Bush: Democrats Offer Enemies a Victory »
Posted by: STONERS 1 year, 4 months ago453 Comments Report this Story
President Bush said Saturday that a Democratic plan to set an end date for the war gives "our enemies the victory they desperately want."
Read Full Story at news.aol.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 453
-
0%
STONERS1 year, 4 months ago
At Bush's invitation, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi are due at the White House on Wednesday to discuss the war, particularly a bill funding the military mission through September.
In both the House and Senate, Democrats have attached timelines for withdrawing troops to the bill containing $96 billion in military funding.
Bush says the meeting will be about his nonnegotiable stance on a timeline.
Reply-
100%
STONERS1 year, 4 months ago
"Instead of approving this funding, Democrats in Congress have spent the past 68 days pushing legislation that would undercut our troops," he said in his weekly radio address. "They passed bills that would impose restrictions on our military commanders and set an arbitrary date for withdrawal from Iraq, giving our enemies the victory they desperately want."
Reply-
0%
Blackacereturn1 year, 4 months ago
Is this guy for real? He should know by now that the American people are not feeding into his crap anymore...we want the troops out of there, if he wants our money he will have to abide by our rules.
Reply-
0%
IncaQueen1 year, 4 months ago
The sad part is that President Bush is correct. Any timeline to force the U.S. out by any bill by the Democrats will cause more deaths and is actually giving the terrorists enough will to hang in there, tough it out, and beat the infedels. Victory for Allah, death to Americans. Any idiot ought to be able to figrue that one out. Many of the soldiers who will die are also Democrats. You aren't just punishing Bush...you are killing your own soldiers, and they will have died in vain. Of course most of these offering these protests have no children serving in the military. It's easy to be an armchair quarterback when you don't play in the game. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are politicians, nothing more. Right now we need patriots, both Democrat and Republican...they are the enemy, and the terrorists are coming from Iran, Syria, and Jordan, not Iraq. Without us you also execute the rest of Iraq and Afghanistan, except those who are sympathizers to the Muslim terrorists.
Reply-
-
100%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
we need to show the islmic fundmentlist thet no matter how often or how long they attack we will stop them,and we will be there to stop them.its not so much what our goal is as it what their goal is.all they have to do is drive us out to win.
Reply -
0%
quackpot1 year, 4 months ago
That's an easy question.
-We will win the right to gather our oil that has somehow gotten stuck unred Iraq.
-We will win BIG contracts for Hallibuten et al to build our permanent military bases
-We will win the right to run an oil pipeline through Afghanistan
-We will be able to close our eyes to the terrorists that live in other parts of the world since this is a highly selectiuve "war on terror" that only involved thos in the Middle East.
Reply -
100%
esmLIVE1 year, 4 months ago
I think it might help too. Why he just won't go on TV and explain the surge and the money needed. Is he saving his TV time for something else?
Nobody really likes the war. Logicaly and stategically speaking telling your enemy who you are OBVIOUSLY still fighting when your going to pull out is probably a no-no.
If you won't do that in basketball or baseball, why on God's green Earth would you do it in a war?
Reply
-
-
100%
PapaWolf1 year, 4 months ago
>>Any timeline to force the U.S. out by any bill by the Democrats will cause more deaths and is actually giving the terrorists enough will to hang in there, tough it out, and beat the infedels. Victory for Allah, death to Americans
All the reports I've heard state that the MAJORITY of those fighting in Iraq are Iraqi's w/only a VERY few from neighboring countries. And if you believe Iraqis would stop fighting an invading & occupying force, no matter how long it took, you're mistaken. How long would YOU fight if an another country was occupying your home & land?
Reply-
-
0%
esmLIVE1 year, 4 months ago
Not to be funny or anything... but history says that your answer is wrong.
And if Bush did what he is doing now about 2 years ago, many Iraqies would approave of the war too.... they would still want us out and make sure we don't feel comfortable, but it would not be what it sis today.
