Iraq Going Well (Bush Right Again!!!)

“Why context is important. The message in it's entirety is important. Why you thought "Mission Accomplished" means "We're done here folks!" is beyond me.

Are you kidding me? The rest of your speach has NOTHING to do with Iraq. It's the typical empty bravado spewed by a wennie mamma's boy born with a silver spoon in his mouth who has never had to sacrafice A THING in his LIFE!

Those morons thought it was time to mop up once they disposed of Saddam and there are plenty of quotes to that effect available for review. Seek them out.

The arrogance of thinking they could change a RELIGION and IDEOLOGY in a couple of years is a joke.”

“Are you kidding me? The rest of your speach has NOTHING to do with Iraq.

What are you talking about? I assume you mean the war on terror wasn't said to be in Iraq? First off, that's nuts, but assuming you're right - why couldn't it have moved into Iraq? What is the big deal if it did? That was the best place for it to go, we didn't have to pick up and move. Saved a bit on the global warming thing too I might add.

Those morons thought it was time to mop up once they disposed of Saddam and there are plenty of quotes to that effect available for review. Seek them out.

What do you think is happening in Iraq? Have you looked at what is going on in Iraq or just stuck to Katie Couric's "news" show?

The arrogance of thinking they could change a RELIGION and IDEOLOGY in a couple of years is a joke.

link?”

“Rosey , you kicked a hole in the dike with the term ' arrogance'. Almost forgot the HAHAHA.
last edited: 8/02/07 9:21:55 AM”

“But rosey is right, it is pure arrogance to believe we were going to change the nature of the people there.

XL we can play "what if" all day. That story is obviously from a biased and possibly liberal source.... :} Commentary from the shrubbery is always suspect.”

“But rosey is right, it is pure arrogance to believe we were going to change the nature of the people there.

Arrogance is putting words in people's mouths, and then arguing against those words. Don't you agree?”

“The people I heard before the war that opposed it said taking Iraq qould be pretty easy and that the problem would come afterwards. That's certainly what I believed.

For Bacpac: As far as the Lancet study - the second death toll study seems to have been pretty much state of the art.”

“Six countries surround Iraq. Do we supply more money to the six, in forms of oil, foreign aid and etc., than we are gushing into Iraq?”

“Wow, did you watch the evening news or morning talk shows? I don't see how you possibly could and have not heard the constant drum beat that we're going to take mass casualties from the left. That was one of their topmost talking points.

I remember them saying "we can't risk our soldier's lives - they're going to throw chemical weapons at us and we'll lose tens to hundreds of thousands right off the bat and it will be urban chaos", and the right was saying "no, no - they'll take us with open arms and our Army is much more capable than theirs".

When we took out Saddam's rule in a few days with just a couple dozen or so casualties the left was like "those helpless civilians! you're killing the helpless civilians!", and the right was like "but the Iraqis are using them as shields!".

Am I the only one who remembers this? Is this 1984?”

“boo?”

“To heck with money, we are selling Iran more weapons....”

“Sarge was listening to them, yes that 'them'.”

“The Iran- contra contract is still active for'hellevacapeter parts'?”

“
10.17.04 -- 12:48PM // link

"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'

Ron Suskind, "Without a Doubt", New York Times Magazine


And nearly three years later, Bush and his fanatics remain unpolluted by Reality.

BOLO refs in DSM-V and ICD-11....

”

“Yeah yeah...yadda yadda yadda...WE SUCK AS A NATION...we should assume third world status then the rest of the world will leave us alone....(LOL) The standard Liberal talking point.

WHOOPTIEDOO...We see repeatedly by Democrat representatives that what is GOOD for the country and BUSH is BAD for them...and so what is BAD for the country is GOOD for them...then they can convince us that we suck and the only way to get out of it is let THEM be in charge....(LOL)”

“uncliff, the giant ants?

Tilt, don't be afraid of the new world order. /sinistar laugh .../”

“I'd encourage the skeptics on here to get a copy of today's Glen Beck and listen to it. I'm just saying.”

“Good questions, LJ ---- Any YouTubers out there want to submit those for the Rebuplican YouTube debate??”

“Obama says he is going to attack our ally Pakinstan.

What is his exit strategy?”

““Obama says he is going to attack our ally Pakinstan.

