| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
Screw Bush.
He was never given a mandate to invade Iraq in the first place. When he first ran for president, he never told the US public the principal campaign for his administration would be to invade a fairly sizeable, unstable Middle East country. If he had had a well-thought-out exit plan when he started this whole mess, the US would be out of Iraq by now. He played God with US financial resources and the lives of US soldiers, with no thought beyond doing something bigger than what Daddy had done.
The Democrats should be applauded for standing up to the Kim Jong-Il of North America and telling him, "Sorry, you're cut off." If he hasn't fixed Iraq by now, screw him. He's had more than enough time and resources to do so.
The only reason why he wants more troops now is that he's afraid Iraq will collapse; he's afraid he'll turn out to be Daddy's failure and a f***up in the history books. |
You don't even know what your talking about. Were up against a resistance driven by beliefs resting in Islamic extremism who've been fighting the world over for thousands of years and your saying we should have beat them by now?
Furthermore the President did have a mandate. Congress voted to give Bush the authoirty to use force against Iraq. Even the dems. |
No, he didn't have a mandate. He didn't tell the US electorate he planned to invade Iraq and commit hundreds of billions of dollars and countless lives in a fool's errand. He lied to the American public. It was his goal all along, and he deliberately misled the American public by saying nothing about it, before he was elected. The US public was never given a choice as to whether they wanted to be stuck in Iraq.
And, given that he has/had more financial, military and planning resources than any other world leader in history, yes he has had more than enough time and resources to plan both an invasion and an exit strategy. If he knew what he was doing. Nobody ever gave him a blank cheque, and kudos to the Democrats for reminding him so. |
Again, you have no clue what your talking about.
And yes the electorate was in the know, for about a year and a half prior to the actual invasion I knew we were going to war with Iraq. The adminstration's language as well as the addditional 180,000 troops sent to Kuwait sort of clued the American public in on that.
Also when he first ran for office? There was no intention to invade then.A president can not predict everything that is going to happen but circumstances during a presidency change. Your being a fool if you think that Bush was supposed to magiclly know before it happned that all the events in the middle east and US would transpire as they did. Get a clue.
Bush had no way of knowing before he entered office and during his campaign that 9-11 would happen.
He had no way of knowing that in 2002 a dissident group in Iran would reveal a ultra secret 2 decade old Nuclear program.
No way of knowing that Iraq would end up being such an issue.
Because he did not tell the US abouit Iraq during his campaigndoesnt make him a liar. because back then he probabaly had no intention of invading Iraq, it is when circumstances CHANGED that Iraq became an issue. Hes the president, not a psychic so get real.
But as far as the mandate HE did have that.From congress.
As far as the electorate goes, like I said he cant predict the future.
Do you think who ever ran for president during the WW2 period knew wed get into a war with Japan?
I suppose youll be saying he didnt have a mandate since he wasnt able to predict the future and tell the US public wed be warrring with Japan?
Whether you support the war or not, the fact remains
Bush got the legally required authorization from congress. End of Story.
GET REAL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But as far as the mandate |
What happened or didn't happen in '03 is no longer relevant.
The public had a chance to vote last November, and the overwhelming conclusion, since the Democrats ran the board in the midterm elections, is that the majority of the voting public is now fed up with the war.
The generals have made it pretty clear that they do not think the solution is military. Abizaid (sp?) is now out.
To me, the question is: Will a spike of 20,000-40,000 troops for 3 or 4 months be enough to train the Iraqi forces to the point they can take over?
I don't think it is. Maybe two or three years would be enough. Bush might have the mandate of the people for a very short spike in troop numbers for a very specific short-term commitment to arrange things for a withdrawal. Beyond that, I don't believe he does.
It looks to me like we should withdraw asap and begin to prepare for a much bigger conflict in a couple of years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
Again, you have no clue what your talking about.
And yes the electorate was in the know, for about a year and a half prior... |
You need to stay with the tour. He never told the US public prior or during his first election campaign that the principal project of his administration would be to invade Iraq. I remember that election campaign, there was not a word about it.
| Quote: |
| Also when he first ran for office? There was no intention to invade then... |
Yes, obviously he had every intention to invade Iraq, and just as obviously he kept it hidden from the public, because if it was part of his election platform he probably wouldn't have been elected. It's just like someone trying to sell you a house and not bothering to tell you the roof is going to crack open from termites. He committed fraud on the American public.
He didn't change his mind after "circumstances changed" because as far as Iraq is/was concerned, there were no changes in circumstances that required an invasion. Iraq had no involvement with Al Quaeda before or after 911, and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, before or after 911. The only "circumstance that changed" was that Dubya got elected.
| Quote: |
| But as far as the mandate HE did have that.From congress. |
He didn't have a mandate from the American voter or the American public. The American public was never given a chance to vote whether or not they wanted to start an unnecessary war in the Middle East. Congress gets its mandate from the US public, in case you have forgotten. And if the public was not given a chance to vote on the war, than neither Congress nor Dubya had any such mandate. Obviously for the simple reason that if Bush and the Republicans had told the US public about their plans, it would have adversely affected their election prospects.
Bush and his team have a consistent, well-documented, solid history of lying to the public and making s**t up as they go along. That's as real as it gets. And if you believe that he "suddenly" decided to invade Iraq AFTER he got elected, for whatever reason he has made up, then you've fallen for his lies as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MOS,
Some people will believe what they want and I doubt you can change their mind about it. They will always believe there was a legitimate reason for the war from the beginning and nothing Bush said was a lie.
The same thing goes for people that say, "Islam is a diease." I'm surprised people like that don't advocate bombing all of the Middle East. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Send more troops. Finish what you started, or it will have been for nothing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| More troops so we can be in position to take Iran after the Jooooooos' strike! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
MOS,
Some people will believe what they want and I doubt you can change their mind about it. They will always believe there was a legitimate reason for the war from the beginning and nothing Bush said was a lie. |
I know. It's more comfortable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, they're always looking for new troops, boys. If you're so anxious to send in the troops, go sign up; I'm sure they'll be glad to have you over there, putting your money where your mouth is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| Well, they're always looking for new troops, boys. If you're so anxious to send in the troops, go sign up; I'm sure they'll be glad to have you over there, putting your money where your mouth is. |
Not American...
If you are..then why not get thee over there.
Actually i really think they should partition the country then leave gradually.
But they don't seem to want to do that, so they'd better go the whole way and finish the job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| Send more troops. Finish what you started, or it will have been for nothing. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank god for small mercies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
Thank god for small mercies. |
Amen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
| You don't even know what your talking about. Were up against a resistance driven by beliefs resting in Islamic extremism who've been fighting the world over for thousands of years and your saying we should have beat them by now? |
Really? and it was the Moslems who engaged in those invasive Crusades?
It's all just so much fearmongering bullshit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
