News Article: Bush to give "clear" plan for success in Iraq tonight[views:6290][posts:81]______________________________ [Jun 28,2005 9:01pm - wade ""] the_reverend said:yeah, his speech sounded so much like his dad's as the economy was going to shit and his poles were sliding into the toilet. very neverous Did you hear him speaking at the joint press conference with the Iraqi PM? It was so staggeringly argumentative, his voice elevating as a point was trying to be made. sounded like me arguing with my wife...I'm really bad at arguing. I yell and contradict myself like the dad on American Chopper. I'd love to see a video of me arguing. My wife shoulda been a lawyer... |
| ______________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 9:07pm - the_reverend ""] yeah, and then the Iraqi PM did a conference on his own and was like "give us your money$$$$" I know the answer... [img] give him to gwar! |
| _______________________________ [Jun 28,2005 9:55pm - Lamp ""] eddienli said:Do people have no historical knowledge? Hoover by far dumbass. At least Hoover didn't get re-elected. |
| _________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 10:17pm - Distrust-Kevin ""] whiskey_weed_and_women said:I do not mean to exclude altogether the idea of patriotism. I know it exists, and I know it has done much in the present contest. But I will venture to assert, that a great and lasting war can never be supported on this principle alone. It must be aided by a prospect of interest, or some reward. - George Washington Yeah the reward will be shitloads of new factories and stuff to make goods for cheap labor. The ultimate goal I believe is to have nothing at all made in the USA that could be made somewhere else at a greater profit. I think they will be put to work making McDonalds Happy Meal toys and other sucky shit. As for OIL, shit, the internal combustion engine has been obselete for 50+ years. Totally obselete. |
| _________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 10:19pm - Distrust-Kevin ""] In other words, I think Bush wants the rest of the world to work for us. (most of it already does) |
| _________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 10:27pm - Distrust-Kevin ""] Like some of these illegals I sometimes see on construction sites I work at (I do commercial masonry) who come up here in the busy season, work all summer under the table and go back to Central America and LIVE LARGE off the money they make here since our money is worth more. They don't even call them illegal aliens anymore. The new term is "undocumented workers" I can't really blame THEM however. I would do the same thing if I lived in a Central American slum. The blame falls upon those who hire these people under the table, and our government for doing a TERRIBLE JOB at border protecion. If the American contractors only realized the ripple effect of hiring illegals to make the quick buck a little quicker, and lived with honor, blah blah blah blah blah................................................. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 10:29pm - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] ah yes by going to other countries and having them do jobs white people are far too cool to do. i'm sure it really profits us by having all our jobs being taken up by cheap labor. good thinking, go global economics ! |
| ____________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 10:41pm - eddienli ""] Lamp said:eddienli said:Do people have no historical knowledge? Hoover by far dumbass. At least Hoover didn't get re-elected. well whos fault is that? |
| _______________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:09pm - wade ""] and the ol' feeling of futility kicks in... |
| _______________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:12pm - the_reverend ""] eddienli said:well whos fault is that? gays. they really shouldn't be allowed to kiss. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:14pm - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] the_reverend said:eddienli said:well whos fault is that? gays. they really shouldn't be allowed to kiss. it's true Paul Stanley should stay away from Gene Simmons and vice versa ! |
| ___________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:19pm - dan_bloodblister ""] any real KISS fan knows that as much as paul seems like the gay one, the one with the real homosexual tendencies is ACE. ipso facto. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:20pm - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] dan_bloodblister said:any real KISS fan knows that as much as paul seems like the gay one, the one with the real homosexual tendencies is ACE. ipso facto. i am the furthest thing from a Kiss fan, i dont enjoy their music in the least. :stupidflanders: |
| ___________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:25pm - dan_bloodblister ""] its ok, we all have our faults. |
| _______________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:27pm - the_reverend ""] I know who has the gayest tendencies in throwing shrapnel... but I'll never tell *jingle**jingle* |
| _________________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:49pm - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] the_reverend said:I know who has the gayest tendencies in throwing shrapnel... but I'll never tell *jingle**jingle* pffft leave Davius alone he can't help it, he's greek italian :ralphie: |
