| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2006 4:33 pm Post subject: Remember when the insurgency was on its last legs? |
 |
|
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/30/cheney.iraq/
Anyone remember a year ago Cheney was a) claiming the insurgency was on its last legs b) America would be out before Bush's term was over.
Now of course, the Bush admin is trying to convince an increasingly smaller subset of people willing to listen and believe there's not a civil war going on in Iraq and the Bush admin is floating the idea 1) it's the long war (like 'nam) 2) the war will last into the next administration.
Wow such a big change in only a year? I mean all the money and power and generals who swear they're winning and making progress and winning hearts and minds and the media just doesn't report the good stuff... now that's all changed in a year?
I remember when first the Bush admin was trying to convince people that Saddam was worse than hilter and he had WMDs. Then after Mission Accomplished and the start of the insurgency, the Bush admin was trying to convince people there wasn't an insurgency at all. It was just Saddam loyalists shooting off ammo. Then the Bush administration was trying to convince us the insurgency was all foreign fighters and local Iraqis just wanted peace and were happy to have America not hooking up their electricity and not fixing the plumbing...
Ah. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2006 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| These people lie all the time, you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2006 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Anyone remember a year ago Cheney was a) claiming the insurgency was on its last legs b) America would be out before Bush's term was over.
Now of course, the Bush admin is trying to convince an increasingly smaller subset of people willing to listen and believe there's not a civil war going on in Iraq and the Bush admin is floating the idea 1) it's the long war (like 'nam) 2) the war will last into the next administration.
Wow such a big change in only a year? I mean all the money and power and generals who swear they're winning and making progress and winning hearts and minds and the media just doesn't report the good stuff... now that's all changed in a year?
I remember when first the Bush admin was trying to convince people that Saddam was worse than hilter and he had WMDs. Then after Mission Accomplished and the start of the insurgency, the Bush admin was trying to convince people there wasn't an insurgency at all. It was just Saddam loyalists shooting off ammo. Then the Bush administration was trying to convince us the insurgency was all foreign fighters and local Iraqis just wanted peace and were happy to have America not hooking up their electricity and not fixing the plumbing...
Ah. |
Thanks for the reminder of all the Bush admin's false claims.
I'm tired of all that comes out of their mouths. I'm tired of all the news reports that even mention Bush. That's why we should just call him "Shrub".
"Mission Acconplished". Now that's cracks me up.
I just wonder how many on this board that supported the war in Iraq but have now changed their minds. What about others who at the beginning supported the war and still do. What are your reasons? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Porter_Goss
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Location: The Wrong Side of Right
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| supernick wrote: |
"Mission Acconplished". Now that's cracks me up.
I just wonder how many on this board that supported the war in Iraq but have now changed their minds. What about others who at the beginning supported the war and still do. What are your reasons? |
Insert tumbleweed [here]. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| These people lie all the time, you know. |
Good point. As per the demands of NOFX, let us now murder the government!!
I was reading in The Economist today that it is projected, by some, that the USA will be in Iraq as late as 2015 and the final cost could be over a trillion bucks.
So, the government steals from the population and uses the money to invade foreign nations. The citizens of the foreign nations get pissed off and attack the USA. The government uses the attack as a justification to raise taxes (with Bush, this will be done in the form of inflation) to invade more nations and piss more people off. Most people on both sides are now poorer (from being taxed and attacked) and hostile to the "others" who are obviously benefiting at "our" expense (anti-immigration and anti-globalization feelings, anyone?), helping lubricate xenophobic and warmongering feelings in an otherwise reasonable population. Before you know it, you have religious crazies pointing nuclear missiles at each other and the rest of us are left offering our manufactured feelings on the subject (on a message board for pretend teachers, cause we couldn't get good jobs at home in our overtaxed and over regulated economies, no less), which of course matter for sh$t all.
Remember to vote, kids!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SirFink
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| I was reading in The Economist today that it is projected, by some, that the USA will be in Iraq as late as 2015 and the final cost could be over a trillion bucks. |
As the ancient Romans used to ask "Cui Bono?" Who benefits? $1+ trillion is going into someone's pocket, and it ain't mine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SirFink wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| I was reading in The Economist today that it is projected, by some, that the USA will be in Iraq as late as 2015 and the final cost could be over a trillion bucks. |
As the ancient Romans used to ask "Cui Bono?" Who benefits? $1+ trillion is going into someone's pocket, and it ain't mine. |
Al Franken had a great point that during WWII Truman had a hearing over war profiteering and called it treason. The president wants all these powers because it's war but war profiteering is okay now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is on its last legs...
I just happens to be a centipede with regenerative abilities, but it's on its last legs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Supernick, when he said, "Mission accomplished", he was talking about having tripled the price of crude oil.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I just wonder how many on this board that supported the war in Iraq but have now changed their minds. |
I'm one of those. Let me tell you, my friends IRL don't seem to talk about the fact that I was pro-war back in the day. They don't keep hammering the issue everytime I see them, and it's rarely mentioned as we discuss other political developments.
What? You think we're embarrassed about being wrong about facts? There were no WMD. Okay. We made a mistake. The Bush Administration cannot be trusted to clean up a hurricane, much less run a war. Got it now. We made a mistake. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
supernick
Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I'm one of those. Let me tell you, my friends IRL don't seem to talk about the fact that I was pro-war back in the day. They don't keep hammering the issue everytime I see them, and it's rarely mentioned as we discuss other political developments.
What? You think we're embarrassed about being wrong about facts? There were no WMD. Okay. We made a mistake. The Bush Administration cannot be trusted to clean up a hurricane, much less run a war. Got it now. We made a mistake. |
I was pro-war a year or so before the invasion. That all changed when Powell read his report at the UN. He wasn't convinced himself of what he was saying. He's a good man, and I know he was just doing his job.
