Great, the Iraqis had their election (after they essentially had to shut down the entire country again)… so can the troops come home now? Mission accomplished, and all that… (this is one of those Iraq Turning PointsTM)
Yeah, guess not.
» Breaking News
Analyst: Only 4% Of Video Games Make Profit
AAA: Thanksgiving Travel To Drop For First Time Since 2002
Star Trek Uhura Poster With Zoe Saldana
More Jason Bourne Movies Coming
Britney Spears Jet Sets To Germany
Such a positive attitude! Used to be when “liberal” used to describe someone who sought to “liberalize” the world… Today’s “liberals” believe in no such thing (see antagonism towards free trade, support for anti-democratic forces, etc.)
BTW, the answer to your question is “No.”
(Woops, Typo! Since you’re so good at it, could you delete my previous comment and leave this one? Thanks!)
Such a positive attitude! Used to be that liberal was a term used to describe someone who sought to liberalize the world& Today s liberals believe in no such thing (see antagonism towards free trade, support for anti-democratic forces, etc.)
BTW, the answer to your question is No.
Enough bullshit, self serving definitions of the word liberal. Save your cheap, playground sophistry for Republicans and other idiots.
I love when conservatives try to tell liberals what ‘liberal’ means.
This is almost as good as if George Bush told us what it is like growing up black in America. Listen, if you don’t have a clue what it means to be a liberal, then don’t go spouting off like you do. I’ll give you a hint on what it really means to be a liberal (not that I think it will help eradicate your ineptitude):
There are several different aspects of liberalism (political, social, economic), but none of them include ramming democracy down the throats of people with the barrel of a gun. Similarly, having the government interfere with free trade by creating ‘free trade’ agreements that stack the deck rather than level the playing field is not in the spirit of laissez faire economics. Neither is the lack of transparency by the Bush administration and their fervent support of anti-democratic regimes in Russia, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan representative of what liberalism stands for.
That is why conservatives like you are the exact opposite of liberal.
stwendeler,
Do you have a point at all?
First, there is no such thing as “free trade.” All trade occurs under certain rules and regulations, whether those rules are written or not. Much of what right-wingers refer to as “free trade” is just one-sided globalization that benefits the already-wealthy (whether you’re talking about states, individuals, or corporations) at the expense of the already-poor. This does not lead to freedom and libery for anyone, and usually ends up in political upheaval and the U.S. supporting murderous right-wing regimes that go along with the financial program.
World Bank and IMF
Second, if you think the Bush administration is truly going to install a representative democracy that will respect the will of ‘the Iraqi people,’ following which the U.S. will pull its forces and come home, you are mistaken.
An Increasingly Aerial Occupation
So you are correct, stwendeler, the troops aren’t coming home. Not all of them, anyway. Under the Bushies’ plan, the U.S. is in Iraq to stay. Iraqi democracy will be nothing more than an insulting fantasy foisted on already warring factions. The Bushies want stability in Iraq, plus a palatable veneer of democracy. The Bushies most definitely don’t want to see Iraq self-determination; that would mean an exploding, divergent set of outcomes that would cost the Bushies and their friends money.
Is it that freaking difficult to admit that given the information available at this time, that the recent elections appear to have been a fairly resounding success story?
Is it that freaking difficult to admit that given the information available at this time, that the recent elections appear to have been a fairly resounding success story?
You mean like the last few times the media swore up and down it was Philadelphia redux in downtown Baghdad, soon interrupted by a suicide bomb and more dead soldiers and civilians?
[...] rywhere else. But NONE of these Lefties see fit to mention it? Res ipse loquitor. Update: Oliver Willis: Great, the Iraqis had their election (after they essentially had to s [...]
WHY IS EVERYONE BEING SO MEAN TODAY!?!? THE IRAQIS ARE HAVING A SUCCESSFUL ELECTION!!! I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THIS IS GOOD NEWS, RIGHT???
It is absolutely amazing how negative and short-sighted most of the Left is on Iraq. By any measure what has been achieved in Iraq is astounding. Your hatred of Bush has clouded you judgement and ability to see.