Reply-
100%
capecoralM1 year, 4 months ago
Perhaps we can learn fom history. This report provides aggregate data on U.S. assistance to Iraq and compares it with U.S. assistance to Germany and Japan during the seven years following World War II. For Germany, in constant 2005 dollars the United States provided a total of $29.3 billion in assistance from 1946-1952 with 60% in economic grants and nearly 30% in economic loans, and the remainder in military aid. Germany and Japan also are larger than Iraq - both population and size of their respective economies - and the extent of war damage to each country's industrial capacity was different. Iraq also faces an insurgency that deliberately sabotages the economy and reconstruction efforts. U.S. policymakers and occupation planners were skeptical that the Germans and Japanese had the necessary cultural background and psychological disposition for flourishing democracies. As we now know it was possible. The same can be said for Vietnam. Congressional Research Service RL33331
Reply-
0%
esmLIVE1 year, 4 months ago
I think in some ways Germany and japan were different. They actually felt defeat. They mentally knew they lost the war. We also were at war with the whole country not a specific part of the population.
I don't know... maybe somehow this will work out. Maybe giving a date will give the insurgants false hope and when the day passes and we are still there, they are caught off guard. Maybe America needs to stop fighting a idea and start fighting the people of the whole state who supports it. I know if a nuke goes off here, it will be the beginning of a very long war with specific countries, not specific people.
Reply-
100%
Blackacereturn1 year, 4 months ago
Hope? Do you think the insurgents are sitting there going ok I can't wait for the US to leave? They are bombing us now as we speak. If we stay or go it matters not to them they will keep at it until we leave be it now or then. I say either we fight a real war or get to hell out and let them deal with it.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
Blackacereturn1 year, 4 months ago
I tould fight Till DEATH,
I love my country; this is why I am against this
administration! I do think I would like Bush if he wasn't in charge of my country but I am sorry I only want the best for our baby America the beautiful, and he isn't.
Reply
-
-
100%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
yes however they are being rilled up and led by iranians and other forgin presons.just as we are getting help from the iraqi people once we gain their trust our true enemies are getting help from indigenous people making by making freedom and demrocracy look bad.something you must understand we are not at war WITH iraq.we are at war IN iraq.iraq is only a battlefeild in the propaganda war we are fighting with islmic fundamentlisim.they say freedom is weak and demrocracy brings division.all they have to do is point to thecongress decision to say "see we were right"
Reply-
85%
mesodude1 year, 4 months ago
"they are being rilled up and led by iranians and other forgin presons.just as we are getting help from the iraqi people once we gain their trust our true enemies are getting help from indigenous people..."
Do you think maybe having a quarter of a million or more American troops and war contractors setting up stakes in their country while they struggle with 70% unemployment might be why "they are being rilled up"?
Reply-
0%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
not at all .if that were the case the violence would be a little more wide spread.instead it is extremly limited to verry small areas.as for contractors i would have to know wich ones but if it follows the normal oil whines it is problly a twist to an out and out lie.we dont get any oil from iraq and NEVER will.it all goes to other countrys.unemployment would be lower if the contractors were allowed to set up an unmolested shop or two so we can get some real rebuilding going
Reply-
27%
miklkit1 year, 4 months ago
Indeed. Since our occupation army is too small to cover the whole country, the violence tends to follow us around as we travel around like a traveling circus.
What contractors? Where have you been while we have been complaining about halliburton and their no bid contract that gives us buildings that fall down, tainted water for our troops, unsanitary toilets, etc.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Reply-
-
0%
PapaWolf1 year, 4 months ago
>>ohhh sorry i was giving you the bennifet of the doubt.i see i was wrong this IS a haliburton thing.i thought you were a lib with a third brain cell.my bad sorry again
That's just wrong. Didn't you know that we (that is, Haliburton & our gov't) brought in labor instead of using the indigenous labor? THAT's why unemployment is so high.
