying to cover his backside and be the good, wise leader that he wasn't. It was so bad that immediately after we got out the Commanding General took retirement in frustration rather than stay for 30. Your friends at the MSM didn't say much about that.
Reply
-
-
0%
betruthful1 year, 7 months ago
Ike5266 - Bush said a few months ago that more troops would just make the Iraqis depend on us more and rejected the militaries request for more troops. When will you join the rest of the world and stop blaming Clinton for all of Bush's mistakes and incompetence. Go back over all the statements made by Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearl, Chrystal Rumsfeld etc.
Reply -
100%
betruthful1 year, 7 months ago
ike5266 - Do you even realize that Bush pulled the special ops team that was tracking down Bin Laden (from Afghanistan). Do you remember he said " I don't know where Bin Laden is and frankly I don't really care and don't think about it much". Clinton warned the Bush people about Al Quaeda and they ignored it completely. Boy and you still refer back to Clinton!! You ignore actual facts and events and simply rant.
Reply -
0%
AmpLee1 year, 7 months ago
Osama Bin who? Is that that one tall guy with the beard that used to be in the news all the time?
Reply -
100%
TrueSkeptical1 year, 7 months ago
It is Bin Laden (and the likes) who are laughing to you. Don't you see how much we have embolden them by going to Iraq instead of chasing them in the place where they really are?
Reply -
100%
rimbaud1 year, 7 months ago
The sects in Iraq must be given an incentive to stop the violence (although, once you arm a bunch of thugs and hoodlums as your "army" or "militia", it's not likely you will retain control over them). The incentive is that the USA will get its troops out of the way.
What's the BS about needing to train Iraqis? They have been holding off the World's greatest military force for years. al-Maliki (and the common shias) prefer the protection of the Mahdi Army to that of our troops or the USA-Trained police.
What's the BS about the Iraqis needing our help in rebuilding their country? Now that Bechtel is out, maybe we can replace Parsons and Halliburton with Iraqi contractors, and get the job completed and at a fraction of the cost.
We should demand al-Maliki to negotiate a cease-fire and long term truce by offerring all parties the removal of US Troops. That way, Iraq get the Peace it needs for reconcilation and the USA gets what it needs: OUT!
Reply -
0%
NoSpinDave1 year, 7 months ago
WRONG. The democrats have NOT presented REDEPLOY as an official plan. Your drunk Sen. Kennedy has presented this idea, but your party does not have the balls to get behind it...and for good reason. Even the biggest dove's of your party know its a DUMB IDEA that will only mean people have died in VAIN!
One fact I probably agree with you on is Bush's plan to send 21,000 troops over is just as f'ing dumb. He should send 210, 000 and end this crap in 30 days!
BTW - Before I get the canned Barbra ( I set women back 100 years) Boxer "you dont have any childen, you dont know what its like, blah, blah, blah" crap please be advised I have both family and friends serving in Iraq right now so I am not making that statement lightly.
Reply-
100%
cushi1 year, 7 months ago
This kind of post almost makes me believe in the theory of evolution because it is indicative that a new kind of fool has evolved!!
"...Even the biggest dove's of your party know its a DUMB IDEA that will only mean people have died in VAIN!"
NoSpinDave, over 3,000 US soldiers have ALREADY died in vain for a non-winnable, fiasco of a conflict. Now Bush want even MORE. If you don't mind your loved ones dying for a lost cause, I do! These are America's finest we are sending into the wholesale slaughter of that black hole called Iraq, not chess pieces!
Do yourself a favor and BUY A CLUE!! Bush is a very bad gambler, and he has LOST lives and credibility! You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away... This is about his stubborn pride, indifference to the will of the people, and the mercenary interests of himself and his partners in crime! Does it required a slap in the head with a good sized iron skillet to WAKE YOU UP?
Reply
-
-
64%
Destry1 year, 6 months ago
I have a viable alternative. Lets get this clown out of office and try again with a real leader with a brain.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 7 months ago
They don't care what kind of impact that would have on America. They're apparently in bed with the Iranian's, who get up every morning and after prayer, chant death to Americans. In this case they've been brainwashed to say impeach Bush. No constructive ideas, no solutions, just criticism.
Many of us who aren't even Republicans wanted Bill Clinton out of office, and he lied before jurys and grand jurys and yet remained. And what kind of an idiot declares that he is going to kill Bin Laden, then warns them he is coming. Madyln Albright convinced Bill Clinton to do that, and they have the nerve to criticize Bush. At least you know where he stands. That's more than I can say for most of our congressmen and congresswomen at the moment.
Reply-
0%
bubba21 year, 7 months ago
Clinton lied about pulling his pants down in the white house. NO ONE DIED from that lie!
Bush LIED about ALL of the reasons to invade Iraq, and HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of people are DEAD or permanently MAIMED because of his LIES!
Yeah, we know where Bush stands alright, and it is NOT for the American people, who he is IGNORING.
Bush only cares about HIS agenda, which is the Project for a New American Century.
Bush cares NOTHING about what YOU think, about what the American people think, or about what the Iraqis think!
Bush knows NOTHING of "sacrifice", NOTHING of war, NOTHING of a friend or relative that has DIED or been MAIMED by the war, NOTHING of the HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of DEAD innocent Iraqis!
Reply -
0%
betruthful1 year, 7 months ago
Clinton never warned Bin Laden!! The leader of a soverign nation, an ally, was told we would send missiles into HIS country. The movie producers assumed, with no facts, that Bin Laden was warned.You should get information from other places other than MOVIES.
Reply
-
-
0%
Lurch1 year, 7 months ago
How do you know?
The fact is, you and none of the other apologists know because there has been no investigation.
Investigate, and we could take down all the crooks, incompetents, liars, and yes men amongst this admin. If we had started a few years ago when it became apparent that we were so horribly lied to, we wouldn`t be having this debate now. Unfortunately the yes men in the Republican do-nothing/rubber stamp congress didn`t have the courage and integrity to stand up for the consitution, the congress, or our country.
"The truth is never unpatriotic", Ben Franklin
Reply -
0%
cushi1 year, 7 months ago
Actually, it works for me because impeachment proceedings can be started on him right away, too!
Reply
-
-
100%
tchef1 year, 7 months ago
He has had several plans and suggestions given to him from both sides. He has rejected them all. The Iraq study group was one of them. The major suggestion put forth by them was to engage in a diplomatic discourse with Iran and Syria wich he totally rejected. That is just one example.
Reply-
0%
bubba21 year, 7 months ago
It just so happens that several alternative plans have been offered in the last couple of years. But there aren't many people paying any attention to them if they don't come from Republicans.
http://www.comw.org/pda/0512exitplans.html
Reply -
0%
Lurch1 year, 7 months ago
ike,
Is it so hard to admit you`ve wrong?
You are a frequent poster here and so you know the names Powell, McCain, Murtha and so forth.
By ignoring the multitude of plans put forth from before this ill-planned invasion ever started, you are only hurting your own credibility.
And do your own homework, we`ve given you plenty of links along the way to get you started. The fact is, you refuse to read and learn what you don`t already believe.
No wonder you support Bush, he is just like you - ignore reality and stick to your agenda and rhetoric no matter who and how many die or make other sacrifices.
Reply
-
50%
uncle-dave1 year, 7 months ago
President Bush's stuborn streak continues. His "with us or against" us attitude has cost the lives of many brave American soldiers. There have been valid alternatives offered, but they have fallen on deaf ears. Sadly President Bush's obstinace will send more victims to the slaughter.
Reply