In less than 3 years, Iraq has gone from being ruled by one of the most brutal, fascistic dictators, to a democracy - a flawed and tenous one for now, but certainly one that has a chance at success. 3 years after the US had occupied German and Japan, neither one had a popularly elected government or a constitution. 7 years after we bombed Kosovo and handed it over to the UN, they still do not have a working government.
Iraqis are overwhelmingly optimistic about their future, and their economic situation is improving (as evidenced by this poll: http://abcnews.go.com/International/PollVault/story?id=1389228).
Undoubtedly success is not assured; there are simply too many moving parts in Iraq and its neighbors. But there is one sure way to ensure failure - withdrawing our troops and support now.
Apparently those of you on the left have decided that you are either unwilling or incapable of acknowledging that anything in Iraq can be considered successful. Sad.
Saying that the elections occurring is a “resounding success story” is like claiming a touchdown just for getting the quarterback on the field.
The question remains as to what the results will be, and what those results will mean.
Iran’s current president was also elected in a democratic fashion.
Iran’s election is a model that you want to follow???
holy cow, you’re deranged… You have no idea about the specifics of the Iranian “elections” apparently.
There’s been a spike in the murder rate in Philadelphia. Time to withdraw from Pennsylvania!!!!!
Way to lend support to people who get to vote who they really want to vote for Oliver.
Christ, you are frigging PATHETIC. So full of hatred for the President that you cannot even muster the balls to congratulate a country that is getting a true taste of freedom. And so what if the security is high? What the hell does that have to do with anything? You’re another in a long line of retards that believes security is some sort of pre-cursor to freedom.
Unreal.
Thanks for proving my point
I suppose you preferred the elections that were held in Iraq prior to 2003…
Sure, you don’t have to be a cheerleader for George W. McHilterBusHalliburton, but at least you could rejoice in the freedom that the Iraqis are exercizing today… They’re certainly happy and optimistic about their future (although you may have missed all the coverage of it).
The least you could do is reluctantly admit that democracy in Iraq is a good thing…
There is nothing “liberal” about “free” trade.
“Free” trade is the “freedom” of the ruling class to make a shitpot of money and pay the working class a bowl of fucking rice a day.
Free trade is the freedom of nations and unions to protect their workers and assure that their workers are well-paid and their national economies are self-sufficient and strong.
Iraq: >25% employment, the most lucrative and profitable work going to foreign contractors, and its assets controlled by foreign corporations and foreign governments.
If you had that here, would you call that “free”? Imagine the Chinese and Saudi’s controlling the the most valuable American assets, taking away the jobs, and controlling the American economy entirely…. oh wait, nevermind.
“Free trade is the freedom of nations and unions to protect their workers and assure that their workers are well-paid and their national economies are self-sufficient and strong.”
No, that is socialism. Free trade is the REMOVAL of the barriers to trade. What you advocate; unions “protecting” the workers, is just “librul” code for erecting tarrifs and protectionist barriers to free trade.
You can’t be a fair weather free trader and just give up on it when markets start shifting away from you. You have to shift your strategy with the trends to become competitive again. That is something that the unions and the “libruls” seem to be very reluctant to do.
“Freedom of thought for individuals…” is just further code for “freedom of thought as long as you agree with our point of view.” Modern liberals embrace cultural diversity, just not diversity of thought. Take a gander at any arts and humanities programs on college campuses for evidence.
Yes, exactly…. and many of those items are counter to the current policy positions of today’s “liberals”… (see freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on the power of government, rule of law, free exchange of ideas, free market economy that supports private enterprise, etc, etc, etc).
and JD… no, they won’t admit anything. I checked the usual news sources for the Left and there’s no mention of the vote. (apparently it didn’t happen!)
Err sorry to comment again in my last sentence I meant to add “is a success” after “determining if the elections in Iraq …”
“Sorry if I don t think it s worth 2,200 American lives so Iraqis can vote to trade a despot for a slightly less corrupt stooge while terrorists continue to plot to kill us all. I don t have that kind of stupidity in me.”
