Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0" target="_blank">http://www.time.com/time/natio n/article/0</a>,8599,1548061,00.html?cnn=yes Ya think?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0" target="_blank">http://www.time.com/time/natio n/article/0</a>,8599,1548061,00.html
Originally Posted By mele I don't think anything after a comma will work as a link. <a href="http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2EF3100E" target="_blank">http://makeashorterlink.com/?N 2EF3100E</a>
Originally Posted By alexbook Wow. Talk about changing the subject quickly. Check the statements before and after the place I marked: >>TIME: Mr. Vice President, if you had to take back any one thing you'd said about Iraq, what would it be? CHENEY: I expressed the sentiment some time ago that I thought we were over the hump in terms of violence, I think that was premature. I thought the elections would have created that environment. And it hasn't happened yet. [***ABRUPT TRANSITION HERE***] The other thing that I'd mention, too, not really in response to your question: I'm struck by the fact that what's being attempted here is to break our will. [New York Times columnist Thomas] Friedman has got an interesting piece today on it, talking about the extent to which the enemy in this stage in Iraq aim very much at the American people... [they] use the media to gain access through technical means that are available now on the Internet and everything else to create as much violence as possible, as much bloodshed as possible and get that broadcast back into the United States as a way to try to shape opinion and influence the outcome of our debate here at home. And I think some of that is going on, too.<<
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Yes, and that's so typical, too. The claim that the only thing that can lead to failure in Iraq is somehow a failure of will, brought on presumably by people who disagree with the policy, and those who disagree with the policy are (it is strongly hinted) mere dupes of the bad guys in Iraq - as opposed to the policy itself being wrongheaded and its execution incompetent.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I am not as convinced the policy is wrong, or that the decision to go there was wrong based on what is known, the execution however has been just bad...or totally miscalculated or both. If more troops were needed they should have been added. If we weren't ready for this ( equipment wise ) - then it shouldn't have happened... the execution is not the fault of the soldiers,let me be real clear on that, but leadership who misjudged the size and scope of the task.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>and those who disagree with the policy are (it is strongly hinted) mere dupes of the bad guys in Iraq<< That's the way these guys like to shut down debate on the topic of Iraq. It's just the latest variation of 'if you're not with us, you're against us.' They ('they' being Rumsfeld and Cheney) completely downplayed what would be involved in Iraq. I dont know if they truly believed their own rhetoric, or if it was wishful thinking, or what. But it's sure cost a lot of lives, and given the president incredibly low approval ratings. And are they sorry for it? No, they change the subject.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Just yesterday, cheney went on rush's show, assured of nice comfy softballs lobbed his way. On iraq, he said - >> If you look at the general overall situation, they’re doing remarkably well. << Of course he doesn't substantiate that comment with any specifics. How could he? This month is on track to be the deadliest ever, baghdad is currently only receiving electricity for about two hours a day - the lowest since the invasion, and the vaunted generals that bush said he'll only listen to are saying that "it's not working". <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/world/middleeast/20iraqcnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10 /19/world/middleeast/20iraqcnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin</a> (registration req'd) BAGHDAD, Oct. 19 — The American military’s stepped-up campaign to staunch unrelenting bloodshed in the capital under an ambitious new security plan that was unveiled in August has failed to reduce the violence, a military spokesman said Thursday. Instead, attacks have actually jumped more than 20 percent over the first three weeks of the holy month of Ramadan, compared to the previous three weeks, said Gen. William Caldwell, the military’s chief spokesman in Iraq. By almost any measure, the situation in the capital is in a downward spiral. Last month, General Caldwell said in a briefing that suicide attacks were at an all-time high. << But see - bush and cheney and rumsfeld don't want you to know this. Instead they fan out to the 'drive-by media' to issue feel good statements that have no basis in reality. It doesn't matter, because their supporters have shown time and again that they'll believe anything this bunch says - even when it flies in the face of reality. So things in iraq are going remarkably well. And that's that. If you hear differently from some other source, dismiss it as part of the liberal media who want us to fail in iraq so that bush looks bad.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 What amazes me is that people on the left take time to listen to Rush / Robertson, and those on the right try to catch something from Air America / M Moore / A Franken etc... None of them gets any of my time, none are worth it
Originally Posted By gadzuux I don't spend all that much time listening to either - I see media reports after the fact. It's not rush that's important, it's cheney. When he gives an interview, it's guaranteed to be with some fauning sychophant who won't ask him any tough questions.
Originally Posted By jonvn I never listen to Rush. Rarely I listen to Air America. Mostly, I listen to my David Sedaris audio books. Lately, anyway.
Originally Posted By patrickegan It is a lack of will! If we had the will Saddam did, say with the wood chipped squads, chemical weapons, disappearing dissidents and a nice stalemate with Iran, Iraqi would be basking in the glory of law and order!
Originally Posted By gadzuux Well, we had abu ghraib - just like saddam. Look how well that turned out. Of course, it blew up into a huge scandal. The bush administration's response was to go and make torture legal. Now it's no longer a problem. A GOP solution to a GOP problem. If the law prohibits what you're doing, change the law.
Originally Posted By woody >>A GOP solution to a GOP problem. If the law prohibits what you're doing, change the law.<< Many Democrats voted for the law. Either they believe in it too, or they are cowards, or maybe more correctly, they have no principles. I think Democrats are just political animals. They want to win. Damn the principles.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I think Democrats are just political animals. They want to win. Damn the principles." You're confused. That's Karl Rove's credo.
