If the United States were a corporation, the board of directors would ask Bush for his resignation or they would fire him. George Bush bet his administration on the gamble in Iraq. He chose a risky strategy over the advise of allies, friends, enemies and advisors. The war has turned out to be a strategic error of the first magnitude. The hope was right but the tactics were wrong. By all indications the enemies and competitors of the US have been strengthened and emboldened. Today Iran is calling to meet with Syria and Iraq. The Bush Administration has lost the faith of most of the natural allies of The United States. A world with diminished respect for the US is a much more dangerous place.The President has failed in the one way that matters most. He has failed to lead. He has not lost support from his enemies. He never had that. Worse, he lost the faith and respect of his friends and supporters. His defenders have been worn down with false hopes for a revival of spirit and leadership. It is not there. The tenure of the office of the President is filled by a man that too few believe in and too many no longer respect. His opinions are mocked. Leadership ceases to be effective when a leader becomes a thing of derision. Few politicians or world leaders will throw their weight and prestige into a project with George Bush unless they have no other choice.
Expediency will rule over principal. Nothing short of a disaster will cause people to renew their circle around the President, in fact the only circle around him are the predators who sense a weakened and damaged office. A weakened man can be more dangerous because his motivations and actions can be suspect. Clinton experienced it during the Lewinski affair, when he attacked the "aspirin factory". Times are more dangerous now and Clinton on his worse days had passionate partisan defenders. Bush has few. Fewer would be unhappy to see him go, if go he must.
Bush resigning would put the Presidency in the hands of an even less popular and respected man, Vice President Cheney. Cheney would have to resign first. Congress would have to select a new Vice President with the knowledge that Bush would step down. Bush would have to follow the selection of the new VP with his own resignation.
I ask you. Would the country be best served with Bush resigning? Would things be worse? Would America be strengthened or weakened by that dramatic change? How would you advise GWB if he asked your opinion?
Not a chance in the World. More likely habu's scenario would play out and we'd nuke Tehran, before Mr Bush hung up his gloves, prematurely.
ReplyDeleteWho'd be cast in the part of Goldwater with Mr Bush in the Nixon role?
Not a snowballs chance in hell
Though his brother will soon be unemployeed.
2164th wrote:
ReplyDeleteThe war has turned out to be a strategic error of the first magnitude.
Only two months ago, when I said that on Belmont Club I got mocking replies like this one from whats-her-face: "I personally like how our troops are dying for nothing, that Iraq is VietNam redux." Oh well, leave no sleeping dog unturned, that's spilled milk under the bridge, etc. But I'd like to know exactly what was the trigger for this vast sea-change in the right-wing blogosphere, was it the election, Rumsfeld resigning, Rumsfeld resigning after the election, what?
It's the whinings of a bunch of tired old men that need to get out more often.
ReplyDeleteWoman,
ReplyDeleteWhats-her-face doesn't think yours is so pretty, anymore.
Anyway, apples and oranges. Our troops have made a positive difference in many parts of Iraq. The war started getting lost by cumulative bad decisions by the WH and DoD, by the constant negativism of the media and Democrats, and finally by these past election results that signalled to the world that we're tired of the whole thing, whether that's true doesn't matter- that's how the world sees it.
Bush has capitulated not only on Iraq, but Iran and Syria, North Korea, too. Something bad is going on and it's not just about Iraq, whose fortune was in part shaped by the constant detraction at home that gave hope to our enemies. You've done your share from the beginning (illegal war, torture policy, etc.) of being a good little force multiplier--- for the other side.
You and 2164th may believe the current situation means the project was wrong from the get-go, but some of us think we lost our way and this is where we've ended up. And not that this was a forgone conclusion. But after November 7 and the rout of the pathetic Republicans by parochial domestic-minded BDS Democrats, most of us have given up hope.
On another site you said you "welcome our Democrat overlords". Well, enjoy.
Guess what, the Shia Majority elected a bunch of Shia politicians who aren't too crazy about the Sunni assholes that killed, and oppressed them for seventy years.
ReplyDeleteThen, to top it off, the elected government acted like a government and represented the people who elected them.
I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED!
Aren't you?
I'm not the least bit sure that it was a "Strategic Error,"
ReplyDeleteI'm not the least bit sure that we're really losing,
and I've seen no evidence, Whatsoever, that Bush has "Capitulated" on, anything.
A non-moonbat Answers McCain.
ReplyDeleteNo, not shocked at all that what was expected to occur, did.
ReplyDeleteMr Bremmer was incountry and saw the preodained outcome. Many commented upon it at the time. Elctions were like the cart before the horse, some said. We were shouted down.
Democracy was a weapon to be wielded. I signed on to give it a go. But Mr Yon's first telling of LTC Kuriilia's "Catch and Release" saga showed me the light.
When Mr Bush had the Public, he should have kept rolling. Now he's got a year to save his Party and perhaps the Nation.
Ole' rufus would compromise principles to save the GOP majority, advised me and all of US to do so, it is a shame that Republican Congressmen like Mr Kolbe and Senators like Lincoln Chafee do not share the same loyalty to either Mr Bush nor the GOP. These two long time Standard bearers.
Wonder if Mr Bush will compromise on Principle to save his reputation and the Nation.
Or does he listen to Mr Lincoln?
Woman,
ReplyDeleteI like how you used that same quote out of context on your Teresita site and made it look like it was meant sincerely.
On this thread you cite your favorite quote more accurately, even if you don't get the larger point today that we've made our fortune by insisting on a sensitive war all the while screaming Abu Ghraib perversity! Guantanomo gulag! 'Bush lied!' 'Bush and Rummy torture!' and 'America's all about the oil'.
Our enemy rights advocates and America sneerers are sophisticated critics, yep.
Rufus, I didn't say Iraq was a strategic error. Are you addressing me? But Bush does seem to be settling, now, and Iran and Syria riding high.
No, Tranz; the phrase was from Deuce's post:
ReplyDeleteThe war has turned out to be a strategic error of the first magnitude.
Where are the Grant, Sherman and Sheridan of the Bush Administration?
ReplyDeleteWe've been saddled with General McClellan clones since the July of '03.
Or does Rumsfeld's axing cover all the Uniformed players responsibilities?
Should Bush resign? Hell no! Geez....
ReplyDeleteHe can recover if he moves quickly. Kagan's plan calls for 21,000 additional troops concentrating on Anbar; the river towns first. Working with Iraqi forces and light armor, clear and hold moving south, then into Baghdad and Ramadi after the smaller cities are cleared. Time frame 12-18 months of significant combat. It should have been started back in the summer.
The Plan
With an additional 7 brigades devoted to active combat operations, it should be possible to conduct clear-hold-build operations in two phases, totaling perhaps 12 to 18 months of significant combat, followed by a longer-term commitment of substantially smaller numbers of "leave-behind" forces. The general concept of the operation is to move from the outside in.
There are two reasons for this approach. First, recently released captured Al Qaeda in Iraq documents reveal that the foreign fighters feel they are losing in Baghdad. They still see Falluja and Ramadi as strongholds that they can use to restore their fortunes, however, highlighting the tight interrelation, in their minds, between the center and the river valleys. Second, because of its size and complexity, Baghdad is the harder problem. It makes sense to attack the more manageable challenges of the river-valley cities and towns, thereby demoralizing the insurgents and making it clear to the resistance in Baghdad that defeat is near. In this way, the coalition can reasonably expect to reduce the difficulty of clearing Baghdad when it turns to that task.
Phase I
The first phase of the operation would clear the three river valleys except for Ramadi. U.S. forces would advance town by town from the upper Euphrates, upper Tigris, and upper Diyala rivers toward Baghdad, clearing and holding as they went and leaving behind a significant ISF presence, leavened with U.S. forces, to consolidate. Because of its size and complexity, Ramadi, in the upper Euphrates valley, would not be cleared during the first phase of the operation, but additional forces would prevent insurgents driven out of the river-valley towns from taking refuge there or in Baghdad. These troops would also serve as a reserve in case of problems in Baghdad or unexpected difficulties in clearing the villages. Coalition forces would start the process of developing intelligence in Ramadi and Baghdad, and shaping the situation there to support coming operations.
This operation should require on the order of 10 U.S. brigades (about 35,000 combat troops) and 18 to 20 Iraqi brigades (90-100,000 ISF troops). The principal cities on the Diyala are Baquba (280,000 inhabitants) and Mukhdadiya (about 150,000). Using the force ratios of the Tal Afar operation, operations in these two cities would require a total of 3 U.S. brigades (10,500 combat troops) and 6 ISF brigades.
The main towns of the upper Tigris are Baiji (120,000), Tikrit (28,000), Samarra (201,000), Taji, and Balad (36,000). Clearing this area would require approximately 3.5 brigades, deployed roughly as follows: one in Baiji, one brigade plus one battalion in Samarra, a battalion in Tikrit, and one in Balad. Taji could be handled either in conjunction with operations in Samarra or by forces based in Baghdad. Coalition forces would be accompanied by about 7 ISF brigades. It appears there are already 2 brigades in this area, one in Taji and one in Samarra, so that it would be necessary to add only 1.5 brigades to conduct the clear-and-hold operations.