Also, our wonderful services can't even repair the electric grid.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
100%
PapaWolf1 year, 4 months ago
>>yes however they are being rilled up and led by iranians and other forgin presons.
No. They're getting riled up by us basically destroying about every part of Iraqi life.
>>we are not at war WITH iraq.we are at war IN iraq.iraq is only a battlefeild in the propaganda war....
And we're losing that propaganda war by destroying that battlefield.
>>we are fighting with islmic fundamentlisim.they say freedom is weak and demrocracy brings division.all they have to do is point to thecongress decision to say "see we were right"
I disagree. They can see that our system can correct mistakes made by that system. If we leave the country and fix our mistakes, the "insurgents" will have no more propaganda to use.
Reply
-
-
75%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
The leadership, funding and weapons for the 'insurgency' comes from Syria and Iran. This is a documented fact. Also, please note the more than 95% of the people being killed by the terrorists in Iraq are not military targets but innocent civilians. The attacks are not focused on an 'occupying army' but on disrupting daily life and playing to the press. The terror leaders have learned that they can play the press to turn the hearts and minds of Americans to try and force a pull out.
If we set an arbitrary date to pull out wether or not the Iraqi gov't and armed forces are ready to fend off the terrorists invites chaos and allows someone like Saddam to take power again.
Two, points of history. 1) It took the US 11 years from the Declaration of Independence to forge the Constitution. Yet we expect a country that has been run by a tyrant for decades to come up with one overnight. 2) The lesson of Vietnam is that when a war gets politicized and troops pulled...innocents die.
Reply-
0%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
(continuing point 2) We not only withdrew troops we failed to deliver material, weapons and funding to South Vietnam that we promised and the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese stormed in. Tens of thousand were killed (as with the typical communist purging) because the politicians in Washington were too busy playing politics instead of doing the right thing. Early in the war we were on the verge of defeating the North Vietnamese and leaving a strong South Vietnam, but then the polticians stepped in and stopped the military from doing it's job. And, what caused this, the unprecendented immediate press coverage of the carnage of war splashed on TV and newspapers everyday.
If WWII was happening today, imagine the people calling for our withdrawal from the war because too many soldiers were dying. It took Pearl Harbor for the US politicians to get off their butts and see we can't hide our heads in the sand. More people got killed on 9/11 and we don't have the guts to protect ourselves.
Reply-
-
100%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
there is no equating civilans going about their lives dieing in an unprovoked attack to military deaths.how ever if you want to than 1 american civilan being killed in this manner should be too many to allow it to be unanswered.that 1 died is too much.if you want to equate lets talk about unsafe it is to walk the streets of american cities where the death toll in philadelipha is 103 so far this year.thats just the city.how about the surrounds like chester and west chester.what dose it climb to then.where is the outcry to do something.americans are dieing and we dont hear about it.a freind of mine lives in philly ,came in on leave and made the comment he cant wait to go back beacuse it looks the same but over there he is safer.over there he has a flack jacket, backup, and can shoot back.
Reply-
0%
PapaWolf1 year, 4 months ago
>>if you want to equate lets talk about unsafe it is to walk the streets of american cities where the death toll in philadelipha is 103 so far this year.thats just the city.how about the surrounds like chester and west chester.what dose it climb to then.where is the outcry to do something
We HAVE been screaming about violence in the US. But the politicians have other priorities - an illegal invasion of Iraq, cutting social programs & job creation funding, giving amazing tax breaks to the richest in this country, tax breaks to oil co's making record profits.
We have been screaming. It's just that the GOP was screaming God, Guns & Gays louder. And raising the terror alert any time their ratings start to slip.
Reply
-
-
-
67%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
Dave -
Much of the money for the weapons the insurgents have comes from the 12 billion dollars in cash disbursed by the US under the auspices of the Coalition Provisional Authority.
It's likely that some weapons are coming from Iran and Syria, but the arms market out of Brussels is doing a bang up job of arming the insurgents. Chinese weapons too.
It's not as cut and dried as you might think.
