This war has NOT been lost and WILL NOT be lost. Your attitude is defeatist in nature and is driven by politics. I am thankful that Gates is fully cognizant of the incredibly negative consequences of your surrender, all hope is lost mentality.
There is a very good chance that one of the first things that Congress is going to do next term is to pass laws which will prevent the president from using signing statements. It wasn't a problem, apparently, until Bush came along. They were used when a president believed that some portion of a bill was unconstitutional and they worked well until this president. But apparently Bush feels that anything that prevents him from acting exactly how he wants is unconstitutional. He uses it more like an unassailable line item veto. In spite of all the well known big issues, it is the constant bending and ignoring of long established rules and procedures that really scares me about W. He doesn’t even care enough about his constitutional duty (to protect the Constitution) to pretend that he cares.
thanks- i was going to make the same point, but it's like shouting into the wind. to paraphrase bruce catton, it's the perpetual call to retreat that most frustrates me about the liberals on this board, and in the larger body politic. when we so manifestly aren't losing, to scream that we are, or already have, and demand a strategy that would hand victory to the enemy...it simply beggars belief.
You and Jorge could have saved yourself a lot of typing by just saying "Stay the course" (despite the fact that you have no idea now, or then what the course is)
If only Jorge and basso and the internet had been around back in the day I'm almost sure we would have won in Vietnam. Nearly four years into the war and even the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not believe Bush has defined the mission there. They also unanimously oppose sending more troops. Jorge, you've asked war opponents on this board to provide a solution to the bloody debacle Bush has caused and you have supported in Iraq. When you asked me, I gave you my opinion on a least worst case strategy. Now what's your answer? Are we winning right now? Should we stay the course and keep doing exactly what we've been doing since it's working so well? Should we send more troops as Bush, McCain and virtually nobody else says we should? Or should we just close down the New York Times and put all their reporters in jail?
My knowledge is driven by facts, experience, and reality. Your attitude is driven by willful ignorance, partisan desires, and slogans. Saying over and over "We will not lose" while clicking your red shoes does not mean victory. As for what Gates said... that you actually take solace in his words: "Failure in Iraq at this juncture would be a calamity that would haunt our nation, impair our credibility, and endanger Americans for decades to come." when he and everyone else except W and yourself know this is already a fait accompli proves my point.
Here we go... Bush and those who were right all along could have pulled this out if they only hadn't been stabbed in the back by those traitors clamoring for surrender. Ugh. I expect this from TJ but I expect better from you basso (though I honestly don't know why). The blame for this debacle goes directly to Bush and the Republican Party. As I've said before, there's no JFK or LBJ to make this a bipartisan failure like Vietnam... this is yours lock, stock, and barrel. You can mimic your boy Adolf and try the stab in the back theory... and it may reasonate with 15-20% of the public, but it won't fly with the majority.
I'm glad you are not politicizing this. Pathetic. The vote to go to war was certianly bi-partisan. Of course subsequent votes on measures to support the troops have not had the Democrats support... Of course, once the libpigs branded this "the Republican's War", then they all rallied against our troops and against the mission. Just pathetic.
Hi Jorge! You probably just missed my post above. What do you propose now? Send more troops? Stay the course? Or something else?
where does gates say it's a fait accompli? that's nopt at all what he said- in fact, he said just the opposite.
I support John McCain's approach. He's a man who is not scared of the enemy. He's a man that wants and expects to win. I'd rather put my trust in that philosphy than the defeatist, 'we've already lost' policies of the anti-war liberals. Sorry, I'll take his experience over the Birkenstock'd hippies'.
this is precisely the sentiment i've been railing against for the past 3 years. It's true that the war has become a political problem for the President, but it's also true that the war is a problem for America. the country will be dealing with its consequences long after bush is gone. yet you make no pretense of even thinking about the interests of the country; all that seems to matter is that liberals and democrats benefit if the war goes badly and blame accrues to Bush. this is a manifestly unpatriotic sentiment, and i'm surprised you could be so indifferent about a country you profess to love.
Welcome to the lunatic fringe. 11% of Americans agree with you. And the entirety of the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not. When did you stop trusting the generals? And when did the Joint Chiefs of Staff (not to mention James Baker, Colin Powell, etc.) become "Birkenstok'd hippies'?"
Batman Chamberlain and Neville Baker <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-w77sLtz754"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-w77sLtz754" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
You realize the war was being run by a trio of Chickenhawks Bush, Rumsfield, and Cheney. Is that the kind of military experience you are looking for?
Crikey! Its Deja vu all over again with some of y'all. All of you liberals are unpatriotic who don't support the war and the president? Let me check the charts, is "Hey Yah!" still number one? The country has rebuked that sort of thinking and incase you missed it even a huge chunk of the Republican party is rebuking it. I hate making political pronouncements but I can't help feeling that Bush is going to destroy the Republican Party and John McCain is going to go down with him. If y'all still believe that this war can be won military you've been missing what's been happening the last few years.
Why do you hate the US military so much? Why are you a fan of bad policy with no defined mission? Why do you take his experience over those who actually are involved in the mission and see what's on the ground? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16275630/ The Bush administration is split over the idea of a surge in troops to Iraq, with White House officials aggressively promoting the concept over the unanimous disagreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intense debate.
Because it's Bush, his party, and his supporters fault. Holy ****, you're surprised that people who (believe it or not) care about America would like to make sure everyone knows who caused this gigantic cluster**** of a war? You're shocked that some of us would like to make sure Bush is held accountable for starting a war on false premises, while racking up mountainous debt, inhibiting independent inquiry, supporting vast corruption, and tacitly approving torture? Holy **** basso, it's called reaping what you sow, and it's called putting blame where blame is due. It's making sure the American public is informed enough to kick Bush and his ilk out of power, as was started this last congressional election. What do you want? Pity? Go f yourself. One of these days when you don't feel like being such an intellectually lazy r****d about this argument, I'd be glad to discuss your "patriotism" with you.