| _______________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:50pm - the_reverend ""] that's what my prom date said. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jun 28,2005 11:52pm - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] the_reverend said:that's what my prom date said. [img] |
| __________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 1:24am - BestialOnslaught ""] dan_bloodblister said:BestialOnslaught said: The past 4 years have been a definite period of stretching executive authority, perhaps further than in any other presidency so far, so I don't think it's totally out of bounds or ignorant to assess Bush to be the worst. if thats what we are going on, then maybe abraham lincoln should be considered the worst president...after all he suspended writs of haebus corpus a HUGE overstepping of his presidential bounds.. I am not saying he's worse for stretching the power of the executive branch, but that the degree to which it is stretched now means an incompetent/corrupt president in this era has the power to fuck more up than, say, a president of 100 years ago, or even 30... Lincoln's intent was not, to my knowledge, to suspend habeus corpus indefinitely, but simply for the extent of the war with the South, which was a much more clear cut, simply defined conflict than the "War On Terror", which could seemingly be an unending source of excuse for the Republicans' destruction of civil rights. |
| ________________________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 1:54am - ryan from HBBSI never logs in ""] the_reverend said:I know who has the gayest tendencies in throwing shrapnel... but I'll never tell *jingle**jingle* i dont know man, this guy has a name like whiskey weed and women and i know he doesnt smoke or drink so i just assumed he was 3 for 3 and doesnt like all 3 of the above |
| ________________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 2:21am - whiskey_weed_and_women ""] ryan from HBBSI never logs in said:the_reverend said:I know who has the gayest tendencies in throwing shrapnel... but I'll never tell *jingle**jingle* i dont know man, this guy has a name like whiskey weed and women and i know he doesnt smoke or drink so i just assumed he was 3 for 3 and doesnt like all 3 of the above true yet i'm a sexist, so go figure. |
| ____________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 2:33am - poopsmcgee ""] the_reverend said:oops.. I think people are going to get confused between this thread and the korn singer thread hahahahahaha |
| _________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 9:34am - soloman ""] just saw that GWAR pic. that's excellent. |
| ________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 11:47am - exhumed4death ""] wasnt this supposed to give a clear cut plan of action in iraq? he just said the same exact thing he always said, and offered no plan at all or any shift in course of action. not that i really though he would or anything, but i thought he would at least give us something new, instead of the usual everythings going exactly as planned, go to sleep america, or watch the premier of I want to be a Hilton, then go to sleep... |
| _____________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 11:48am - anonymous ""] reality tv is the new american gladiators |
| ___________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 11:57am - dan_bloodblister ""] american gladiators should be the new american gladiators. i miss that shit |
| __________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 12:00pm - soloman ""] the arsenal was my favorite. |
| _______________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 12:12pm - BobNOMAAMRooney nli ""] I'm sure Mike Adamle has nothing better to do. |
| ___________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 1:10pm - wade nli ""] From the American Progress. -Wade A Wasted Opportunity In a primetime address to the nation on Iraq last night, Bush wasted a precious opportunity to level with the American public about the struggle we face ahead of us in Iraq, the mistakes that have been made, and the need to change course. Instead, we heard a president who had only two objectives on his mind: 1) wrap 9-11 and Iraq together to help bolster his public approval and support for the war; and 2) stubbornly refuse to change course. As the New York Times noted in an editorial today, Bush "raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks." The speech "offered few new ideas for dealing with an insurgency that has claimed more than 1,700 American lives" and "rejected any change in course, ruling out either a deadline for troop withdrawals or an increase in troop levels." HOW BUSH TURNED IRAQ INTO A TERRORIST TRAINING GROUND: The thrust of President Bush's address last night was that the Iraq war has now become the "latest battlefield" in the war on terror, and that we must "defeat [the terrorists] abroad before they attack us at home." There is little doubt, as a new CIA report concludes and director Porter Goss said previously, that Iraq has become the new Afghanistan -- the training ground for the next generation of insurgent fighters. But Iraq certainly wasn't this type of breeding ground before the war. In fact, one rationale Bush proffered for the war was to prevent Iraq from becoming "a training ground" for terrorists. Bush said in November 2002: "Imagine a terrorist