The upper Euphrates is long but relatively sparsely settled. The town of al-Qaim on the Syrian border is strategically important, but small; one battalion should suffice to clear it. Another brigade would deploy one battalion north and one south of Haditha to control movement along the river, catch fleeing or regrouping insurgents, and hold the key roads and small villages. Operations in Ramadi, a city of some 420,000 people, would be confined to preventing insurgents from using it as a refuge, gathering intelligence, and preparing for subsequent operations. There are currently about two brigades in and around Ramadi; one more would be needed. And there are about four brigades in Baghdad; one or two more would be deployed to screen Baghdad and to serve as a reserve. It appears that there are now roughly two Marine regiments in Anbar province and one Army brigade in Habbaniya (near Falluja). This force, reinforced by one or two additional brigades, should be sufficient to clear the upper Euphrates apart from Ramadi; with three or four extra brigades, it might even be possible to clear Ramadi at the same time.
Phase II
When clearing operations were completed, the ISF troops that had participated would remain in place to consolidate, supported by about 5 American battalions (2.5 brigades). That would leave about 9 battalions (4.5 brigades), in addition to those already deployed in Iraq, to continue active operations in the second phase: clearing Ramadi and the southern suburbs of Baghdad, and beginning to clear Baghdad itself.
As General Chiarelli's operations in Sadr City show, the forces currently in the capital, reinforced by 2.5 more brigades, should suffice to allow the coalition to clear one neighborhood at a time. If additional forces became available after the clearing of the river valleys, it might be possible to clear two or more neighborhoods simultaneously. Considering that it is highly unlikely that predominantly Shiite Sadr City would rise during operations against Sunni insurgents, that the coalition already controls parts of the city, and that the Sunni insurgents would already have heard of the destruction of their bases in the river valleys, the clearing of Baghdad in this final phase is not a terrifying prospect, even with these relatively small troop numbers. In the worst case, it should be possible to proceed neighborhood by neighborhood over the course of several months. More optimistic scenarios are far more likely.
Most insurgents who shoot at coalition and ISF troops during clearing operations are not hard-core revolutionaries, but the young men of the local tribe who wish to defend their homes and follow the strongest and most successful local leaders. In areas such as Tal Afar before the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment's operation, Ramadi, and Samarra, coalition abandonment led to the rise of local leaders committed to the insurgency, and the young men followed them.
When Tal Afar was evacuated, large U.S. forces arrived, and their operations, both kinetic and nonkinetic, made it clear that the insurgents were about to lose, many insurgent shooters simply went home. Because of the solid ISF presence remaining in Tal Afar backed by U.S. support, they have mostly stayed home--or joined the Iraqi police or the ISF. There is no reason to imagine that operations in other river valley towns would be different, provided that they were conducted intelligently, with careful preparation of the situation prior to combat, and with the discriminate use of force.
Critics of this proposal see it as a plan for reducing every city in Iraq to rubble. They cite the first battle of Falluja. But in that battle, the Marines had none of the advantages U.S. forces can expect in future operations. There, the Marines advanced at short notice, unable to prepare the ground. They had inadequate manpower and armor, and so were forced to overuse artillery and air support to survive. There were virtually no Iraqi soldiers fighting with them. There is no reason to expect their grim experience to be repeated.
Countless examples, moreover, from Tal Afar to the clear-and-hold operations in the upper Euphrates before the December elections, show that there is no reason to imagine that the introduction of American forces into Sunni Arab villages would lead to uncontrollable explosions of rage. On the contrary, when overwhelming force is applied in a discriminate manner, most Iraqis, like most reasonable people, do not leap to fight it.
This plan, finally, is consistent with the idea of a small U.S. "footprint." The difference between 130,000 and 160,000-180,000 American soldiers in Iraq is not the difference between the Americans' being seen as liberators and as occupiers. It does, however, make a great deal of difference in what military operations U.S. forces can contemplate.
The assault on the Sunni Arab insurgency outlined here is but one of many possible variants. One could argue that the political significance of attacks in Baghdad is such that clearing the capital should receive priority, with pacification spreading out from the center along the river valleys. The main counterargument is psychological. Baghdad would be the hardest job. Tackling it first would probably mean taking on the insurgents at their strongest and most determined. By first clearing their outlying bases and demonstrating their weakening power--by showing the insurgency to be about to fail--the valleys-first strategy would probably prompt many Baghdadi insurgents to choose to go home rather than fight to the death.
Other variants of an offensive strategy might be designed to work with fewer forces, adding another phase, perhaps, by clearing first the Tigris and Diyala and only then approaching the Euphrates, then Baghdad. The details of any plan, of course, would have to be based on the best possible evaluations of the actual situation on the ground.
21k more combat troops would bring us up to about 77k front line troops. Damn if we can't do that we certainly had no business going in the first place.
George Bush may, (may) have one last surprise left. I don't see how, he will let his "project" go down like this. But, I have been wrong about a lot of things lately.
He died for ALL their Sins, Rat.
ReplyDeleteOr, we just MIGHT stumble our way to Victory.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone seriously believe that had Bush known what he knows now, he would have gone into Iraq or at least gone in the way we did? He is not crazy.
ReplyDeleteAssume Bush was not POTUS but a captain on a warship and ran it aground, a couple of times, what would the Navy do?
I recall when Lt. Gen. David Petraeus left Iraq. He had been in charge of training the Iraqi troops, early on.
ReplyDeleteWay back in June of '04 he said
"...Separately, Petraeus is pushing to get body armor and good weapons to the Iraqis. Money is not an issue: a billion dollars has already been spent on Iraqi forces, and an additional $2.4 billion is in the pipeline for the rest of the year. In just the last week, 13,500 Gluck pistols, 850,000 rounds of ammunition, 900 vehicles, 50,000 flak vests and 60,000 Kevlar helmets were delivered. "It's really flowing in now," Petraeus said.
Anyway, the General was leaving and doug asked, "Why?, when the Iraqi were just supposed to be taking over?" My gleeful answer, "He's done such a good job he can leave them to handle it on their own".
Anyway from Jun of '04 makes for interesting reading, now that it's almost December '06 and time to renew that Authorization of Occupation with the Iraqi and the UN.
Look, we need to kick some ass, somewhere. Ramadi is the logical choice. We've been waiting for the Iraqis to grow into the job; but, the people need to see a little Fireworks. They really, really need to see a bunch of Jihadi assholes with their nuts on fire.
ReplyDeleteThe Iraqis probably need to see it, too.
There's an old axiom in the entertainment business...You get the audience to buy the premise and they'll by the entire bit.
ReplyDeleteThis thread, fraught with misrepresentations in it's premise then turns to the innocents of the rhetorical device of asking a few simple questions.
Not your best work 2164, not even close.
The main lie that W is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of WMD's. From this "lie" two subsidiary lies emerged. That an "imminent" possibility that Sadam would use them or sell them to terrorists who would.
Yet even stipulating-- which I do only for the sake of argument - that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the perios leading up to the invasion, it defies all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted what he did. To lie means to say something one knows to be false. But it is as close to certainty that we can get that Bush believed in the truth of what he was saying about WMD's in Iraq.
How indeed could it have been otherwise? George Tenet, his own CIA director assured him that the case was "a slam dunk". In making his statement Tenet had the backing of ALL FIFTEEN AGENCIES involved in gathering intelligence for the United States.
In the National Intelligence Estimate of 2002 where their collective views were summarized,one of the conclusions offered with"high confidence" was that,
"Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its Chemical,biological,nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.
The intelligence agencies of Britian,Germany,Russia,China,Israel and even France ALL AGREED WITH THIS JUDGEMENT.
So did the British,French, and Germans, all of whom signed on in advance to Secretary of State Powells UN presentation of the satllite photos also lie not only in their intelligence but in their signing off on the Powell presentation? The gravity of the situation leads one to believe it would have taken the most coordinated lie in world histroy to believe that. the consensus of the intelligence communities was overwhelming.
Kenneth Pollack who served in the Clinton NSC has written that in the spring of 2002 he participated in a Washington meeting about Iraq WMD. "Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the UNSCOM.
One of the senior members asked those assemble if any doubted that Iraq was operating a secret centifuge plant. NO ONE DID. Three othe attendees added that they believed he was also operating a calutron plant( a facility for separating uranium isotopes)
Now let's look at Clinton's statement in 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force our purpose is clear. WE WANT TO SERIOUSLY DIMINISH THE THREAT POSED BY IRAQ'S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"
Mad Albright also in 1998 said," Iraq is a long way from the USA but what happens there matters a great deal. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use NBC weapons against us and our allies is THE GREATEST SECURITY THREAT WE FACE"
Sandy Berger NSC Adviser to Clinton made the flat out assertion,"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again,as he has ten times since 1983"
Nancy Pelosi," Saddam Hussein has been engagedd in the development of WMD TECHNOLOGY WHICH IS A THREAT TO COUNTRIES IN THE REGION AND HE HAS MADE A MOCKERY OF THE WEAPONS INSPECTIONS"
Hillary
Tom Daschle
Carl Levin
John Kerry
Jay Rockefeller
All of the above made similar statements. WMD's WMD'S WMD'S.