No. You have a completely different kind of stupidity in you. You view everything, from the bottom up, through this “Us vs. Them” prizm, and that prizm is domestic party politics. When looked at objectively, a country that has known nothing but repressive dictatorship for at least the last generation holds free elections, that is progress. No, they aren’t percfect. And neither are our elections. But its progress, and your consuming hatred for all things republican can not let you even admit that because to do so would be to give this administration a little credit. And we can’t hurt the home team now can we? I mean, shit, look at what you are doing to “Hanoi Joe”, just for speaking his mind and sharing his observations after numerous trips to Iraq. Have you traveled there?
[...] biggies so that we don t have to. My favorite is the evidently thoroughly depressed Oliver Willis: Great, the Iraqis had their election (after they essentially had to s [...]
When I say “they were a success”, I mean the elections in Iraq .. not Democrats, now that would be funny.
It’s amazing. I’ve haven’t seen a group of people pout like little children since the 2004 elections. You people can’t even be articulate about the subject because of your intense hatred for Bush. I’m sure the DU site is going to be busy for the next couple of days with rants about the evilbushhitlermcchimpy and his cronies.
Actually, I think Rome used to be the most powerful nation in the history of the world. But that’s subjective.
Also, see above regarding conservatives telling liberals what exactly it is they think.
I don’t think he’s the anti-Christ. But I also think it’s too soon to claim victory is in sight.
So full of hatred for the President that you cannot even muster the balls to congratulate a country that is getting a true taste of freedom.
Sorry if I don’t think it’s worth 2,200 American lives so Iraqis can vote to trade a despot for a slightly less corrupt stooge while terrorists continue to plot to kill us all. I don’t have that kind of stupidity in me.
“Christ, you are frigging PATHETIC. So full of hatred for the President that you cannot even muster the balls to congratulate a country that is getting a true taste of freedom.”
Exactly. It must be a pretty shitty way to go through life when you’re pissed off that there wasn’t massive bloodshed, death, and carnage.
It’s a good thing the Media Matters Christmas party isn’t tonight, there would be a lot of depressed people.
Tru, one that has cost us half a trillion dollars and 2000 of our finest citizens, not to mention some 30,000 Iraqi civilians.
First, its not 30,000 civilians, despite being spun so by the MSM. It is 30k total, of which a large proportion are males between the ages of 18 and 35 and armed.
Second, and more importnatly, how far the Democrats have come from this sentiment:
“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This much we pledge–and more.”
Sad really.
You conservatives keep patting each other on the back and sucking each other’s dicks about how AMAZING and HISTORIC the Iraqi election is. I guess you are the same type of people that would get orgasmic from holding a 3 month-old infant up by the arms and having it ‘walk’ so you can proudly proclaim “My 3 month-old is walking! What a genius! Never in the history of mankind has a person this age walked on their own before!”
As for me, I won’t consider it a success until Iraq can function without being occupied by American forces. Or to follow through with my analogy, I’ll be the first one to cheer when the kid walks on his own - without being propped up by an eager parent anxious to see bipedal locomotion.
I mean, shit, look at what you are doing to Hanoi Joe , just for speaking his mind and sharing his observations after numerous trips to Iraq. Have you traveled there?
Other Congressmen have made numerous trips to Iraq and come back with a different opinion than Joe–and conservatives have had a field day with them. This is not a topic on which the right can be holier-than-thou.
It really is no wonder the left can’t win on a national scale anymore. When an historic event like this is spun as failure, the bottom of the hole can’t be far.
Good luck in ‘06
Is someone a little cranky because he was the only one who showed up at the office with dyed fingers today?
for a group that seems so concerned about the troops, the left sure doesn’t mind trashing them. Those “terrorists” out there giving there lives for Iraqi freedom are doing so voluntarily, and for the most part they remain dedicated to the cause. I’m sure they appreciate the left’s concern for their safety, but I think they’ll respectfully decline their repeated cries for surrender.
But the truth is that the left’s desire for the US to withdraw from Iraq has nothing to do with what’s truly in the best interest of our troops. It has everything to do with ideological opposition to a man they perceive as a modern day anti-christ. As the miracle of freedom continues to sweep through the rotting core of the middle east, the more foolish these people look.
Now with victory clearly within view, the left’s hopeless predictions of defeat smashed, we hear “It’s not worth the money, It’s not worth the lives”. How reprehensible!
