Why does bush keep on bringing in the war on terror. Since the war there are more terrorist than there were before saddam, but bush keeps on insisting that this is a war on terror.
i didn't even know this speech was about to happen, i was looking forward to family guy. kinda weird to actually see bush say he was wrong and explain things for once. not that the speech will do much, just weird to see this admin do that.
Seriously, I was pretty pissed off at the timing. Finally a new family guy and then Bush pops up on the screen. If he cuts off family guy and american dad, i'll be kind of pissed off. Oh well, I'll admit that his speech is better than what he normally throws out.
I thought the speech was very effective. He specifically targeted the opponents of the war that want immediate pull out, as well as those who are erroneously and foolishly claiming we have already lost. He shut them up and embarrassed them, by specifically outlining how their policy would weaken our effort, nullify the work of our troops, and embolden our enemies. The best part about it? The liberals have to sit and listen -- with no opportunity for rebuttal.
Well it was either watch Forrest Gump or watch GW. I couldn't decide who was smarter,....but I went with Gump.
The only thing I'm embarrassed about is that after six years this idiot still can't read a teleprompter.
Who developed this nonsensical notion that keeps getting hashed and rehashed ad nauseum that we are fighting the terrorists abroad now so that we will be safer later? A grade school student has more reason than that. There is no set number of terrorists in that if you kill them all now then the threat is gone. Terrorism is a sentiment or an ideology and it emboldens as more hatred grows towards the United States. How is this such a difficult concept for the dittoheads to understand? That speech was pure trash. I wish I had those 16 minutes of my life back. George W. Bush once again shows a complete lack of understanding of the complexity of the Shiite/Sunni relationship, completely oblivious to the fact that an impending Shiite theocracy is a major threat and a very real possibility.
hmmm... God forbid the aministration actually listen to reasoned oppositional arguments. Much better to listen to your own propaganda. "We're fighting the liberals in Iraq so we don't have to fight them at home...oh wait, uh, I mean...uhh...9/11!...terror!...9/11!...terror!...."
Well, terrorists are people and there are a finite number of people. These terrorists are predominantly Muslim and Arab, and that group is a smaller number. It is possible to destroy the entire pool of potential terrorists, though that is a) not the goal, and b) not neccessary for victory.
As an observer of the political game, and not a person with a strong opinion about the President, I will say the speech used a good strategy. He targeted oponents of the war, to make it seem like he wasn't silencing dissent, and appeal to those who were drifting away or had tentatively drifted away from supporting the war. He brought up WMD's while acknowledging that they weren't there. The strategy was decent. The effectiveness, I can't comment on since I will admit bias. I'm still very angry over the eavesdropping order he gave without permission from the courts.
That is the only possible explanation I can think of, and like you said, that is not the goal nor is it necessary for victory. So how are we defeating terrorism? We can't ethnically cleanse the entire Arab Muslim population. Sons of dead fathers are only growing up with animosity towards the United States. So how does this work, Mr. Bush?
You, like the Democrats, are just throwing complaints out there with no recommendations. The speech tonight was to help build support for staying the course. It was needed because of the defeatist liberals dominating the news lately. We are in Iraq. The time for debating that move is over. Now the decision is whether we'd like to win the war or lose it. Stay and finish the job, or leave and hand over the country to terrorists. Which would you prefer?
Once again, since Iraq is a hole in the ground. I'd be fine with handing the country over to terrorists. Good luck governing sand pits
Yet another unconstructive complaint by the liberals. Do you have any recommendations or are you just out to complain, like 99% of those of your ideological beliefs? I take it by your post that you are in favor of leaving Iraq immediately and handing it over to the terrorists?
Instead of just attacking him and "liberals" answer the question because many others in this country have that same question. Dubya hasn't done a very good job of answering that so perhaps you can enlighten us and clear that up.