So, too, The Washington Post greeted he inauguration of GW Bush in january 2001 with the admonition that:
" Of all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, NONE, is more dangerous, or more URGENT, than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unravelling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding it's WMD's. That leaves president Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf where intelligence photos show the reconstruction of facotries long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.
Then we had 9-11 and the imaginary became reality and the world changed, the temo changed and the threat had long since been identified.
It is absurd to even posit the questions posed in this thread.
( I have more research but I'll let the wobbly digest this portion of the meal first.)
I hope Bush surprises me with a "Hail Mary" pass, a successful on-side kick, sacking the opposing quarterback and a 55 yard field goal in the last three minutes. I just would not bet on it.
ReplyDeleteGreat plan, not enough time, the General said four to six months, not twelve to eighteen. They will not get that long from the Politicos.
ReplyDeleteThe GOP blood would be all in the water, by then.
The best that can be hoped for, a quick surge, hit the high points, and cut a "long and small" alternative, with a lot of troopers pulling out by November '07, as requested by Mr Maliki when he took the job of Prime Minister of Iraq.
tranzizoroaste said...
ReplyDeleteWoman,
Whats-her-face doesn't think yours is so pretty, anymore.
Have we met? I don't think so. And I don't think I would want to meet a Tranz who was so double-minded that his or her opinion of someone's appearance shifted depending on what that person wrote on a blog.
Should FDR have Resigned after Eisenhower got his ass kicked in N. Africa?
ReplyDeleteShould Truman have Resigned after Chosen Reservoir?
Should Kennedy have resigned after Bay of Pigs?
Should Lincoln have resigned after Bull Run?
Do you understand that we lost ten times as many Americans in one day at Antietam as we have in the whole Iraqi War?
That we had several days in WWII that we lost more than the entire Iraqi War?
You need to take a nap, Deuce. You must be fatigued.
All good points Habu, some of your better work for sure, but it is besides the point. Short of a win, GWB has missed his chance. How is he going to get the win? Whit's post on Kagan is compelling. It sounds like a strategy and a plan, but will it work? Will it get support?
ReplyDeleteHe has lost the support of Congress, public opinion and most of his allies.
Like it or not, we are in a civil war in Iraq. I do not know which side I want to win, do you?
habu wants to kill 'em all and let allah sort them out.
ReplyDeleteWhile there could be benefits to that Program, it's not going to Play.
The Network President canceled it, maybe they'll make a pay-for-view out of the concept by reeditting the pilot.
Should FDR have Resigned after Eisenhower got his ass kicked in N. Africa?
ReplyDelete"No, the axis declared war on the US. It was one battle in a war that had to be won. The US has not lost any battles in Iraq. The US is not fighting a war to win."
Should Truman have Resigned after Chosen Reservoir?
"Truman was not afraid to hold people responsible for failure but the stalemate in Korea resulted in a situtation that has consequences to this date."
Should Kennedy have resigned after Bay of Pigs?
" Kennedy was inept, the "Bay of pigs" was a result ofr him having lost his nerve and betraying fighting men committed to battle. Shameful. The Cuban Missile crisis was a result of Kruschev thinking Kennedy was weak based on 'The Bay of Pigs".
Should Lincoln have resigned after Bull Run?
" Lincoln resigning would have resulted in the separation of the United States. When he committed his forces to war, he did not restrain them to accomodate the Governors of the states where the Union Army fought."
I'm with Rufus -
ReplyDeleteI think George Bush's problem was that he listened too much to his critics - five months wasted for UN resolutions and Hans Blix appeasement - all while they were over the shredders with the Oil-for-food documents showing the payoffs to Paribas and Annan Jr.
He should have gone in sooner while he still had Turkey - now that they are where they are, they should start kickin' ass and taking names.
He did the right thing, and exposed a Moslem culture bereft of generosity and full of bloodlust. Had he played the Scowcroft delay game, they would only be stronger and able to hurt us more.
He should not resign.
Woman Catholic,
ReplyDeleteYou never answer the substantive points. Just lovely prose like "whats-her-name." I'm Catherine the Protestant and pretty amused you'd respond to a thread on "Should Bush Resign" with an attempted gratuitous slam on one of my quotes from several months ago which you've tucked into your pocket and finger every once in a while about my believing Iraq was not Nam and that our troops weren't dying for nothing.
But, hey, good on you for believing they are dying for nothing in an illegal pre-emptive war for Bush-America oil interests.
2164,
Bush is more likely to felled by an attempt on his life than to resign. But I'm beginning to think this downward spiral of late, in terms of perception and expectations, may be a function of someone having credibly threatened his family or worse. The Iraq-Iranian-Syrian situation is spinning out of control and not due to any obvious military debacle. Iraq is not in a really good way now, but there have been no decisive defeats of our troops or even of our strategy that hasn't fully played out yet (although it's mighty frustrating to those of us at home.)
No, there's something else going on behind the scenes that's really not good.
Rat:
ReplyDeleteThe General said 4 to 6 months but is that the time frame if we do nothing? If we could get these extra troops in asap, what is the time frame?
I too, am thinking Bush, like Lincoln should have had a General who would fight.
Personally, I don't think the go-light, go long strategy is going to work against the Sunnis on one hand and the Iranians on the other.
Just do something...And do not give the muzzies a victory!
I'm NOT quite sure about that Blue Dress, though.
ReplyDeleteI would pull just about everybody out of Europe and South Korea. The only personnel left in Europe would be those in support of Iraq and Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteIt all boils down to this:
ReplyDeleteWe have got to kick ass in Iraq and Afghanistan starting with the Sunni insurgents, al-Qaeda, the Taliban, the Pashtuns, the war lords and anyone else that gets in the way or we will have our asses kicked all over the world for a very long time.
No redeployment, no go long, just go strong or go down
2164th wrote:
ReplyDeleteLike it or not, we are in a civil war in Iraq. I do not know which side I want to win, do you?
Support a Kurdish state to avenge the 4th ID/Turkey fiasco and tweak the ayatollahs in Iran. Support the Shi'ites to avenge everything al-Qaeda in Iraq has done to kill or maim Americans. Set up Palestinian style Sunni refugee camps in the western desert, one on the border of Syria and another one on the border of Saudi Arabia, then pull all US forces back to their superbases on the frontier with Iran.
whit said:
ReplyDeleteI would pull just about everybody out of Europe and South Korea. The only personnel left in Europe would be those in support of Iraq and Afghanistan.
That is what they will have to do if they choose "Go Big". Either that, or start up Rangel's draft.
allen said...
ReplyDeleteJust saw Whore-Hay on Fox in his so called Vietnamese garb. Where were the black pajamas?
6:25 PM, November 20, 2006
allen said...
The only time I saw Vietnamese in such get-ups was in Hue. This was the dress perferred by the Vietnamese-French girls there. Does that say something? Those Vietnamese are such kidders.
I find myself agreeing with most of what everyone is saying except taking a nap. I can get by on very little sleep. I usually only require a nap after having done something to further world peace.
ReplyDeleteYou all argue until the cows come home but "allen said...
ReplyDeleteUnless the Iranians do something incredibly stupid, this administration has thrown in the towel. We will have to have the debate about Iran after the '08 elections. How long is that?"
Bush's "blue dress" says it all.
Some of Mr. Bush's stall-wart supporters should go back in time and revisit some of their posts from 3, 6, and 9 months ago. How did that work out for you?
ReplyDeleteMr. Bush reminds me of nothing so much as the bottle jockey who at midnight lets everyone know what he is going to do tomorrow. Come morning, he forgets his braggadocio. By the midnight following he has a whole new list of promises. Mr. Bush is a dry drunk; what's the excuse of his apologists?
I usually only require a nap after having done something to further world peace.
ReplyDeleteTHAT'S the answer, Deuce, We gotta find you a nice girl.
Give me one example of Bush breaking his word.
ReplyDeleteHe was going to rebuild the military. Please check the numbers.
ReplyDeleteHe was going to secure the border.
ReplyDeleteTax cuts were going to be permanent.
ReplyDeleteThe US would not permit Iran to become a nukeahlar power.
ReplyDeleteHezbollah would be disarmed.
ReplyDeleteSyria and Iran were part of the axis of evil.
ReplyDeleteYou were with the terrorists or us.
ReplyDeleteThe US would not give aid to the Palestinians.
ReplyDeleteTell me when you would like to stop. Otherwise, I can go on all night.
ReplyDeleteWould you rather go to war against our present military, or the one he inherited in 2000?
ReplyDeleteAre there more border patrol agents now than there were in 2000? Is the National Guard on the border? Did he just sign the fence bill?
Has he busted his nuts repeatedly trying to get the tax cuts made permanent?
Is Iran a Nuclear Power?
This is what it really is; you're upset because Ohlmert completely fucked up his chance, and you want to blame Bush, instead of laying the blame where it belongs.
BULLSHIT!
No where to run and no where to hide. Think Pakistan.
ReplyDeleteThere could be a million border patrol agents, but if not allowed to actually do the job, so what?
ReplyDeleteIran IS a nuclear power, albeit a SMALL power. Even the UN admits as much.
ReplyDeleteLet's talk about North Korea, shall we?
ReplyDeleteJust this very evenng Fox ran a segment about the National Guard at the border. The Guard commander made it quite clear, they build when asked, but they DO NOT do enforcement.