I have always said that Iraq had to be dealt with. Something really had to be done but war was rushed and the fear exaggerated. After a while, something just wasn't right.
No, you don't have to be embarrassed because of the actions of those who led the war and for those you have elected your government, or for being in favor at one time of this war. I would like to know why you or others may have supported the war at first, but later changed your minds. There might be some here you were against the war but aren't now. I can respect their opinions.
There are some plus signs in this war. Some business people from a select group of countries will get first dibs on some cushy contracts. There will be better control on the availability of oil. No more black oil money feeding the pockets of Saddam and many other dirty traders. It will be easier to deal with terrorist groups in the M/E with coalition forces having large military bases and a record that says, "We can blow you up".
You may want to discuss other political developments, and that's fine. Maybe that's part of the problem; sweep the past under the rug and move on. A day rarely goes past without some major news story about the war, and I'm not talking about the few deaths here and there. Just the other day there was the story about how Bush used wrong information about chemical weapons trailers. Sure, the W/H says that the intelligence that Bush was given was wrong. Well, duh, don't you think Bush always wanted the wrong intelligence?
Iraq and Bush is still (in the minds of many) in the forefront of discussion though it has taken on a different shape. The discussions are not about the prisoner abuses or whether or not the war was legal or illegal. The discussions revolve around the subject of "What's next". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What's next? Noone knows what is next but we can theorize. Unlike the debacle that was Vietnam (another illegal, unjustifiable war) where the enemy was a unique population (Vietnemese Communists) the invasion of Iraq has broke open a hornet's nest of muslim hatred and they are uniting in their hatred for Americans and the west. But what can the US do?
1. Stay the course in Iraq. There is a full scale civil war being fought right now in the country and there is no elected government to run the place. Just like Vietnam the lack of a coherent government will spell disaster.
2. Leave Iraq. The civil war continues and gets worse with Turkey, Syria and Iran entering the fray. Genocide will happen in this scenario.
3. Invade Iran. The only way the Bush Crime Family can boost their numbers and keep the scam going is to invade Iran. The might US military cannot defeat the insurgancy in Afghanistan or Iraq but I'm sure it will do better against the Iranians.
So in the end there really is no good course for the US to go, Bin Ladin has won the war, the US can do nothing without coming out as the loser and all it took was a few hundred thousand dollars and 18 madmen. This will be studied in history books with great interest I suspect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I disagree about the options. There has always been teh option of letting the Iraqis choose their own fate, but helping if asked. So, hold a referendum:
Which do you prefer?
1. Get the infidels out, now, damn the consequences because nothing is worse than having them here defiling our great ______ .
2. Get the infidels out, but keep them nearby to come running if we call because most of us really do want a non-sectarian government in which all can participate.
3. Get the infidels out but accept their money, weapons and training to build up our our own forces to secure our own country because most of us really do want a non-sectarian government in which all can participate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What's next? Noone knows what is next but we can theorize. Unlike the debacle that was Vietnam (another illegal, unjustifiable war) where the enemy was a unique population (Vietnemese Communists) the invasion of Iraq has broke open a hornet's nest of muslim hatred and they are uniting in their hatred for Americans and the west. But what can the US do? |
Was Korea an unjustifiable war? What is the difference between Vietnam and Korea.
And don't gloat too much about Vietnam. After all it seems that the US ended up better than the communists after the cold war. Explain that.
In the 1990s 70,000 trained in Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. What was the problem then?
Tell us why the mideast street never said anything when Saddam gassed the Kurds , when Khomeni killed 30,000 in 1988 . when Al Qaeda killed muslims in Afghanistan or when Syria destroyed the city of Hama.
The real reason for the hatred is that all too often in the MidE the governments , elites , the media and clerics teach hatred and incite violence .
| Quote: |
| 1. Stay the course in Iraq. There is a full scale civil war being fought right now in the country and there is no elected government to run the place. Just like Vietnam the lack of a coherent government will spell disaster. |
Pull the US back to bases in Kurdistan.
| Quote: |
| 3. Invade Iran. The only way the Bush Crime Family can boost their numbers and keep the scam going is to invade Iran. The might US military cannot defeat the insurgancy in Afghanistan or Iraq but I'm sure it will do better against the Iranians. |
US Navy and Airforce are in good shape if needed.
But anyway if Iran gave up its war there would be no problem.
| Quote: |
| So in the end there really is no good course for the US to go, Bin Ladin has won the war, the US can do nothing without coming out as the loser and all it took was a few hundred thousand dollars and 18 madmen. This will be studied in history books with great interest I suspect. |
IF he has won the war well then where are the big AQ attacks.
And the US will not lose you know why ? Cause the US can hit back harder than the enemy can.
No US president will allow the US to be attacked over and over like 9-11. The US will hit the mideast so hard that the governments overthere will go after those that support terror, cause if they don't then they will be destroyed.
The US won World War II and the US came out of the cold war a lot better than the enemy did. The US won those wars and the US will win this war. You can take it to the bank.
Mideast states are police states not so different than NKorea. They can take out the terrorists if personal survival of the leaders depends on it.
If the US hits them hard enough they will say uncle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
The US won World War II and the US came out of the cold war a lot better than the enemy did. The US won those wars and the US will win this war. You can take it to the bank. |
Like it won Vietnam and that did cracker jacks for the US economy?
I always ask you but you never answer. You seem to be fully in support of this war and the cause. If so, why aren't you actually there serving? Why aren't you dropping this crazy Korean thing, signing up with the army, and volunteering to drive supply convoys along IUD err IED Alley 'n' stuff? You've had three years. It just seems to me you're a lot of talk but you actually prefer to leave the manly stuff, the heavy lifting, to people with actual guts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