Reply -
0%
DoseASpinoza1 year, 4 months ago
Even if we concede point 2, how are we doing any better in Iraq now? Why is it we can get plenty of humvees and pallets of cash over there but we can't get the troops enough IED-resistant vehicles and body armor, which we do make?
I am not interested in funding more of the same. If we are to keep troops there to stabilize the situation we destabilized, let's try giving them the right stuff to actually win or at least create a draw.
Any good commander knows that your strategy is the sum of your tactics, not the other way around. So far our only tactic is to throw more bodies into the pit.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
43%
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
Ummm, I believe we were still in Vietnam in '72.
Couldn't have been any of those famous dirty tricks that won Nixon his nickname that helped swing that election, could it?
Reply -
-
-
20%
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
Kissinger was working on it. Nixon and other Republicans were saying things that sounded a lot like the things Iraq war supporters say today--that we'd be surrendering, handing the terrorists, I mean Communists, victory, that they'd soon expand to take over surrounding countries, etc.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
25%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
well flowers and liberators was a little off.after being burned in the gulf war they wernt sure if we were here to stay,they were afraid .after a few days you saw what was going on.the statue came down and they and woke up.now in the pacified area (wich is most of iraq)they openly greet our boys with,as corny as it is true,flowers. you dont see it beacuse our lib perss cannot let W have a victory.mission accomplished the first mission was done,the war WITH iraq ended.it was approaite then,the lib press just could not let us have our victory.turning corners and last throes,it was till now.all they have to do is trot out the video footage of dog woman nancy biting her masters hand and show the vote for pull out dates to say "see how weak demrocracy is"
Reply
-
-
0%
ETproductions1 year, 4 months ago
IncaQueen, In my opinion, your theory is flawed. Iraq is mostly a civil war, not terrorism. The only terrorist base there before we invaded existed only due to the protection of our no-fly zone. The majority Shiia, the Kurds and even to an increasing degree the Sunnis are now pursuing al Qaeda with the intention of driving them from their country.
Bush doesn't even know who "the enemy" is. If someone contacted Bush tomorrow and said, bring the surrender treaty and we'll sign, he would have no idea where to take it or what uniform the "enemy" would be wearing.
We may need to keep a forward deployed presence there for a time to prevent al Qaeda from gaining a foothold, but the sooner we let the Iraqis settle their differences the better.
They LIVE there. We don't. They don't need a withdrawal date to inspire them to hang in. It's their country. They aren't going anywhere, and some day, after how many thousand more deaths, we are going to leave.
Reply-
HomeGManComment removed: User banned.
-
-
100%
gfarral1 year, 4 months ago
The only way the President or his successor can pull of a complete victory in Iraq and Afghanistan is to reinstate the draft and build up our troop strenth to a bout 1.5 - 2.0 million persons. to fight a guerrilla action, you must out number them by about 11 - 1. Read Mao Tse Dongs book on Guerilla Warfare. It is the 'bible' on this topic. Had the President done his due diligence when he was a jet jockey, he would know this. Without more troops we are shooting ourselves in the foot and will be mired down in Iraq for many years. It is not worth the effort.
Our military personal do their jobs and more! Myself and others send them notes, gifts, and packages. This is not a reflection on them but on an Administration that greivously erred by starting something they had no plan to end and now cannot finish.
Reply-
-
0%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
no you are fighting the wrong war.this is not a war of troops,even though it involves troops,this is a propaganda war.this is a war to find out who is stronger,freedom and demrocracy or islamic mundamentalisim and therocracy.everyone keeps thinking this has no place in the war on terror,but it is central.in order to win this we have to show both sides ,and the neturals who havent decided yet,that we have the patiance to wait them out.there is not going to be a falling of berlin or heroshima moment in this war.it will slowly fade away when they stop getting more recruits.congress vote just gave them material to recuit several thousand more.