ReplyDeleteThen he should have promised to TRY to get permanent tax cuts. He did not, however. Mr. Bush likes the sound of his own voice, apparently.
ReplyDeleteSyria was never named as a member of the "axis" of Evil.
ReplyDeleteWe flipped Pakistan to "With us" and they've arrested and turned over to us (the ones we wanted, at least) over 600 AQ.
We HAVE cut off all aid to the Palestinian Government.
Keep trying, you haven't struck "blood," yet.
Mr. Olmert had nothing to do with the Franco-American UNSC Resolution brokered by Madame Rice. How is that working out?
ReplyDeleteAxis of Evil
ReplyDeleteGood try but no cigar. I tire of this. By all means continue to support Mr. Bush. He needs all the help he can get.
re: Palestinian aid cuts
ReplyDeleteYou are one of those beknighted souls who believed that getting a blow-job from Monica was not sex.
re: Pakistan
ReplyDeleteYou have heard of Waziristan?
It's working out okay, for THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
ReplyDeleteIt would be working out better for you if Israel hadn't fought the most inept, shucking and jiving war in the history of the State.
I'm beginning to feel like I'm taking candy from a baby.
ReplyDeleteI am a Jew who happens to think that both Bush and Olmert are jack-offs. Try harder, you're not hitting me yet. Jeez. Maybe this explains the losses on the 7th. No brains, no gains. Jerk it, jerk it harder.
ReplyDeleteIsrael did fight a pussy war, What you and Mr. Bush fail to understand is that the US has been doing the same thing for more than 3 years. Jerk it! Jerk it harder!
ReplyDeleteIt' still jerking off and Mr. Bush is the big jerker.
Sorry, Mr. Bush, Mr. Baker, Mr. Kissinger, Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Scowcroft, and Bush 41 are all major league wankers. Credit where credit is due.
ReplyDeleteIraq Reopens Diplomatic Relations With Syria
ReplyDeleteBy SABRINA TAVERNISE
Published: November 21, 2006
BAGHDAD, Nov. 20 — Iraq re-established diplomatic relations with Syria on Monday, agreeing to restore an embassy in Baghdad after more than 20 years with no formal avenues of communication.
The step came on the second day of a two-day visit by Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem while he met with the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, in the international Green Zone here.
This? is what you're referring to?
ReplyDeleteIn a speech entitled "Beyond the Axis of Evil", US Under Secretary of State, John Bolton said that the three nations could be grouped with other so-called "rogue states" - Iraq, Iran and North Korea - in actively attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Better read it again, Bub.
I don't see the term "axis of evil" used, and certainly not by the President.
I don't know about blowjobs from Monica, but I do know that the Government of the United States is NOT giving aid to the Palestinian govt.
ReplyDeletere: Axis of Evil
ReplyDeleteEven I have a limit as to how long I will argue with Ash about Senior Che.
Jerk it! Jerk it hard! See what you end up with.
I know that Bush has tried to work through the Waziristan problem with Musharraf, rather than get him overthrown and see fifty or so Nuclear Warheads, and missiles fall into the hands of AQ or their Supporters.
ReplyDeletere: Palestinian aid
ReplyDeleteYou probably don't. That would require actually looking at the backdoor. That would disallusion you. You couldn't live with that. The numbers are there, as well as the pronouncements of Dr. Rice. Oh, sorry, since the President didn't say so himself, it doesn't count. Mr. Bolton and Dr. Rice are merely chopped liver when they don't work out for you.
Waziristan is still Waziristan, i.e. a terrorist sanctuary. By the way, Mr. Bush said it, not me. If he couldn't produce, he might have considered STFU.
ReplyDeleteWell, Allen, maybe that explains it; when the other kids were learning how to read you were over in the corner "Jerking It."
ReplyDeleteAn Undersecretary of State saying Syria
could be grouped with other so-called "rogue states" - Iraq, Iran and North Korea - in actively attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction is hardly the same as saying Syria was a "Member" of the "Axis of Evil."
Back to the 2002 State of the Union, that added Syria, Hezbollah by name and a whole host of others, to be condition decided. It really was a rousing speach, if anyone is interested I'll google it and post the link. "Axis of Evil, I think it was there, I'll check. Like "Stay the Course" something Mr Bush "never" said
ReplyDeleteHe has fallen short through out.
The attempt is not enough, rufus, Mr Bush gets no points for "trying", only "doing". No points for intentions only results.
Maybe if Mr Bush or his team had "strong armmed" Lincoln Chafee, but he was to tough a nut to crack.
Fore warned is fore armed, I was once admonished. This crowd discounted the warnings and now is pissed at itself.
Rufus blames others, when it was Mr Kolbe abandoned the GOP. He blames others when Lincoln Chafee holds John Bolton's nomination hostage.
This Iraqi success story will wipe out the GOP in '08 if it is not under control in six to eight months.
Are you denying that two months ago the government of the United States did not give to the Palestinian Authority 3,000 M-16s and one million rounds of ammunition?
ReplyDeleteTo parapharse Churchill, "Tomorrow, Madame, I will be sober, but you will still be stupid."
ReplyDeleteAllen, Israel still provides "Free" Electricity to the Palestinians.
ReplyDeleteThe U.S. and the E.U. give money to NGOs which provide food for poor people. Since the Palestinian government workers haven't been paid in up to six months it doesn't seem like much of that NGO money is getting to them.
2002 State of the Union, rufus.
ReplyDeleteMr bush names the three, Iran, NorK and Iraq by name, then adds a host of others by a conditions based matrix.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world.
Plain as day to includes those named and unnamed terrorist sponsor States, like Syria.
But some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake about it: If they do not act, America will.
Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction.
Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September 11, but we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.
Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens, leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction.
We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack.
And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.
We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.
In as much as Assad is the only conceivable hope for any kind of peace in Gaza, we gave his security force the M-16's and ammo ostensibly for protection from the Hamas "Crazies."
ReplyDeleteGuns and bullets, rufus, not electricity.
ReplyDeleteGuns and bullets.
I'll say the same thing to you I said to Allen,
ReplyDeleteYou better read it again, Bub.
The word "Syria" is not there, anywhere.
Picking Terror leaders in Palistine and Iraq to support with US largesse, that is the bite in the ass, rufus.
ReplyDeleteWe swore no suport until the Palistinians acknowledged Israel's "Right to Exist"
We blinked.
I said it before, and I'll say it, again. You, two, are whining like a couple of old men. I think you're "crying before you're Hurt."
ReplyDeleteI still don't see any incontrovertible evidence we're losing. And, I don't see anything at all wrong with Maliki meeting with the Syrians, or the Iranians.
Hell, maybe they'll Surrender!
No, Rat; Abbas "Supports" Israel's "Right to Exist."
ReplyDeleteAbbas, not Assad
ReplyDeleteBut you knew that
So you deny the Israeli and Us reports the Syria sponsors terrorists, rufus.
ReplyDeleteYou deny the provide Sanctuary for Sunni Insurgents from Iraq and Hezbollah in both Iraq and Lebanon?
I'll get the Rummy quotes, the Israeli quotes, the Ms Rice quotes, they are easy to find. Mr Bush set the Standard of Performance himself.
He fell short on performance while being long on rhetoric.
He said: "States "like" these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."
LIKE is the operative word, as is Terrorist allies. Mr Bush spun a mighty big catch rope.
I'll hold him to it, even if you do not, rufus.
But he is not the Government of Palistine. That is the rub, rufus.
ReplyDeleteHe is just another Warlord with a title. Hamas won the Election, Mr Abbas was not on the ballot. He cannot pass a Resolution acknowledging Iraraels right to exist from the Palistinian Parliment. If he could maybe he would. But he's really just another Warlord, with style.
On to something important: Old man Broin is expanding the Voyager Ethanol Plant in Emmetsburg, Ia to produce 125 Million Gallons of Ethanol/yr Out of Cornstalks.
ReplyDeleteThe Age of Ethanol from Cellulose is Here. This isn't some University doing a couple of gallons in an experiment in a basement, somewhere. This isn't some Dot.Com Gazillionaire throwing a few million around to feel "Green" and Good.
This is Broin. This is the guy that's built half of the Ethanol plants, out there. This is the guy that "Always Takes a Piece" of the Action in any plant he builds. This guy knows where the valves are, and when to "flip the switch."
If Broin is building it (and, it's a Big One) it will work; and, even more important, IT WILL MAKE MONEY!
ReplyDeleteThe technology that the Nerds said would be here in two, or three, or five years is here, TODAY. A corn field that could produce 400 gallons an acre will now be able to produce, maybe 800 or 900 gallons/acre.
If it'll work on corn stalks (and, you better believe, if Broin builds it, it will work) it'll work on bean stalks, wheat stalks, switch grass, or kudzu.
IT'S BIG, FOLKS!
2164...Immediately after posting my exposition of how we arrived at this point in time I thought. Faced with this 2164 will blow it off as irrelevent, which of course is not an argument. So lets review some things that might, in your world seem relevent. You said:
ReplyDelete"George Bush bet his administration on the gamble in Iraq. He chose a risky strategy over the advise of allies, friends, enemies and advisors. The war has turned out to be a strategic error of the first magnitude. The hope was right but the tactics were wrong."
