In Speech Bush Returns to Fear Mongering as Polls Drop

OK. To do it the way you seem to want to do it is unrealistic. Regardless of what a criminally incompetent fool George W. Bush is, we can't just announce we are leaving, pack up, and go. It would be murder. Yes, plenty of "murder" is going on right now, as well as plenty of combat deaths and injuries, but some kind of "mechanism," what, I don't know... there are different possibilities, has to be in place to enable those who put their lives in our hands, by supporting us, to have a chance. In my opinion.


Keep D&D Civil.

 

in George's too.

 

rhadamanthus - I agree with the author's basic premise. Regarding the Dean quote, I'm not quite sure if staying the course is the best option but I am starting to lean more open to that option.

Just thought I would add in that "ahistorical citizenry" is probably the best description I've heard yet of the apathetic/ignorant parroting that typifies a large percentage of our nation's population. I think I'll start using that.

 

"Illegal" was my word too but we can even set aside the fact that invading was morally reprehensible. It simply was illogical.

 

Well, if one accepts the premise that Bush perjured himself before America and the world as a criminal offence, then the invasion was a criminal act. Not sure if being criminally incompetent counts.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

George W. Bush lied in front of Congress during the 2003 State of the Union address with his claims of yellow cake from Niger.

Lying to Congress is a felony.

Case Closed.

 

RMT, how can you prove it? He'll say that he just repeated what his advisors told him were the "facts." And if that doesn't work, he can just claim stupidity. If that is a valid defence, well, I would believe him.


Keep D&D Civil.

 

Any rational, clear thinking, true American would be mad as hell and looking to fire the person or persons who mislead them and made them look like a fool to the world. But in this case the perps got medals of Freedom.

Weird...

 

really? could you quote the lie please? please also offer your proof that his statement was a lie.

 

I wouldn't put too much weight on neocon's propaganda. Did the author fail to mention the illegal use of Agent Orange, its devastating effect on the environment and lives of human beings, the cover-up by U.S., and refusal by U.S. to compensate the victims?

"holocaust took place in Cambodia"

Does carpet bombing count as mass muder?

 

Beautiful.

 

So if you truly believe a blowjob isn't sex, you're not lying, right?

 

Exactly.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

Any historian will tell you that South Vietnam had it really bad post our exit, neocon or otherwize. The point of me posting that was to show that pulling out can cause horrible effects. If you only thought the war in Iraq was a bad thing because of the cost to America then fine, we should just pull out and leave Iraqis to suffer the consequences for our irresponsibility. However, the main reason I opposed the Iraq war was the cost the people of Iraq would have to bear during the conflict. If we leave now we are abandoning these people to civil strife that would take even more lives than a US occupation is taking now.

Sure, I didn't agree with the Vietnam war. What we did was reprehensible. I only used the Vietnam war as one of many examples of when we've said. Oh sh*t, this isn't going well, you're on your own now brown people. And that abandonment resulted in massive ammounts of suffering.

The main difference between Iraq and Vietnam however, is that in Vietnam we were involved in a war between two countries. Our presence was merely prolonging the conflict and taking more lives. In Iraq, if we leave we actually could spark a full scale war as the three ethnic factions would have no mediation between them and the power vacuum would no doubt spark a massive conflict that is not occuring now. If we have any sense of responsibility, we'll do whatever we can to make sure that doesn't happen.

 

How much worse can it be if we pull out? Nobody can answer that question now. You can only speculate at best. What's clear is that most Iraqis think we are not doing a good job in their country, and are causing more harm than good. We are an uninvited guest, to put it mildly, in other people's home. Some of the family members are acting aggressively to push us out, while others try to be polite, only to avoid offending the powerful intruder. But deep in their hearts, they also want us out - the sooner the better.

The responsible way is to trust the Iraqi people to settle scores among themselves. There may be some bloodshed, but that's a bump on the road to peace. By staying the course, we have no hope for peace. We think we have quashed a problem, but in the process we created another one, or two.

 

Why do you hate freedom and the Panam canal?

 

No fly zone.

 

why? are we currently winning the war in iraq?

 

I'm not sure I can agree with this because there will always be resentment on their side regarding an ongoing foreign occupation. We tend to dismiss the human aspect of things too easily as occupation is always humiliating. Even assuming our intentions are noble and of a humanitarian cause, you simply cannot impose a revolution or ideology. The "we know what's best for you" attitude has never been successful not to mention an overwhelming sense of animosity in that region towards the U.S. over suspicion of our ulterior motives in Iraq.

Aside from the (dwindling number in the) popinjay crowd, I think most everyone now agrees that entering Iraq was a bad decision. When the question shifts to our plan of exit, I can do nothing but throw my hands up in the air in frustration ala Rudy T. every time we blew a 20 point lead in the 2nd half. The biggest flaw from the start was this Eurocentric arrogant assumption that given the choice in a democratic election, the people would abandon Islam. That was clearly not the case. That will be a problem. If things go well, what should have become the 51st state of the United States and a model democracy in the Middle East suddenly becomes an ally to the 3rd wheel of the "axis of evil" and a stepping stone towards the first Islamic superpower since the fall of the Ottomans. Oops, we cleary didn't want that. If we pull out now, the sunni insurgents assume power and all hell breaks loose. Neither is a favorable situation in this case.

Don't ever overlook the human factor. Even if our intentions are noble, occupation is always resented.

I mean, really, why would you want Saddam Hussein out of power? We're talking about a secularist government in no way in collaboration with the Muslim influences surrounding him, in the heart of the Middle East, and you would disrupt that?