Reply-
-
89%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
that is going on but the meida dosnt tell you.the only place where aid projects have been slowed is in the small hot zones.now there are some key things that have to done in these hot spots in order to finish projects in other parts of the country but over all we have rebuilding going on.at the same time we cant do it all for them.they have to have an active hand in rebiulding and a personal stake in the success of their country.untill they are sure they can be seen helping without the threat of us leaving,they wont help.
Reply-
-
0%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
i dont accept the premis of the question.ensuring safty in a war zone is an oxymoran.necessities to who??you ???or them?? just beacuse you have electricity and icecream and a mcdonalds up the street all the time you expect the army to carry all that in with them in their backpacks to place some where convient as they pass.as i said they have to have a personal stake in their country.they wont help till they can be seen helping without us abandoning them... again
Reply-
0%
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
You're right that the more important thing is what's going on now, rather than how the war was started. But I can't help feeling frustrated--electricity is a necessity. It helps preserve food. And in the long run, it would have been helpful to bolster a national pride by securing the ancient artifacts that were looted from the museums. It is, after all, the birthplace of civilization.
Reply-
0%
mrbs1 year, 4 months ago
thost things that were looted....turns out they were for the most part being taken by the staff of the museums for safe keeping scince the early 90's.in fact they addmitted they have them.and hiding them.they arnt going to bring them forth till the US is out and the iraqi govt is capable of standing on its own but they have them.yes there were a few items that made their way to the black market but most of it was gone befor W was elected.something else burried by the press. makes you wonder why they would do that.
electricity is above prewar levels.there is electricity in places that dont know what a lightbulb is.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
DoseASpinoza1 year, 4 months ago
And if that is true, there is no point in staying. Any sociologist will tell you that religion is one of the greatest obstacles to change. Would you convert if someone stormed your town? Did the Jews convert in Germany? And they did not have suicide bombers.
This is a culture that has demonstrated over and over that its religious values are more important than American-style democracy.
Your logic is ridiculous. The Congressional vote did not give them material to recruit more. If they believe we will leave there will be nothing left to fight except each other. They have been doing that for 1,000 years. The incentive to join up would be the same as it has been for that long.
Reply
-
-
0%
mesodude1 year, 4 months ago
ITA about the draft. Right wingers love to compare Iraq to Vietnam and WWII but they always want to sidestep the fact that during those earlier conflicts we had a draft and there were no tax cuts galore with which the Presidents in power then could bribe wealthy war cheerleaders into eternal ignorant loyalty as Bush has managed to do. It cannot be said often enough that those on the right are happy to have us perpetually invading destroying other countries as long as they personally aren't the ones enlisting and coming home in body bags, permanently brain damaged, missing multiple limbs and suffering from PTSD. If they were the ones who had to share moldy hospital rooms with rodents and beg their government for disability benefits, they would absolutely be singing an entirely different tune. Neoclowns are absolutely UNBELIEVABLE.
Reply-
100%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
"love to compare Iraq to Vietnam and WWII but they always want to sidestep the fact that during those earlier conflicts we had a draft" --
First, it was liberal democrats oppossed to us going to war in Iraq in the first place who invoked the ghosts of Vietnam. Read your news reports and read the speeches on record in the Library of Congress.
Second, while there was a standing draft (historically called 'conscription') for Vietnam (a war we entered under two dem presidents and a dem congress by the way) there was not a standing draft for WWII. The draft had been used for WWI but repealed at wars end. It was inacted in 1940 when Europe and North Africa were already imbroiled in war and leaders of the US forsaw of our involvement.
The hospital you speak of is not the only medical facility used to treat the injured, they are spread out on bases across the country. While tragic, it has become a politcal football and doesn't change anything.
Reply-
0%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
p.s. for all your bluster about conservatives wanting to send innocent troops to war, why is it that the large majority of military recruits come from conservative republican families? (part of joining the military includes personal and family background checks including political affilitaion so this is documented.) Why do you think the dems went to court to get oversea serviceperson's ballot's excluded from the last two presidential elections? (read the court records) Because they are historically conservative.