A gamble? And then you turn around and say my argument is irrelevent? You need to go back and re-read how we got to this point and how it wasn't a "gamble" unless you are going to wholly discount all of the intelligence at the time.
"He chose a risky strategy"
Cite for me all of the ney sayers at that time that considered going into Iraq a risky strategy in the face of the aforementioned intelligence? Had he not gone in and Israel was now a memory you'd be bitch'in up a different tune.
Citing Syria,Hamas, and al jeez don't count.
"The Bush Administration has lost the faith of most of the natural allies of The United States. A world with diminished respect for the US is a much more dangerous place."
Once again,we went an endless number of times to the UN, and garnered the backing,and in the end of the endorsement for SecState Powell to read and show intel on WMD's. The internal politics of Germany,France, and Britain have more to do with there diminished support than anything W has done.
Even now the French,English and Dutch are gaining backbone to control the cancer of Islam.
"The President has failed in the one way that matters most. He has failed to lead."
Hogwash. You may not agree with the current situation but that's IS irrelevent to his leadership. he has never backed away from accepting responsibility for his administration.
Your original premise is lousy, your ignorance of the facts on how we arrived at this point are neon in there brilliance and you seem to have forgotten entirely that this entire endeavor was thrust upon him by 9-11.
Bone up some on how points in time develop, this one in particular. I think you've embarassed youself, by running to the front of the parade, baton in hand, proclaiming you knew better all the time ..you and a bunch of other fair weather "patriots" who with perfect hindsight gitty-up with the windblown trendoids.
I second Habu
ReplyDeleteAnd, by the way, if He, and Laura, and Barney get lonely they can call on me. I'm still with'em.
ReplyDeleteand DR...it's very difficult to fail on performance when the game is still in play and the outcome is in doubt..unless we follow your cut and run policy.
ReplyDeleteYou might do well to reflect on
Bill Mazeroski's Walkoff Home Run that won the 1960 World Series on October 14 1960. This after the NY Yankees had set a dozen plus world series records.
Or you might relect on what George G. meade did to Robert E. Lee at Gettysburg only months after what is described by historians as one of the most brilliant tactical battles in history at Chacellorsville won by Lee...
or you can cut and run
What Habu said
ReplyDeleteAgain
rufus said:
ReplyDelete> 2164th said:
I usually only require a nap after having done something to further world peace.
THAT'S the answer, Deuce, We gotta find you a nice girl.
That's world peace, not world PIECE.
Spelin never wuz my strong sut :)
ReplyDeleteRather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
ReplyDeleteThat he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
Wm Shakespeare, Henry V
"These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their county; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny like hell is not easily conquered yet we have this consolation with us, the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value." -- Tom Paine after the Declaration of Independence
ReplyDeleteDitto
ReplyDeleteand, Ditto
2164...I do think this thread has a brilliance to it.
ReplyDeleteIf you had asked a mundane question, one with no chance to roil the passions of men and women then it would no doubt pancake.
By offering what you must have known would be a barn burner you got the elevated BP and the adrenaline of a bunch of old war horses work'in overtime.
We're not gonna settle this. Congress,Bush, and the other players will. We at least owe them, while our troops are fighting and dying, some measure of confidence. Or we can return to 1968.
68' wasn't bad; I was in Veiques Island, PR, and "getting short."
ReplyDeleteSteel Bands, Puerto Rican girls, beaches. Yeah, not bad at all.
We ought get back to the words of Mr Bush and his Staff and leave Mr Paine to rabble rouse the peoples of a not yet born Republic.
ReplyDeleteBetter yet, translate him into Arabic. Bet that has not been done, our best pamphleteer left on the sidelines. Along with Mr Madison and the Federalist papers.
But worry not, becasue the Democracy Project is but a sham, a way for the habu clique to obtain a target list. I do not dismiss the Project so lightly, that in it's ashes, I can so easily discount it. And ashes it is in, in both Lebanon and Iraq.
Wait and watch. We'll smake a Mohammed in Anbar and proclaim Victory, at least enough to start the withdrawal. Or not and the GOP is back to the backbench of government for another 50 years.
Or wait for that preemptive strike against Iran. I'll wait with you, I'm younger by almost a decade, maybe I'll get to see it.
Or better yet, let US wait for the Congress to Declare War on Iran.
Let's run that up the pole, see who salutes. It will not be the Religion of Peace team, mark my words.
Yes, Gettysberg, where Mr Lee would not discount the losses of the previous day, sending General Pickett and the South to sure defeat. Because he would not "cut and run" like Chesty at the Chosin. Mr Lee would not abandon the field and advance to DC.
ReplyDeleteAn error, to be sure.
President Bush has not shone the type of decision-making implied in the presented scenarios. It is highly unlikely this will occur, especially with threats of purse tightening from the Dems.
ReplyDeleteI’m afraid we’ll have two years of wasted time, while the enemy gets stronger.
Damn! I sure hope I’m wrong!
Though himself "a pious deist," in The Age of Reason Paine reflected the atheistic feeling that had swept France during these revolutionary times; The Age of Reason became known as the "Atheist's bible." On returning to America in 1802, Paine found himself, directly on account The Age of Reason, out of favour, ostracized by political leaders and churchgoers. After seven incredible years of abuse, hatred, neglect, poverty, and ill health, Paine died in 1809, at the age of 72; and was denied burial in a Quaker cemetery.
ReplyDeletetiger said:
ReplyDeleteI’m afraid we’ll have two years of wasted time, while the enemy gets stronger.
Ironically, it's the fact that the enemy is so weak and resorts to guerrilla tactics that gives our forces such a hard time. Would that the enemy was strong and had a 90 MiG air force, for example, or 400 T-72 tanks and a strong general to field them.
DR
ReplyDeleteIt's a damn good guess you never had to inspire men to exceed what they thought were their limits.
You entreaty to ignore the words of Thomas Paine are a natural for you given your choice to ignore facts and instead go for the capillary with smarmy cynacism.
That is the hallmark of the best cut and runners though and you are setting daily records in that department.
Do you blow with just any wind or do you stand for something?
Did you guys cut allen off?
ReplyDeleteHe seems to think so.
It's what he wrote, elsewhere in the EB-BC world
rufus said:
ReplyDeleteIn as much as Assad is the only conceivable hope for any kind of peace in Gaza, we gave his security force the M-16's and ammo ostensibly for protection from the Hamas "Crazies."
Okay, but the next time a Fatah gunman takes out everyone inside a Jerusalem pizzaria, it better not be with an M-16.
Human Calculus
ReplyDeleteYeah, I stand for cutting through the BS.
ReplyDeleteI stand for making good decisions at the right times.
I stand with Mr Paine when the public dumped on him.
I stand for walkin' the talk or being quiet.
But I have not led folk in a long time, I will not act as a unpaid tax collection service for the government.
But call me when the preemptive attacks begin, against anyone, anywhere.
In Warizistan, Somolia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon or even Iran.
Rally to the President, habu, get on board the Religion of Peace Train and booghie down.
You and Dr K, you'll both be back in saddle again, like back in the 'Nam.
I think he must be drinkin :-)
ReplyDeleteHe called me, "Stupid," then disappeared. I didn't even fire back.
2164...Immediately after posting my exposition of how we arrived at this point in time I thought. Faced with this 2164 will blow it off as irrelevent, which of course is not an argument. So lets review some things that might, in your world seem relevent. You said:
ReplyDelete"George Bush bet his administration on the gamble in Iraq. He chose a risky strategy over the advise of allies, friends, enemies and advisors. The war has turned out to be a strategic error of the first magnitude. The hope was right but the tactics were wrong."
A gamble? And then you turn around and say my argument is irrelevent? You need to go back and re-read how we got to this point and how it wasn't a "gamble" unless you are going to wholly discount all of the intelligence at the time.
✣ ✣ ✣
I do not fault him for going with the intelligence he had. If he were an artillery man and was given bad coordinates. No problem. But once he found out they were wrong he has to adjust.
✣ ✣ ✣
"He chose a risky strategy"
Cite for me all of the ney sayers at that time that considered going into Iraq a risky strategy in the face of the aforementioned intelligence? Had he not gone in and Israel was now a memory you'd be bitch'in up a different tune.
✣ ✣ ✣
He did not cite Israel as a reason. He did it for WMD. He had call to go after Sadaam. No problem there. Firing the army was stupid and allowing the country to be ransaacked was stupid. It is not my problem if the one Islamic group wants to kill another. Iask you the question who do you want to win The sunnis or the Iranian choice? Pick a side and tell me which one we should fight and die for. I would rather we sided for order. Pick some young ambitious ruthless Iraqi colonel and give him the resources and backing to restore order. Not the nonsense where 40% of our casualties are from doing street patrols that should be done by Iraqis. Everyone of those patrols that get hit are done so with the knowledge of local people. that knowledge and lack of notice should be punished but it is not.
✣ ✣ ✣
Citing Syria,Hamas, and al jeez don't count.
✣ ✣ ✣
Are you saying that I am a flack for Syria, hamas and al jjez?