The US is the most powerful nation in the history of the world. What more admirable application could there be than to extend freedom and opportunity to those who can’t achieve it by themselves. The United States is making a difference in the world, which is something that could not be said for the previous eight years of so called “compassionate” center-leftist rule
Really, it’s sad that Democrats can’t admit that they were a success and can’t be happy for most of the Iraqi people who voted for the third time in their lives. Liberals like Oliver take the right to vote as granted and probably doesn’t appreciate things African Americans did for him to have that right. However, I am not surprised that determining if the elections in Iraq is a Democrat v. Republican issue.
Nudnik, I completely agree with you. Iraq is a success story. Tru, one that has cost us half a trillion dollars and 2000 of our finest citizens, not to mention some 30,000 Iraqi civilians.
But it is a success.
Now, can our boys come home? Iraq today is on its way, as you say, to becoming a democracy. But they will never truly be one until occupying troops exit. Can our boys come home now? If not now, then when?
Once more, Repugs are duped by the stage-managed symbology of the Iraqi elections into believing something has been accomplished.
The fact is nothing has changed. The security situation which was crap before the elections will be crap after the elections.
Again, nudnik, I agree. Not a one innocent Iraqi civilian had died; even the children who have died would have grown up to be terr’ists. Fine.
You’ve not answered the question: can our boys come home now? What else is there left to do. We’ve made Iraq a smashing democarcy without, apparently, killing any civilians. What is there left to do? Like Oliver said, Mission Accomplished! Bring the boys home.
Bring the boys home.
Nudnik,
Loved the quote from JFK. I think it is particularly poignant on a day like today. As much as these haters don’t want to admit it, we ARE going to honor our commitment to the Iraqi people. We will never be rid of the white flag wavers and the summer patriots, but they are thankfully a minority in this country.
We will never be rid of the white flag wavers and the summer patriots, but they are thankfully a minority in this country.
As the Democrats keep proving in election after election. Whenever the main issue of the day is national security and defense, the Democrats lose because they have become the party of Dean and Pelosi, and abandoned their roots of Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Scoop Jackson.
The women too.
We will also never be rid of the supposedly clever namecallers, but they’re a minority, too. Except in kindergarten.
The Army War College is a bunch of white flag wavers and summer patriots.
Certaintly not the MSM.
Certaintly not the above named mediums of information.
I mainly rely on Michael Yon who is a blogger/reporter stationed with soldiers.
Jadidiot, I can cherry pick too.
The security that the pro-Bush Republicans seek is the security of the slave.
My, look at how profound we are. How about getting back to an actual discussion, nudnik?
“I do nothing but cherry pick”. Uhh, I don’t recall ever quoting anything, all I do is express my opinion, not quote articles.
“Chickenhawk”. I think that term is old by now and quite hypocritical by those who use it because many Democraps supported the War in Afghanistan.
While you dipshits are selectively quoting JFK, make sure not to forget:
The emphasis is mine, of course.
You’re right, Ian. Sometimes you cherry-pick, most times you lie. Usually you just post the stupidities of youth.
Says the person who relies on MSM for their information.
The security that the Bush Admin seeks is one opposite to the security of the slave. By supporting democracy, we are enhancing our own security. That is the security of freedom, not slavery.
Irony doesn’t play well on the forum, apparently. I don’t actually believe what I typed above; I was just pointing out how easy it was to generate a baseless attack on your opponent using a better man’s words. Unless you seriously believe that anti-war Democrats would rather be dead.
The peace that the anti-war Democrats seek is the peace of the grave.
Ridicules the person who relies on the Drudge Report, Little Green Footballs and FOX News for his information.
The MSM certainly has its flaws, but what the hell are you relying on for your ‘credible’ information?
Some folks don’t spend a lot of time thinking up new names for things.
If you like, we can refer to “those who show enthusiasm for wars that other people have to fight,” or TWSEFWTOPHTF.
Lacks a certain je ne sais quoi.
U.S. Encouraged by Iraq Vote
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Al Queda Terror
by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15– United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in Iraq’s election despite a Iraqi terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
According to reports from Baghdad, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the insurgents.