Reply-
100%
mesodude1 year, 4 months ago
"p.s. for all your bluster about conservatives wanting to send innocent troops to war, why is it that the large majority of military recruits come from conservative republican families"
Even if this is true, it doesn't change the fact that the majority of conservatives who "support" the war are doing it from the sidelines. Why is that when our military is overstretched and troops are doing multiple tours? Why are there more war cheerleaders like yourself than there are "supporters" rushing to put their lives on the line in In Iraq?
Reply -
0%
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year, 4 months ago
Families of the uneducated and easily coerced o into the military, not wealthy Republicans..just under-educated, underachieving southerners and poor people..Sure, there are many poor republicans who become republicans because they think the democrats are gonna let gays get married, or allow abortions (those are the corced Reublicans)
Remember the Republican motto: "keep them dumb and they'll believe anything"
Get the facts and you'll see...73% of America's brightest students are smart enough not to go into the military..So we end up with the the bottom 25% and the poor (which are often not well-educated)..Dumb rich kids,. like Bush and Cheney didn't go..Your statement is very inaccurate..VERY
Reply
-
-
0%
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
The liberal Democrats who compared Vietnam to Iraq in opposing it were considering the real parallel between Iraq and Vietnam, which lies in the similarities of fighting a war against no clear enemy, the misuse of military rather than diplomatic and humanitarian means to try to impose our ideology on a people, and the losing proposition of destabilizing a region and miring ourselves in the middle of a civil war halfway around the world.
The supporters of Iraq who compare Iraq to Vietnam still tend to picture Vietnam as a conflict that we could have won, if we'd just been more committed. And they ignore the fact that their dire predictions of Communist hegemony throughout the region if we left never materialized.
Reply
-
-
-
-
86%
blog20061 year, 4 months ago
incaqueen
Correct?
What are you smoking?
Who has been offering a daily humiliation to the country s prestige for the past few years?
Reply -
100%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
IncaQueen -
I recognioze the possibility that you might be correct; however, rather than allow Iraq to stabilize itself, as people like Ali Allawi say, we keep attempting to dam a river of dissent with stopgap measures...
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20%
mcgrievysr1 year, 4 months ago
NoSpinDave---Hey, Dave, I just checked back through, and I'll leave you with a thought if you get back. You're fun, because you don't have a clue, and you have no sense of humor. It's too easy to rattle your cage.
"not from where I sit".
You're sitting on a top that's in motion. Do you know what a top does?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
saneman1 year, 4 months ago
Since Bush wants to privatize everything, let the oil companies hire their own security forces to protect the oil fields. That's the only reason why the troops are in Iraq to begin with so that the oil companies can reap huge profits at our expense. We as taxpayers are getting kicked in the teeth not only once but twice. Not only are we paying to protect the oil companies, but we are getting stabbed in the back on the way to the gas pumps, a scenario commonly adhered to by the Repubs everywhere.
Reply-
0%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
You think we are getting kicked in the teeth now. Imagine leaving the job unfinished in Iraq and a puppet gov't under the control of Iran going into place. There are obviously people commenting here that have no clue. Having lived through the oil crisis of the '70's and early '80's you have no idea how the economy of this country will crash. Even if we went full bore ahead with turning to alternative energy (which I believe is wise) it would take decades before we could be free of middle eastern oil. But, we will never be free of it's effect on the world's economy.
Anyone remember 22% interest mortgage rates under the Carter Administration during the hostage crisis.
Like it or not we are involved in a mess in Iraq and regardless of how we got there we can't just cut and run. What do you thing Hitler and Hirohito would have done if we said in 1943 that regardless of how things are going we are pulling out of the war on Sept 1, 1944? How would their troops have been inspired?
Reply-
95%
saneman1 year, 4 months ago
Your crystal ball is broken. You have absolutely no idea what would happen. So, please go tell your B.S. to someone else. If you knew what would happen, your people would never have gone into Iraq in the first place other than to steal the oil from the Iraqis, something the Repubs do very well, because they surely don't have the brains to invent anything useful.