✣
"The Bush Administration has lost the faith of most of the natural allies of The United States. A world with diminished respect for the US is a much more dangerous place."
Once again,we went an endless number of times to the UN, and garnered the backing,and in the end of the endorsement for SecState Powell to read and show intel on WMD's. The internal politics of Germany,France, and Britain have more to do with there diminished support than anything W has done.
Even now the French,English and Dutch are gaining backbone to control the cancer of Islam.
"The President has failed in the one way that matters most. He has failed to lead."
Hogwash. You may not agree with the current situation but that's IS irrelevent to his leadership. he has never backed away from accepting responsibility for his administration.
Your original premise is lousy, your ignorance of the facts on how we arrived at this point are neon in there brilliance and you seem to have forgotten entirely that this entire endeavor was thrust upon him by 9-11.
Bone up some on how points in time develop, this one in particular. I think you've embarassed youself, by running to the front of the parade, baton in hand, proclaiming you knew better all the time ..you and a bunch of other fair weather "patriots" who with perfect hindsight gitty-up with the windblown trendoids.
To be obtuse and a cynic is not easily achieved but the ease with which you slither into the role makes you a unique Bahgdad Bob prop. Your sciolism gives our enemies a sigh of relief knowing you are so easily mislead.
ReplyDeleteBy your youth you are too young to understand the daily criticism LBJ endured while personally directing the war.
Now our Commander in Chief allows his military, the professionals at war and it's execution, to decide how to prosecute it and you caterwaul about defeat while the game is still on. were he pulling an LBJ you'd be doing the same thing.
Are you frustrated with life,feeling abandonment,remorse?
Cheer up lad we'll prevail, but obviously without your encouragement or support.
Dr,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that how Thomas Paine died is germane to the value he was to two countries seeking independence.
George Washington readily acknowledged how powerful "Common Sense" was in turning Royalists into revolutionaries.
His contributions to the French Revolution and their voicing of the Rights Of Man are also acknowledged as a powerful force.
"Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation: conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
ReplyDeleteNow we are engaged in a great civil war. . .testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated. . . can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war.
We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate. . .we cannot consecrate. . . we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be here dedicated to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.
It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us. . .that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion. . . that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. . . and that this government of the people. . .by the people. . .for the people. . . shall not perish from the earth. "
Dr.
ReplyDeleteIn the Nam we beat the NVA to hell and back..it was people like you back home that undermined the war by giving comfort to the enemy.
General Giap and Uncle Ho both admitted they were ready to capitulate, knowing they were beaten and broke, UNTIL the anti war movement gave them the added courage to continue.
Just like your doing now, encouraging the enemy.
He has my support habu.
ReplyDeleteHe is doing little so the level of support appropriate. If more is done, I'll support him more.
But as I see less being done, I'll support him less.
You can dream of preemptive strikes, while wait for your decision of whom to support in Iraq.
The Sunni Insurgents or the Iranian Frontmen. Mr Bush sides with the Iranian frontmen, should we list you there as well?
At least for tomorrow. You can shift alliances each day, just tell US first, please. Don't want to shoot a friend today that was an enemy yesterday.
The guy that wrote those words had a few troubles, too.
ReplyDeleteRufus,
ReplyDeleteProbably the greatest speech ever given,anywhere by anybody.
The Bush Administration has lost the faith of most of the natural allies of The United States. A world with diminished respect for the US is a much more dangerous place."
ReplyDeleteOnce again,we went an endless number of times to the UN, and garnered the backing,and in the end of the endorsement for SecState Powell to read and show intel on WMD's. The internal politics of Germany,France, and Britain have more to do with there diminished support than anything W has done.
Even now the French,English and Dutch are gaining backbone to control the cancer of Islam.
✣ ✣ ✣
If you think, Bush has been a wise steward of long developed alliances, that is your privliage.
✣ ✣ ✣
"The President has failed in the one way that matters most. He has failed to lead."
Hogwash. You may not agree with the current situation but that's IS irrelevent to his leadership. he has never backed away from accepting responsibility for his administration.
✣ ✣ ✣
?
✣ ✣ ✣
Your original premise is lousy, your ignorance of the facts on how we arrived at this point are neon in there brilliance and you seem to have forgotten entirely that this entire endeavor was thrust upon him by 9-11.
✣ ✣ ✣
9-11 did not drag us into Iraq. Getting into Iraq has not improved our security nor has it strengthened our alliances. It has diminished the ability of our armed forces and the respect for the US. My ignorance noticed that Iran seems to have improved its stature. Syria sponsored a resurgent Hezbollah and not one Arab country is supplying troops for the Iraqi venture. Seems to me that Syria and France both supported Gulf 1 with troops.
✣ ✣ ✣
Bone up some on how points in time develop, this one in particular. I think you've embarassed youself, by running to the front of the parade, baton in hand, proclaiming you knew better all the time ..you and a bunch of other fair weather "patriots" who with perfect hindsight gitty-up with the windblown trendoids.
✣ ✣ ✣.
the bones I have are the ones I made. Iv'e worn out a few pair of boots in real parades. I never carried a baton, mine was an M1. fair weather patriot? I never avoided military service. I know what green incoming and red outgoing looks like from seeing it. I know what stupid leadership can do to real live troops. i know that any man my age that wanted to go to Viet Nam could have. Any fighter pilot that wanted to fly there could have. Any national guardsman that wanted to go there could have. Any student deferred who wanted to waive the deferrment could have. And I know a lot of "would of's" who didnt. That includes most of the flag waivers in this administration.They had their reasons. I prefer fair weather but when the shit was handed out I was there. Were you?
And then his Countrymen, Washington's people turn their collective backs on him, when he was down and out.
ReplyDeleteTypical.
Reality and rhetoric, the Common Sense of the Revolution abandon by a fickle public.
So your support DR is like standing feet firmly placed in a position to run far run fast, not firmly placed to stand ground when the times get tough.
ReplyDeleteSometimes you must grind the grist in the mill no matter what the cost and no matter how long it takes.
You know those who were referred to as the "Son's of Liberty" would have been good companion for you given that they sat in taverns and talked the talk but never went to the protracted war of our revolution.
DR..your 10:27 has no proof in all of our history. The people of this country knew George Washington was an extraordinary man.
ReplyDeleteEven King George said,when he found that Washington had eschewed becoming a king said of him that he must be one of the finest men to have ever lived.
"Getting into Iraq has not improved our security nor has it strengthened our alliances."
ReplyDeleteYes, it has. It has given the US invaluable perspective and perception as it regards its allies and alliances. Turkey, Spain, Germany, France, Canada, all bugged out when the US came asking for assistance. So much for NATO alliance.
That is in reference to the 9:28 habu, it was not Mr Washington but Mr Paine that was abandon by the people he so well served, according to your take of Mr Washington's feelings towards him.
ReplyDeleteThe object lesson is that the people of the US are a fickle bunch, were so then, still are.
Does not take many mistakes and they walk on you. It is a cut and run society.
Just ask OJ
ReplyDeleteThere's a meltdown on the blogosphere tonight. It's madness. Even Christopher Hitchens had a column saying that some Bushies are now cutting and about to run.
ReplyDeleteIt's not over yet, Bush better get ahead of this madness. Instead of posing in those pajamas with Vlad Putin, the poisoner, he should have been making a damn decision. This crap about waiting to hear from the Generals is ridiculous.
Not good!
"If you think, Bush has been a wise steward of long developed alliances, that is your privliage."
ReplyDeleteI don't need your permission to acknowledge my privlidge, it's a birthright in this country. My facts speak for themselves.
"9-11 did not drag us into Iraq"
Only slightly delusional. Once again the facts presented show that Iraq was considered a immediate threat. You don't ignore that after a 9-11. If you do and they hit you, you would be saying, but golly he had all this intelligence , whata doof.
I prefer fair weather but when the shit was handed out I was there. Were you?
As a matter of fact yes. And Cambodia and Laos all without the cover of the Geneva Convention since I was undercover and a spy.
The duty was voluntary and the bonus was that at times I got to kill the enemy.
Creative Destruction I believe the economists call it.
ReplyDeleteThe essence of the US System, no?
I don't mind a r little rough and tumble. This place is for everyone to say what they believe and argue their case. This is no place for the timid. Right habu?
ReplyDeleteMətušélaḥ,
ReplyDeleteGreat point. It is invaluable to know who stands with you when the going gets tough.
As Tony Blair said in his speech to a joint Congress.
"Why America, why now?
" Because God has placed you in this time and place and only you can do the job"
Islam is not going to quit, but it looks as though we could use some citizens made of sterner stuff.
I take it back, the meltdown seems to be occurring only here and over at the Belmont Club. We're either way ahead of the curve or simply out of our heads.
ReplyDeleteI'll arm wrestle you to see who buys a round.
ReplyDelete2164...I do agree. And I must confess that I have way too great a tendency to the personal attack than is necessary.
ReplyDeleteThings always get said that should have required a more noble discourse.
This forum is the finest going BECAUSE we each say what we mean and mean what we say (above apologia excepted)
There's diplomacy 90% of the time, PC about 2% of the time and informed articulate people all over the place.
This forum is a victory for free speech and we all love it.
In the morning I'll post my favorite angel food cake recipe.