….A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Bush’s policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in Iraq. The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in March, 2002, to which President Bush gave his personal commitment when he met Ahmed Chalibi to discuss prewar intelligence.
The purpose of the voting was to give legitimacy to the Baghdad Government, which has been founded only on and power plays since early in Iraq Freedom, when President Saddam Hussein was overthrown by the invasion forces.
Negative, Ian.
In reality, the MSM can’t tell anyone how bad the situation is in Iraq because they’re basically confined to the Green Zone for their safety.
If you didn’t have such a phobia of military folks, Ian, you might ask their opinion. Or you could read the analysis coming from the Army War College that says the picture in Iraq is bleak and getting bleaker. Here are some key points:
“It appears increasingly unlikely that U.S., Iraqi and coalition forces will crush the insurgency prior to the beginning of a phased U.S. and coalition withdrawal.”
“It is no longer clear that the United States will be able to create (Iraqi) military and police forces that can secure the entire country no matter how long U.S. forces remain.”
And “the United States may also have to scale back its expectations for Iraq’s political future,” by accepting a relatively stable but undemocratic state as preferable to a civil war among Iraq’s ethnic and religious factions.
“U.S. vital interests have never demanded a democratic state in Iraq before 2003,”
Who do you rely on? And how can you prove that your non-MSM is any more or less credible?
There might be a lot going wrong with the MSM, sure, but you don’t get to claim knowledge just because you avoid it.
Ian, you do nothing but cherry-pick. I really expect nothing more from chickenhawks. Thus, I’m rarely surprised.
Let’s try this again. All I’m hearing today from conservatives is “The elections are a success. Why do you hate freedom for suggesting today is not a success?”
Well, if today is such an unmitigated success, why can’t we bring the troops home? After the Al-Qaeda-Iraq link, after WMDs, the reason given to us for invading Iraq was to bring democracy to the Middle East. And, according to conservatives, that has been a success as shown by today. Then bring them home. As far as I’m concerned, success in Iraq equates to our troops out of harm’s way. Anything else is a meaningless “turn the corner” moment.
I was actually comparing the similarities between today and 38 years ago. Here is the real article. I know, I know, it’s not Vietnam. Because there is sand. Oh, yea, and oil too. Don’t forget oil.
U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror
by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times
WASHINGTON, Sept. 3 (1967)– United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam’s presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.
….A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson’s policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam. The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in January, 1966, to which President Johnson gave his personal commitment when he met Premier Ky and General Thieu, the chief of state, in Honolulu in February.
The purpose of the voting was to give legitimacy to the Saigon Government, which has been founded only on coups and power plays since November, 1963, when President Ngo Dinh Deim was overthrown by a military junta.
So none of you traitors supported the war in Afghanistan? I mean all you guys do is constantly complain that we go after AQ, and we did there, so now what? Again, hypocrites and traitors.
factcheck - Nice trick.
Note that we are not just pulling our troops out and leaving the citizens to fend for themselves (read - get slaughtered) like we did in Viet Nam.
Personally, Im happy the Iraqis are able to vote. Id be happier if they’d fought for their own independance- you know, like just about every country in the world did at some point in history.
I also believe, judging by some of the comments made here, that most of the right is exuberant mainly for the perceived political boost it could give Bush. After all, liberating oppressed peoples was never really a pet cause of conservatives until this war started, and they needed a legitimate reason to support it after the first two rationales went up in smoke.
Oh, and those who claim the dastardly MSM is ignoring or negatively spinning the story, I give you your two favorite punching bags-
CNN- ‘It’s been a good day for Iraq’
NY TIMES - Heavy Sunni Turnout Is Seen; Attacks Are Scattered and Light
Mommy’s calling you for din-din, Ian. Time to let the adults talk.
Nicely done, Factcheck.
Here’s another deja vu all over again:
Yesterday, AWOL George put Condiliar Rice in charge of post-war Iraq.
Where have we seen this before?
Why, back in 2003:
Hey…if it worked before, it’ll work again.
fixed NY times link
NY TIMES - Heavy Sunni Turnout Is Seen; Attacks Are Scattered and Light
Ian, Bush cut and run from going after AQ so they could commence “Operation Dick and George’s Excellent Adventure”.
factcheck - But what does that mean? Last I checked, the Times was part of the MSM.