Reply-
100%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
Logical thought based in historical reality and not emotional politics is BS? I have a son who is a Marine and is shipping off to Iraq. I have friends who are heading back on their second tours. I have friends who have lost body parts in Iraq. And, some who have died.
Of the survivors, the families who lost a son and those heading back, not one of them regrets it. They have been on the ground. In the cities and villages. They have been treated as heroes by the local populations who are thrilled to be free of Saddams rule. Most of the insurgents they have fought, killed or captured are foriegn nationals or are lead by foreign nationals. The locals only wish is thet we don't leave until the job is done. It's funny, not one of these folks have been interviewed by the press but if any of them had come back decrying this war they would be a national celebrity. If this war is so unpopular why have the armed forces set records for recruiting.
Reply-
-
-
0%
saneman1 year, 4 months ago
I am tired of trying to argue against stupidity. I do that everyday trying to argue with the patent examiners to get claims allowed for the most idiotic inventions one can ever imagine. I will send to you a Certificate of Confidentiality and let's see if you can present something to me that isn't as idiotic; other than what you have done so far. How about it?
Reply-
100%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
What is so idiotic about it? You haven't countered anything I have said. Do you have a son in the military? Are you in the military? Do you have friends and family members in the military that can refute this? I have a personal investment at stake in this. Other than political motivation what is your stake in this? All you've said is anything someone can hear as dem talking points on any radio station. Which you can also get from a local demo party office.
Study your history. Dems didn't become politcal doves until the mid-60's. Conviently during Vietnam (JFK and LBJ). The majority of conflicts in US history occured under a democratic president and congress. And, while the GOP waves the flag of Lincoln a study of political science will teach you that the politics of the GOP in the mid to late 1800's is more alligned with the current democratic party. My father, a vet and life long democrat, voted for Bush the last election because he is disgusted with what his party has become.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
mesodude1 year, 4 months ago
"What do you thing Hitler and Hirohito would have done if we said in 1943 that regardless of how things are going we are pulling out of the war on Sept 1, 1944? How would their troops have been inspired?"
The difference between Iraq and WWII is that we had a draft then. In 1943 neither you nor I would be having this debate because we wouldn't have the option of cheering "Go Bush" while not enlisting. BIG difference.
Reply-
0%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
(read above) Then let's reinstate the draft (as it was institued for WWII, there wasn't a standing draft when the war started). Maybe learning a little personal discipline, responsility and team work might be what this generation needs. I wanted to enter the military but a severe knee injury kept me out. What's your excuse.
As I stated above, all branches of the miltary set recruiting records in '06. We have troops that have completed bootcamp who are waiting to continue their specialty training but the budget constraints put in place during the Clinton years leave all branches in a bind. This is part of the reason why experienced troops are having their tours extended. Everyone is focused on the budget for the war effort but not on the regular military budget which pays for the traing.
Reply -
50%
IanFraigun1 year, 4 months ago
Sorry the difference between WWII and Iraq is not the draft.
The difference is in WWII we were attacked and in Iraq we attacked a country for little or no reason.
All the reasons we were given have been proven false.
Bottom line in 1941 Japan attacked us and Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan.
In this situation the administration lied to us about threats, got the OK to use military after negotiations failed and they did nothing except order the UN Inspectors out before invading.
A whole different situation especially since except during strong government controls Iraq has been in a religious civil war for over 1000 years and no way we can ever end that. We wait 2000 years and a million troops killed before we leave and guess what. The next day the fighting starts all over again.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Watchman_Dave1 year, 4 months ago
Not so fast...
Many times peace allows former enemies to be trading partners but they usually were trading partners before the war.
Are we trading partners with North Korea? Until recently were we trading partners with Vietnam? Read your history. Did Russia and japan become trading partners after their first war (not WWII)? Did Isreal and Syria (et al) bec
-
-
-
-
-
-