ReplyDelete2164th wrote:
ReplyDeleteI don't mind a r little rough and tumble. This place is for everyone to say what they believe and argue their case. This is no place for the timid. Right habu?
He's busy taking the training wheels off his sports car.
I'll have a Bud Light, Thanks.
ReplyDeleteGentlemen,
ReplyDeletei suggest tomorrow we discuss the virtue of raising grapes for good wine.
For now it's off to bed since I was into thrust and parry with DR, until 3AM last night.
Good dreams, noble fellows.
Did I mention the new Cellulosic Ethanol Plant? Did I mention . . . . oh, hell; forget it :)
ReplyDeleteMAT, if you're still there; What kind of photovoltaics are they installing in Israel, now?
ReplyDeleteWho do the Israelis think has the best product?
Whit, I agree. A little perspective and a calm spirit is in order.
ReplyDeleteAllen:
ReplyDeleteYou have not been cut off. We can't even do that.
It seems that the Belmont Club and the EB are on somewhat of a meltdown tonight. We're either ahead of the s*!t storm or out of our heads.
I don't think the general public quite knows the implications. Christopher Hitchens has called some Bushies "cut and runners."
Other blogs seem to be oblivious to the situation. George Bush better he out of the country when the general public begins to understand what is happening.
Capitulation and Appeasement. Thank You, James Baker.
whit wrote:
ReplyDeleteInstead of posing in those pajamas with Vlad Putin, the poisoner, he should have been making a damn decision.
You got to admire the KGB though; at least they're out there doing real spy vs. spy stuff rather than dicking around with leaks and trying to bring down the President.
This crap about waiting to hear from the Generals is ridiculous.
Isn't that what you do right after learning of a military coup'd etat? Wait to hear from the Generals?
Whit, I really think you all are misreading this Iraqi Study Group thing. I don't think you've thought it through, as to motives, etc. Keep in mind, there's also a Pentagon study group. We know the Pentagon is coming up with 3 options. The ISG will probably come up with multiple options/recommendations, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think the whole thing is somewhat of a cover. The longer he can keep people talking the longer he can keep fighting. He can, also, present the appearance of seeking "wise" counsel.
Rufus,
ReplyDeleteNothing high tech. It's 30 year technology used in a straight conversion to heat energy. Solar panels are used to heat water stored in barrels on the roof. Back then, it was decided this would be the most efficient to use of the technology.
The Fox News talking heads on Brit Humes show said that the Admirals and Generals in the Pentagon got Rumsfeld. Perhaps they have gotten "W" also, this James Baker and Kissinger crap has come at a time when the President just happens to be out of the country.
ReplyDeleteObscured By Clouds
ReplyDeleteHeaven send the promised land
Looks all right from where I stand
'cause I'm the man on the outside looking in
Waiting on the first step
Show me where the key is kept
Point me down the right line
Because it's time
to let me in from the cold
Turn my lead into gold
'cause there's a chill wind blowin' in my soul
and I think I'm growing old
Flash the readies
Wot's... uh the deal?
Got to make it to the next meal
Try to keep up with the turning of the wheel
Mile after mile, stone after stone
You turn to speak, but you're alone
Million miles from home, you're on your own
So let me in from the cold
Turn my lead into gold
'cause there's a chill wind blowin' in my soul
and I think I'm growing old
Fire bright by candle light and her by my side
Or if she prefers, we never stir again
Someone sent the promised land
and I grabbed it with both hands
Now I'm the man on the inside looking out
Hear me shout:
Come on in. What's the news? Where you been?
'Cause there's no wind left in my soul
and I've grown old
With that many people it's not too hard to lead the result in the direction you want to go, anyway, unless, that is, the direction is just obviously delusional.
ReplyDeleteKissenger running around blabbing with the Kuwaitis, various and sundry congressmen/senators throwing in their two cents worth. The Military "Giving Options," the MSM confused, for a change, about which way "Their heros, and heroines are going to go.
Ruf:
ReplyDeleteI hope you're right. Also, I have a hard time believing that George Bush is ready to chuck it in. Maybe the Baker and Kissinger suggestions about talking to Syria and Iran are trial balloons.
They better be.
It gives the "talking heads" somethng to talk about besides the car bomb three days ago, that killed a group of poor suicide "People" that got blowed up before they could get the kia out of the garage.
ReplyDeleteMeantime the troops are trudging forward, and a few more Iraqis are getting trained.
Btw, that was dedicated to old Europe. :D
ReplyDeleteYou know, I think I'm the only one here who finds it mildly comforting that the Iraqis are meeting with the Syrians, and the Iranians, etc.
ReplyDeleteMaybe, while everybody's doing all that talking the Marines can sneak up one somebody and kill them.
That'll get 'em about thirty days, not nearly enough.
ReplyDeleteThe boys have to put the hammer down in a big way, or figure a way out. Or both.
As to the EB and BC being ahead of the curve, usually by a couple of days, on breaking news, longer on stuff like the Air Bus story, almost two weeks, as I recall.
On the "directional" memes sometimes a month, before the herd caught up.
You see that the open minded of the "true believers" are tasting some doubt.
It is an unfamilar flavor to most of them.
The Politics will play out, but the Military has to show substanial progress in providing some real Security or the caldrun will boil over, here at home.
Mətušélaḥ said...
ReplyDeleteObscured By Clouds
You are the angel of death
And I am the dead man's son.
And he was buried like a mole in a fox hole.
And everyone is still on the run.
Bush talks Biofuels in Indonesia.
ReplyDeleteYou're right about that, Rat. I think the "relief valve" of all this studying and jawboning might get a "Couple" of months, but, SURELY he knows that he needs a WIN of some kind, fairly soon.
ReplyDeleteYep, another Socialist concern, there in Indodesia.
ReplyDeleteIt'll be full of payola and fraud
The country plans to invest a massive Rupee 200 trillion (€17.3 bn / US$22 bn) over the next five years to promote the use of alternative fuels using crops such as palm oil, cassava, jatropha and sugar cane for the production of biodiesel and ethanol Energy Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro said.
About $6 billion will be spent securing 6 million hectares (14.8 million acres) of land, in an as-yet-unspecified location, ..."
Senator Reid, Congressman Hastert will lead the way. About $500 USD per acre for Indonesia scrub land.
" ... and the rest will fund factories, roads and other supporting services, he said.
Central planning of bio fuels will lead to large scale failure. It alway does in other endevours, bio fuel just increased the opportunities for mismanagement.
Rat, that Palm oil is so Potent that it would be virtually "impossible" to fail. Actually, the Indonesian government isn't too bad. It may be a largely Muslim Nation but that SE Asian blood is pretty hard-wired into "doin bidness."
ReplyDeleteI'll bet it works out pretty good for them.
Whit and 2164 can relax--a California court has ruled that a web site is not liable for libel from third party posters. :)
ReplyDeleteThey have an ideal climate for oil palm. They'll probably get about 900 gallons of palm oil/acre.
ReplyDelete1 gal palm oil = 1 gal diesel
Plus, the palm oil business is labor intensive, and they have millions of poor rural folk who are not adverse to work.
The 200-page report says Australia should easily reach the federal government's production target of 350 million litres of ethanol and biodiesel by 2010, but faces rising costs and limited supplies of major feedstocks.
ReplyDeleteReport co-author and EnergyQuest chief executive Graeme Bethune said biofuel production capacity is likely to exceed 640 million litres a year by the end of 2007 and could reach 2,400 million litres by 2010.
Needs More Support
Sam, that's why This is So Important.
ReplyDeleteIt change all the cost/yield parameters.
Thanks for the link, Rufus. Man, reading that article, this ethanol thing is really taking off.
ReplyDeleteSam, I made several comments further up the link about why this one is so important, but, trust me, THIS IS HUGE!
ReplyDeleteIf you noticed they have cut their cost of production by over 80%. That means they're not only getting some ethanol out of the stalks, but they're burning them to drive the production. There are obviously NO FOSSIL FUELS INVOLVED!
I would guess that after selling the co-products they're producing the ethanol for about $0.50 gal, even at todays extremely high ($3.70/bu) Corn prices.
An acre of good Iowa farmland will produce about 650 gallons of ethanol, and as a co-product about 50 gallons of corn oil (biodiesel.) On top of that about 3,000 lbs of Distillers Dried Grains (top notch cattle feed.)
ReplyDeleteThey will, also, get about 3,000 lbs of CO2, and I would imagine they'll be set up to turn out a huge amount of fertilizer from the burning of the stover.
ReplyDeleteThe CO2 can be used to refresh old oil wells, but it can, also, be returned to the earth in the Terra Prata process to increase the fertility of the land, thus increasing the yield the next year.
ReplyDeleteIf were able to sequester enough CO2, I reckon we could create an army of Teresita's and lay siege to Habu's Montana fortress. That'd be a YouTube worth watching.
ReplyDeleteTerra Preta
ReplyDeleteG'nite all; I'm going to go dream about an army of Nano-Terra Preta Philipine Lesbos Sex Goddesses besieging Habu's Montana Redoubt.
ReplyDeleteHabu, 30-06 blazing, the air thick with cordite, the possumtater scouts harrassing the sapphos from the flanks, and ON the flanks.
Oh, the Humanity!