What is his exit strategy?”


Don't ask, don't tell.”

“From 3/19/03

“I think the decision to go to war is a bad one. I think the current Pres. Bush and his administration totally botched the process of coalition building. I fear that he is totally reversing the economic and diplomatic strength built up by his father and Clinton.

That said, I must hope that the war and its aftermath work out well for this country, our troops, Iraqi's and the world.

It's a little like when a guy bet his rent money and his kids college tuition on a horse. It's a bonehead move, a product of misplaced priorities - but still, I have to hope that this bad bet pays off. Too many lives are riding on it.

The one reassurance I have is that we have a highly professional and dedicated military... but, I think taking Iraq will be the easy part.”
pedxing
1:05:34 PM
3/17/03.”

http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/20608,-1,2.php”

“pedxing, your one voice doesn't negate the rest of the liberals - but I am encouraged that you found it appropriate to reference your own commentary when defending what "the liberals" said.

I thought you believed you were more of a moderate. See, it feels good to come out, or, I suppose it does anyways.”

“If you dudes could be as right about what needs to be done, as you are about Obama and the democrates, maybe you'd be worth listening to. But like the demwits, you fall victim to all the things that, 'Make you undemocratic' as on the other hand ,the dems unrebuplican.”

“Fun to read the old thread and see that so many predictions were true.”

“No blood for oil.”

“That was a good thread to post, pedxing. I still feel this is true:



Bush definitely should have attended to higher priorities than Iraq (e.g. North Korea), and he should've been speedier and far less careless with political capital.
Mutt
4:39:51 PM
3/17/03
ignore this user
report this message”

“No oil for the blood?”

“The issue wasn't to just stop Saddam. Shutting N.K. up just pisses off their allies. Taking Iraq (along w/ what we're doing) gives us an intelligence advantage. It was the right choice.”

“Well it wasn't a wrong choice; at least it's far from clear yet to determine either way. Certainly there has been some results, but obviously it was bungled in other ways.”

“War isn't cut and dry like tic-tac-toe. Never is.

Do you want to play a game?

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
last edited: 8/02/07 12:28:27 PM”

“Oh yeah. things are definitely going well. Hmm. Four years later and no regular running water?

Pitiful.

Oh yeah. This is just the negative, liberal press. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Water taps run dry in Baghdad By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 15 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - Much of the Iraqi capital was without running water Thursday and had been for at least 24 hours, compounding the urban misery in a war zone and the blistering heat at the height of the Baghdad summer.

Residents and city officials said large sections in the west of the capital had been virtually dry for six days because the already strained electricity grid cannot provide sufficient power to run water purification and pumping stations.

Baghdad routinely suffers from periodic water outages, but this one is described by residents as one of the most extended and widespread in recent memory. The problem highlights the larger difficulties in a capital beset by violence, crumbling infrastructure, rampant crime and too little electricity to keep cool in the sweltering weather more than four years after the U.S.-led invasion.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq;_ylt=AgOe1vFx5bwxXi5RAaEJ8MOs0NUE
last edited: 8/02/07 1:38:40 PM”

“I'm not that crazy about labels (especially putting one on myself), but I'm definitely one that you, XL and others are calling a liberal. I was in the liberal camp (I'd say left wing) before the war for sure, definitely to the left of John Kerry. I protested against the march to war. I went to Kerry's office to give his flak catchers the bsuiness about his craven decision to give Bush a blank check to invade whenever he wanted and plead with him to change his mind before the vote.

I stopped protestig once the troops went in, and I might qualify as a moderate (or conservative to some of my friends) on the war now because i'm not in favor of immediate withdrawal or the six month plan and don't think congress should consider any major intervention until September.”

“Well, suffice it to say that when I say that "liberals were saying" (fill in the blank), that you're not to assume I mean that you specifically said that. I do know that it was a major (if not the) talking point on the news leading up to the war, regardless of your stance.

There is no "immediate withdrawal" plan on anybody's table. It's a fake talking point designed to cast doubt on Bush. It's not even an option anyone is considering. I wouldn't say disagreeing with that makes anybody a moderate, I'd say it makes them a candidate for being sane.”

