Not really basso, if that were true the Iraq war would't be an intractable mess, the Middle East wouldn't be even worse off than it was five years ago, the US wouldn't be an international laughingstock, and GWB wouldn't be a 29% lame duck. Basso I have evidence and results and, most of all, just plain logic, to back up my assumptions What do you have to back up yours aside from wishful thinking? Let's take the first point on. Is it your contention that the Iraqi insurgents would, if the US stopped involving itself in their civil war, gather themselves into a marauding army and set sail for the New World? Why or why not? My contention is that, for the most part, they would probably not, on balance, because most of them appear to be fighting a sectarian civil war against internal enemies in a struggle for local dominance, and that few of them have the means or willingness to do what you say. I think of the Mehdi army as far more concerned with what goes on Iraq than on this message board.
Err Ok mr Dreamshake, obviously u aint givin a fair shake to the leeder of our great nation. Do you really believe that GWB aint doin a good job! Thats wut the bleeding harts want u to believe! Now here in Texas, loyalty actually means somethin. It is also painfully obvius that GWB is doing a GREAT job. How many American soldiers die on a daily basis? 2, 4, 6, 8, 10? How many Irakis? 2,000, 4,000, 6,000? We are obviusly winning the war
Rimmy, I saw most of the press conference, and you failed to mention in your point what I found to be a new low from Bush... twice he used the fear card, "they're coming to kill your children if we don't fight them in Iraq," with two reporters to dodge a question. Dodging the questions and implying that the two reporters don't care what happens to their kids, or they wouldn't have the temerity to question George W. Bush. To use one of my old hippie expressions, which remain with me to this day (I have a bunch of them), it blows my mind. To think that this man is President of the United States freaks me out. D&D. Replicant City.
Well when I said "our" I meant it because he said "your" which was directed to two reporters but also symbolic of everyone listening, thus "our" children. So you, sir, are wrong about me failing. You have offended me. I shall never speak to or of you again. Stupid hippie. Get a haircut. I am finished with you. So, you like Blade Runner? Did you know it was based on a novel? Finished. You don't exist. So...you like the Rockets? I think they are super duper. Do you have a prostate? I have one.
Still have my prostate. Not sure about the other states, though. I can be in a state, at times. As for my hair, got it cut yesterday, ha ha! What little there is of it. To date, I don't dream of electric sheep. I consider that a blessing, although it could be a software error. D&D. Replicant City.
i think i have a prostate, but i'll have to ask batman to confirm, he's be all up 'n there lately... but yeah, it is about the kids to a very large degree, and as the father of two young children, in nyc, and both very much a part of the post 9/11 baby boom that we're experiencing here, i can't disagree- it certainly motivates my thinking, and it's something i think about every time i hear a siren heading up amsterdam, which is a couple of times a day. pre 9/11, i didn't even notice them.
A goofy attempt to tug at the heart strings rather than an actual response. SInce you brought it up why do you raise your children in a danger zone? Responsible parenting would dictate a move to a red state exurb where you can be around like minded citizens as well as remove yourself from the crosshairs. Anyway my question to you remains: If it is about the kids then why have you yet to face up to the fact that the President's policies have done very little to makethem safer and probably gone backwards in that regard?
if you could provide an ounce of creditable evidence to support that charge, i'd be happy to respond.
I hope your kids get drafted into some military conflict. The irony would be amazing. Have we not learned from Vietnam? If the locals are against you, you will never win. And innocent people, including our soldiers and civilians will suffer. If you're really concerned parent, pray for those who have lost sons and daughters so we could "keep the war over there". Whatever.
one could just as easily turn this question around. if you're so convinced the W has made us less safe, why do you continue to live in a danger zone? methinks thou dost naught have the courage of thine own convictions.
First, the word is "credible" Second, I asked you a very narrow, direct question earlier that goes to this, which you refused to answer. I will reprint it again: Answer it if you want. Look, I had written you off as a smart person who chooses to look silly on the internets cause 1. you don't care (which your really shouldn't), and 2. you're a hardocre republican (which seems to be based on a semi-populist disdain for elites based on something psychological, though you like opera) But anyway I, the great SamFisher of BBS fame, am offering you a chance at redemption - and more importantly, "creditability". Engage me on an intellectual level. I asked a question. Can you answer it? And more importantly will your answer make sense, and not lead to a lot more questions that invalidate it? Easy - I have made an economic (and I don't mean financial) decision - plus I don't have any kids. If it's "all about the kids" then you and I have differnt concerns right? Very obvious. In the past few years I've done a number of things that you wouldn't do. I've climbed mountains in the Himalayas with ****ty equipment. I've had sex with individuals with sketchy pasts. I've gotten insanely blackout drunk in strange places without regard for personal safety. We have different levels of acceptable risk.
Im sure that's what those who have lost their sons and daughters think of you and your kind. Those who support the war symbolizes the ultimate form of selfishness. And I hope justice in the true sense of the word will be served to all of you.
And there you are wrong.. Its well known that Sadr was a big fan of JVG as he recognized that you win games through defense, ball control and that V-Span for all his hype was as reliable a ball handler as a former member of the Republican Guard is a suicide bomber. Didn't Sadr in his speech the other day mention the infidal DaDakota's unbelief in Van Gundy had misguided Les Alexander into purging a great man and that for the good of all true Rocket fans be they Shiite, Sunni, Kurd or YOF such evil occupiers like DaDakota must be driven out of the mighty BBS.
i agree, to a certain extent at least, that most of the folks we're fighting in iraq are not likely to "follow us home," but some will, and we need to keep fighting them. where would you propose we do that? you seem to think they're in afghanistan, but if your objection to fighting them in iraq is that the oraqi people are otherwise innocent, does that the same innocence apply to the afghanis? and in any case, most people think OBL is in Pakistan. would you "redeploy" there? are there possibly unforeseen consequences of such a strategy? regardless, this is not the main rationale for staying in iraq, at least for me. rather, it is because we have a responsibility to the iraqi people, and altho we have delivered much, there is much that remains to be done. we owe it to our children, and the children of the overwhelming majority of the iraqi people, to stay and help them finish the job.
So you agree that the vast majority would not. Then your strategy is to fight the tiny minority by fighting a vast majority (and not really even fighting. Basso - please define for me how driving a convoy past an IED is "fighting" anything?) on their turf, on their terms, at enormous financial cost, and at enormous political cost, and at enormous human cost? Why not take the resources devoted to thelargely ineffective endeavor to fight 10 million people on their terms and instead try to target them smartly to fight the 1 or 2 thousand we really care about? Can you answer this question? I don't think you can. That sounds like a platitude. You can't define what "finishing the job" is, and you can't define what "we have delivered", and most importantly, all available evidence indicates that they don't know what the job is, nor do we, but that htey don't want us to finish it.