Good for the Iraqis. I remain cautiously optimistic.
And yes, we haven’t made ANY inroads with the Musharraf administration… they’re an enemy in the WOT… and we’re only fighting the WOT in Iraq & Afghanistan. Please ignore those soldiers in the Phillippines. Please ignore our diplomatic efforts in the Middle East and Asia…
just focus on how Iraq was taking our eyes “off the ball”
factcheck - Despite your assertions to the contrary, we did not such thing as cut and run from chasing Al Queda. We still have forces in Afghanistan who I suspect would question the veracity of your statement. Now, if your argument is that we did not invade Pakistan to continue our search for him, then maybe you have a point.
It would be easy to ignore them as there are only 100 or so.
In fact, there are more troops in Germany, Korea, Japan and Kuwait than in Afghanistan.
Here is a spreadsheet on troop levels.
Mr. Corrigan - I think it was the realists (aka Brent Scowcroft) who prefer stability to democracy… There is nothing “stable” about going to war and establishing a democracy in a region which has never experienced it before.
Thanks for strapping on the Tinfoil and putting your whacky thoughts regarding free trade, capitalism, and foreign policy on display.
factcheck thanks for spinning
Everyone is looking to this election as though it has finality, as though it were the archetypal event which will introduce the 1000- year- reign of Christ.
The best we can hope for is that the Shiites don’t abuse their overwhleming majority to muscle everyone else into the ditch. If the vote is seen as successful it will be another step in the process of bringing some stability to Iraqi society. It’s up to the Shia.
Again, I say, I have my fingers crossed. But little has changed in the tribal enmity that propels continuous violence, since the last attempt to accomplish Arab unity in 1918 Damascus.
This just makes crystal clear the fact that the leftist’s of this country cannot survive if this election goes well. They are so invested in the failure because they have permanently aligned themselves against Bush and the war.
It’s sad that a group of Americans would actually work against the development of a free and independent nation. That they would actually believe that these people would be better off under Saddam than the evil Bushitler, Cheney, Rove triumverate that they imagine. Sad and dissapointing.
The good news is, they have permanently aligned themselves on the wrong side of history and will be spoken of with as much disadain as we speak of Neville Chamberlain today.
Why is it that you people get so much joy out of failure? Do you feel guilty for living in liberty? Are you sad that you have air conditioning and a Bill of Rights? Or are you just trying to keep all this to yourselves?
Uh-oh. First line of a long comment and you’re already hallucinating?
I’m out.
The invasion of Iraq was intended to topple Hussein. That has happened. The invasion of Iraq was intended to give us a reliable Muslim ally in the Middle East (unlike the “French - like” back stabbing Saudis). This is happening now, as the Iraqis get themselves together, and itch for us to leave. Incidentally, one of the reasons we have to stay is to clean up the mess we made, blowing up buildings and whatnot, just like we did after WW II, Oliver’s favorite, the one that Roosevelt and Truman won, without any help from the Republicans. They will have the “troops over the horizon” that Rep. Jack “Sgt. Fury” Murtha was in tears about a month or so ago, and we will have the “speed bump” in the “Arab Street” that I predicted a year ago.
Despite all your wailing and gnashing of teeth, Iraq is a success story. And you’ll all be weeping with Jack Murtha in ‘06, when the Republicans take a few more seats from the Democrats
“That they would actually believe that these people would be better off under Saddam than the evil Bushitler, Cheney, Rove triumverate that they imagine. Sad and dissapointing.”
This is kind of a telling slip. The Iraqis are better off under Bush? And here I thought we were liberating them so they could live under self-rule.
DrPedro;
If you are indeed a practicing MD, I pray your practice is Podiatry so that “Do No Harm” can remain an oath within your minimal reach.
Great comment, Dr Pedro…
to John S., I just have to say that the President explicitly said that the War On Terror would involve a variety of initiatives….. from diplomatic to covert military action to military assistance (as in the case of the Phillippines) to full scale military action (as in the case of Iraq/Afghanistan).
and I agree… it’s time that we pull out of Germany…. when will Chimpy McHitlerBushalliburton establish a timeline for the withdrawal? It’s been over 60 years now!!!