“For Bacpac: As far as the Lancet study - the second death toll study seems to have been pretty much state of the art.”
pedxing
10:05:37 AM
8/02/07

When you say 'state of the art' I have to assume you mean the art of deception. The numbers from either study can't be corroborated by existing data.”

“When you say 'state of the art' I have to assume you mean the art of deception.

That's pretty funny.”

“State of the art would've been the entire Saudi family taking up housekeeping in GITMO. But now that we missed by one borderline, we own what we needlessly tore into pieces and will live with it for years and years.”

“... especially if "we" keep bringing it up, right salebored? I mean, that IS the plan, right?”

“For the goofballs aping the McCarthyesque talking points about Rep Clyburn above, context is everything: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/07/30/VI2007073001325.html”

“Not really. Surely you must have a link.

If you want to go back over the threads and see which 'side' has better powers of prediction, be sure and post your findings here.”
violin
5:04:21 AM
8/02/07
ignore this user - Violin

LOL - I'm not sure which puts violin in a worse light - slinking away from a thread in which his challenge was more than met, or coming back to it yet not have the strength of character to admit he was wrong, or even acknowledge the response. Either way he comes across as an emotionally challenged man-child.
last edited: 8/03/07 5:39:43 AM”

“I think I just lost it... I actually forgot and clicked on one of fiddleboys links...

Multimedia is blocked here so I couldnt "read" it anyway...”

“When you say 'state of the art' I have to assume you mean the art of deception. The numbers from either study can't be corroborated by existing data.”
bacpac
4:00:31 PM
8/02/07

Cute reply, but they used accepted epidemiological methodology and were more thorough - than anyone else who has looked at death rates. Could there be sources of error? Perhaps. But no one has done more to try to get the numbers right.

Most of the criticism of study 1 that came from knowledgeable epidemiologists was that the small sample size resulted in such a wide range of possible totals that the study said very little. The second study was done with a remarkably straightforward and transparent method that greatly strengthened the value of the study taking into account the legitimate criticisms of the first study.
last edited: 8/03/07 6:01:23 AM”

“How do we know how to interpret those death rates?”

“http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070801/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_070801091932;_ylt=AqpLkLf7e97MDRRkK8KK8qQUewgF

After all is said and done Iraq will have a civil war and there is nothing we can do to stop it.”

“Yes, three just like the USofA.”

“Poll Finds Americans Lack Confidence In President Bush, Congress Over War In Iraq

August 3, 2007 1:07 p.m. EST

Julie Farby - AHN News Writer
Washington, D.C. (AHN)-A newly released Zogby International poll finds that a majority of Americans not only lack confidence in President Bush's ability as Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military, but also have serious doubts about the president's judgment when it comes to the war in Iraq.

According to the poll, which included 7,590 respondents, 54 percent of Americans say they lack confidence in President Bush's role as the Commander-in-Chief of the military, while another 60 percent say they have no faith in his decisions relating to the war.

President Bush also received low approval ratings for his handling of the Iraq war, with just 24 percent of respondents giving him a favorable rating. Despite the President's low approval ratings over his handling of the war in Iraq, congress fared even worse, with public dissatisfaction transcending across party lines and ideologies.

Of those who participated in the poll, only 3 percent gave Congress positive ratings for its conduct in handling the war in Iraq; while 94 percent said they disapproved of the way Congress has handled the conflict.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7008096617

Wow, that's just embarrassing.”

“Many people will change their minds on the handling of the war very soon, for the positive. Just so you know.”

“Nigal: Congress is in such a f---ing muddle on Iraq, it would be a huge challenge for anyone to justify approving of how they have handled Iraq or what they are doing now. I think they know they need to wait until September, but want to look like they are doing something. So they are all chasing their tails and trying to look busy.

How soon Sarge? Roughly how many? By what criteria will we be able to judge you right or wrong?
last edited: 8/03/07 2:39:12 PM”

“How soon Sarge? Roughly how many? By what criteria will we be able to judge you right or wrong?

Fairly soon. Will be obvious.

pedxing, you're sounding like you're in a competition. I wish you would have answered my question to you, above.”

“A 3% approval rating for Pelosi's and Reid's Congress.

I say throw the bums out.”

“It's too bad people use polls to justify their beliefs. To me that says "I'm right because my view is popular." You'll not always agree with the majority, will you then say your beliefs are wrong? It's senseless.”