network with Iraq as an arsenal and as a training ground..." We don't have to imagine anymore; Bush's war has made it a reality due to the whole host of mistakes that were made in the post-war phase. THE 9-11 STRATEGY: Last night, President Bush called on Americans to remember "the lessons of September 11th." Coming on the heels of Karl Rove's politicization of the 9-11 attacks, it seems clear the White House has turned to the aid of that tragic day to help prop up a reeling president. In a speech littered with references to 9-11, Bush circumvented the real problems facing U.S. forces in Iraq by attempting to inspire imagery of another attack on our homeland. The Washington Post helped propagate Bush's deception: "[C]ritics long have accused Bush of falsely drawing a connection between Iraq and Sept. 11 as a way to justify the original decision to launch the war in Iraq. That was not the point Bush made last night." Oh really? Here's what Bush said last night: "The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. The war reached our shores on September the 11th, 2001." The argument that we had to go to war in Iraq because we were attacked on 9-11 is blatantly false. And Bush knows it -- he previously said he "couldn't make that claim" that Iraq was connected to 9-11 and that he had "no evidence" that Saddam was connected to 9-11. Yet, it appears that not everyone has caught on to the deception. BUSH FAILED TO BE CANDID ABOUT THE REAL PROBLEMS: As the daily toll of America's sacrifice in lives and dollars in Iraq continues to increase, Bush did little last night to allay the fears of those who see no end in sight. Moreover, he gave little impression that he understands the nature of the insurgency raging in Iraq. Bush declined to weigh in on the dispute between Rumsfeld and Cheney about whether the insurgency is in its "last throes" or will last another decade. He described the insurgents as filled with "blind hatred" yet he did not comment on Rumsfeld's confirmation that the U.S. is now negotiating with the those insurgents. Bush failed to admit any mistakes that have been made (and thus give any indication that he has corrected course), and he failed to explain any new strategy for winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis, defeating the terrorist insurgents, reconstructing Iraq, and bringing our troops home. BUSH RECYCLED OLD IDEAS AS "NEW": Bush claimed last night to offer "three new steps" which weren't new at all. His supposed three new ideas were to "partner coalition units with Iraqi units," embed "transition teams" inside Iraqi units (if you don't know the difference between those two, you're not alone), and third, work with the Iraqi Ministries of Interior and Defense to "coordinate anti-terrorism operations" (which is really newsworthy only because the coordination apparently wasn't taking place before). In May 2004, Bush delivered a much-hyped speech at the Army War College that was supposed to outline "specific steps" for achieving our goals in Iraq. In that address, he said we were working with Iraqi forces to establish both a "chain of command" and an improved "vetting and training" process. Bush also said in that May 2004 speech that "America and other countries will continue to provide technical experts to help Iraq's ministries of government." The media wasn't fooled into thinking that Bush was offering anything new last night. The New York Times reported, Bush "offer[ed] no new strategies in a war that has now stretched for 25 months," and he delivered what was "in essence, a repeat of a speech he delivered 13 months ago...during an appearance at the Army War College." |
| __________________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 3:21pm - BestialOnslaught ""] I wish the Dems would stand up and say "No! The Iraqi insurgents would NOT be fighting us here in the US were our armed forces not in Iraq. They'd be living their lives as usual in Baathist Iraq." Sure, there are some Al Qaeda operatives involved in parts of the insurgency, but most are simply normal Iraqis fighting for: a) freedom from the US troops and the US puppet government and b) their religious sect, in a conflict centuries old. They need to call him on more than just the phoney 9/11-Iraq connections, but in fact his whole definition of the "War On Terror", which hardly seems to have any consistency at all. |
| ______________________________________ [Jun 29,2005 3:29pm - the_reverend ""] no cheap gas and freedom for you, commie. bush reminds me of dennis hopper in the new land of the dead movie.... but I won't spoil it. |
| ______________________________ [Jun 29,2005 5:59pm - wade ""] BestialOnslaught said:I wish the Dems would stand up and say "No! The Iraqi insurgents would NOT be fighting us here in the US were our armed forces not in Iraq. They'd be living their lives as usual in Baathist Iraq." Sure, there are some Al Qaeda operatives involved in parts of the insurgency, but most are simply normal Iraqis fighting for: a) freedom from the US troops and the US puppet government and b) their religious sect, in a conflict centuries old. They need to call him on more than just the phoney 9/11-Iraq connections, but in fact his whole definition of the "War On Terror", which hardly seems to have any consistency at all. Dems have no balls. when they do, their moderate bullshit colleagues scorn 'em...now is not the time to pipe down, ya know? |