Oh no! Frank pushed the History Eraser button. In reality, we were told that the primary reason for invading Iraq was to prevent a mushroom cloud from being delivered to us by Saddam. This was the primary thrust in the runup to war.
Damnit, I’m taking the History Eraser button away from Frank. He seems to enjoy pushing it just a bit too much. The second major reason this war was sold to Americans was because Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and Al-Quaeda.
Now while regime change and installing a Democratic state in the Middle East were tertiary goals given for invading Iraq, to say that these were the primary justifications is tantamount to saying that the primary reason for American involvement in WWII was the liberation of the Jews.
Before this tsunami of conservative popularity is over, were gonna need a lot more than just 535 seats in Congress.
As usual, Cleo, incomprehensible.
Frank, it shocks me that in your monologue of the reasons we went to Iraq, not one mention of the imminent threat posed by Sadddam’s WMD. You know, the WMD that Rumsfeld Cheney and Rice said existed. The ones that if ignored, would come to us in the form of a mushroom cloud. The ones that are north south east and west of Baghdad. Its so bizarre youd forget to mention that…
You know, Johnny P., all this winger excitement reminds me of an old Rudy Ray Moore skit, wherein a wife tells her husband that the Reverend convinced her to have sex with him by telling her that his penis was the “communion pole.” Of course, the husband is dismayed, because the Reverend had earlier told him that his penis was “Gabriel’s Horn.”
Well, of course these willful numbskulls will keep making Bush’s folly out to be a success. They can’t help themselves. They’ve long since handed over their critical skills in favor of lapping up the logical incongruities of ‘conservative philosophy.’
You can’t reason with these people, because reason is less important than chest-thumping, imperialistic cheerleading. I’m not going to bother repeating the same old laundry list of damning facts a million times, as though that’s going to make them see the light. I’m just going to say the same three words I said when so many wingers I’ve known were clamoring for war back in early 2003: WAIT. AND. SEE.
And when it all crumbles before their eyes, again, do you think they’ll admit they were wrong? No, they’ll just keep blowing on Gabriel’s Horn. Mark my fucking words.
The comments sum it all up: no real response to the issue, just concern over my professional career and fond memories of old comedy routines.
Leftists are on the wrong side of history, they know and it is coming nigh on to time to pay the piper…..
Factcheck:
No, I think he is referring to paying the piper on election day. You on the left seem to conveniently forget that you have been paying that ol’ piper for several years now. But buck up camper it can’t keep going against you forever! Heh.
Keep hoping gay blade, keep hoping.
factcheck - paying higher tax rates does not necessarily equate to increased tax revenues, but you know that.
I didn’t say anything about the “importance” or “priority” of reasons, nor do I plan to. The “Bush lied! Men died!” mantra means nothing to me. I’m aware of a statement made by the Secretary of State only a few days ago that we intend to make of Iraq an ally. Period
The left, clinging desperately to the idea that Bush would somehow be ruined by this war, realizes now that success is at hand. This being the case, there are only two options: 1)Minimize the success. Once “Johnny comes marching home,” and Irag is free, that won’t work; or 2) Keep banging the “Bush lied” drum. The problem with that is, we all know how short the American attention span is.
So, tough luck.
p.s. There are no WMD’s in Iraq, right? So, like the magic rock that keeps elephants away, we’ve accomplished that, too.
{aside to John S. That was a response, not an attack, understand, now?}
That is rich, drpedro says we have to “pay the piper”. That coming from a side that refuses to pay higher taxes to support our war effort and mostly refuses to serve.
What a quack.
Zorro, I would have agreed with you a few months ago, but I think given the “strategery” of our democratic opponents, it might just keep going on forever!
And yes, I was referring to the US elections in the future.
Oh, and factcheck, before you start chicken hawking me….I am a US Navy veteran who spent 9-11 and the following two years forward deployed in support of our work in both Afghanistan and Iraq…I HAVE served…and you sir, what branch of our armed services were doing your civic duty with?