Possumtater scouts trained in surreptitious clitoral circumsizion attacking from THE REAR.
ReplyDeleteROFLMAO
ReplyDeleteTo Me, Sapphii!! For Ensler, Butler and St. Jones!!
ReplyDeletePossumDieter,
ReplyDeleteOctavia Butler lived in Seattle. Runtchard wrote about Seattle. T lives there, too- are you a friend in the “community” who happens to have better politics than she? My guess is that you’re Runtchard and Sausage Sommelier, at any rate.
?? :)
But who is St. Jones? Shirley from the Partridge Family?
Well, I just meant Mother Jones to be St. Jones
ReplyDeletenot sure if there was anyone canonized who'd fit the requisite bill.
I've not heard of Ms. Octavia... I meant Judith Butler.
Im from PA - watched Seattle vs the Steelers this past year. Those folks can write mean stuff on craigslist but thats about it. The rust belt rises again!
Ive seen both individual(s) youre talking about but thats about it im afraid. Both were pretty ridiculous ... id be lying if i said i wasn't amused by them at times, even a little egged on.
I thought it was rufus who said 3 people post between EB and BC. 2164th has me convinced c4 is wretchard now. I read C4 in wretchards voice...i cant help it!
I was joshing about Shirley. But that Judith’s a trip: On sex/gender from Bodies That Matter (Wiki cite):
ReplyDelete“Performativity cannot be understood outside of a process of iterability, a regularized and constrained repetition of norms. And this repetition is not performed by a subject; this repetition is what enables a subject and constitutes the temporal condition for the subject. This iterability implies that 'performance' is not a singular 'act' or event, but a ritualized production, a ritual reiterated under and through constraint, under and through the force of prohibition and taboo, with the threat of ostracism and even death controlling and compelling the shape of the production, but not, I will insist, determining it fully in advance.”
You sure you’re not R and SS? You’re all hypothecizing imaginating types— even your bio’s whimsically done!
C4 is not Wretchard, unless Wretchard is a Texan who served in the US Marines.
That was a super post you did at BC, working in “sceptre” (how often does that word get used?), even if you did pick one of the few good pundit-gods as a bad guy stand in :)
Bush resigns and atones for his constant lying wrt his "efforts" to curb illegal immigration and secure the border by coming clean, taking full responsibility for the feckless rudderlessness of his foreign "policy," resuscitating the reputation of President Cheney by admitting that he ignored the advice of those older and wiser than he, namely Richard Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, needlessly sacrificing some of our best and brightest by taking the advice of State Dept and others instead, leaving Syria and Iran unmolested in spite of their constant contributions to the chaos and destruction in Iraq.
ReplyDeleteCheney promptly makes up for lost time by calling on Rumsfeld to stay for the Duration, and they begin their retaliatory/preventive aerial punishment of previously untouched bases and supplies in these two sanctuaries of evil.
Rumsfeld makes up for his dangerous and provocative penny pinching ways by immediately begining a buildup of the size of all the services, replenishment of weapons and material, and relief and replenishment of the Gaurd and Reserves.
Special emergency orders are enacted requiring all schools and colleges receiving Federal aid to offer ROTC and JROTC, and providing year-round campus access for recruiters.
In spite of the additional expenses involved, overall spending is reduced by elimination of the prescription drug benefit and all Federal aid to illegal aliens. No child left behind is eliminated along with the Federal Dept of Education, and all school districts are ordered to provide vouchers to all parents requesting them.
Criminal aliens are immediately sent to massive new tent cities/prisons in the desert run by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and overcrowded jails and prisons are relieved by transferring all illegal's previously locked up in them to Joe's labor camps in the desert.
Sheriff Joe is tasked with providing plans and manpower for the National Guard to begin construction on the Border Fence ASAP.
Immigrant laborers performing meritoriously on the fence project will be rewarded with lavish vacations at W's ranch in Waco, catered by the staffs and Senators who voted for amnesty, and GWB is required to sleep under the stands at Ranger Stadium until construction of the fence is completed.
Mel Martinez is sent South as permanent ambassador to Tijuana, and Tom Tancredo is appointed head of the RNC.
The GWOT is wrapped up, and all mosques are closed prior to Cheney leaving office, as are CAIR and the ACLU.
Karen Hughes is sentenced to a re-education stint at the direction of Sheriff Joe.
World Peace Reigns, and the Orgasm for peace is made a permanent yearly event so that Rumsfeld and Cheney will always be remembered and honored by Straight Shooters across the fruited plains.
General Shinseki is brought out of retirement and tasked with providing special forces in the fence brigades with Berets and Hula Skirts.
ReplyDeleteRat:
ReplyDeleteFederally produced Palm is a...
SLAM DUNK!
I'll take my Medal of Freedom now, thank you!
Maybe W's last act before leaving office should be a Medal of Freedom for Janet Reno for cleaning up things in his immediate neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteGotta keep tabs on them Religious Extremists.
Survivors of Waco sentenced to re-education by Karen Hughes.
Th th, th, thank you, Mr. President!
ReplyDeleteDamn you Fox!
You spiked my Iced Tea!
Sam said,
ReplyDelete"Thanks for the link, Rufus. Man, reading that article, this ethanol thing is really taking off. "
---
Rufus's Ethanol thang has already reached escape velocity.
Headline:
ReplyDeleteGlobal Warming Solved!
CO2 displaced into Space by Ethanol Fumes and Bud Farts.
"Or wait for that preemptive strike against Iran. I'll wait with you, I'm younger by almost a decade, maybe I'll get to see it."
ReplyDelete---
UNFAIR!
This "man" is not a Veteran of the Summer of Love and the Decade of Chemical Re-education!
What right does he have to raise his voice in this August Forum?
(Unless perhaps he's a victim of that Fox Overmedication Syndrome, or a Survior of the Victims of 9-11.)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"In the Nam we beat the NVA to hell and back..it was people like you back home that undermined the war by giving comfort to the enemy.
ReplyDelete"
---
I've got a Video of DR doing the Maccarenna in Diapers with a picture of Ho Che Kimchi on them posted on YouTube.
Just search for: "Maccarenna Kimchi"
"I do not fault him for going with the intelligence he had. If he were an artillery man and was given bad coordinates. No problem.
ReplyDeleteBut once he found out they were wrong he has to adjust. "
Amen, and good night, brothers and Sister:
As Randy Shilts Wrote:
"And the Band Played On"
" Shilts was controversial among more radical members of the movement, some of whom labeled him a "gay Uncle Tom."
ReplyDeleteIn the mid-1980s, his stories "suggesting" (well documented by Dave Horowitiz citing health experts... but Jim Jones and Pelosi's Democrat Mafia in SF were well covered (up) by the local MSM and local locos.) that gay bathhouses in San Francisco were breeding grounds for AIDS made him a pariah, unable to walk through the city's Castro District without being jeered or spat upon.
When "And the Band Played On" came out, he was attacked for charging that gay groups initially pretended that AIDS did not exist. More recently, he was faulted for opposing the "outing" of prominent, closeted gays, including two four-star generals he described anonymously in "Conduct Unbecoming."
Shilts was hurt by such barbs, but refused to alter his message or obscure the truth to win friends.
"
""I can only answer that I tried to tell the truth and, if not be objective, at least be fair; history is not served when reporters prize trepidation and propriety over the robust journalistic duty to tell the whole story." "
ReplyDelete---
Thanks, DR, and Trish, for your contributions amidst the din of hero worship.
(link to Jerry Ford's accomplishment to be posted tomorrow to compare to present day "leaders.")
"Shilts learned he was infected with HIV the day he wrote the final page of
ReplyDelete"And the Band Played On" in March, 1987.
He had allowed his doctor to test him a year earlier, but asked not to be told the result, fearing it might influence his reporting.
He did not disclose his condition publicly until last year."
---
If only our "leader" had a similar devotion to the truth!
Doug,
ReplyDeletewhy you've turned into a pussy.
bush lied?
all men lie
you just did about six rants, all lies.
Habu:
ReplyDeleteNot all lies create serious threats to our National Security and future prosperity, as are W's wrt to his pathetic "efforts" to secure the border, stop the flow of criminals by the 10's of thousands and occasional terrorist infiltrators.
---
Exit plan benchmarks
---
President Bush's monumental blunders in post-Saddam Iraq have left no thrilling exit strategies. The idea of a unified, democratic, stable and nonsectarian Iraq is fatuous. An exit plan should be more earthbound. Its benchmarks should be fourfold: The United States should not appear to have been defeated by the terrorist insurgency; a civil war in Iraq should be averted; Iran should not be left to dominate the region; and U.S. troops should be withdrawn within 12 months.
Setting a fixed timetable for American troop withdrawals without more would be clearly deficient. Islamic fanatics would be seen to have defeated the "Great Satan" and recruitment into terrorist ranks would soar. Remember the enormous boost to al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden when the Islamic resistance in Afghanistan (supported by the United States) was seen to have triumphed over the then-superpower Soviet Union. The result was the rise of Taliban, and ultimately the terrorist attacks on America of September 11, 2001.
In addition, a troop withdrawal, simpliciter, guarantees a murderous civil war between Sunnis, Shi'ites, and Kurds...