Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/29/powell.iraq/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI CS/11/29/powell.iraq/index.html</a>
Originally Posted By mele Powell is just confused. He doesn't understand the situation. He's a traitor. Thought we could get that out of the way.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Iraq's violence meets the standard of civil war - Colin Powell "No it doesn't." Thought we'd get THAT out of the way too.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Well, who can trust what Powell says after that presentation at the UN?
Originally Posted By DAR It's actually a shame that in some circles Powell's name has been tarnished.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Okay, it's a civil war in Iraq. 1. Who gives a crap what it's officially called. 2. What's the end game? 3. Matt Lauer is a punk. 4. Colin Powell got raked over the coals the minute he decided to become a member of the Bush Administration.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Why do they call it a civil war anyways? There's nothing civil about it. Sorry, I was channeling Andy Rooney for a minute.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Honestly, I think all of the "civil war" talk is a calculated strategy by the administration that will precede a shift in the Iraq policy. The elections pretty much put the nail in the coffin of the "stay the course" strategy. Now, if you can get the pundits and some key respected Republicans to redefine the war as a "civil war," it provides some wiggle room to change the U.S. strategy there. The next thing you will be hearing is how the conflict has changed such that U.S. involvement is not as necessary in a civil affair. That's a lot better sounding than the alternative that we are stuck in a quagmire that can't be won and need to pull out before it gets even uglier.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I agree all that could be a possibility, except that President Bush is decidely not calling it a civil war.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj The President isn't calling it a civil war yet. He's having his minions and talking heads float the trial balloon first. Once it sticks, he'll use it to shift the strategy.
Originally Posted By jonvn It's been a civil war for a while, when the first insurgents started their attacks, and we did nothing to quell them and show others that we meant business. They found out early on we would do nothing if attacked, and that we behaved in an ineffectual manner since we got there. They have been building up their strengths and their financial abilities, and are now a force that will overthrow the current government soon enough. And they still operate because we continue to do nothing about it. And it might be that we are no longer in a position to do anything about it. Years of endless violence has radicalized a large segment of the population. Bush's utter incompetence in dealing with this entire situation will go down in history as one of the worst disasters this country has ever engaged in. And it will all be on the back of George W. Bush.
Originally Posted By ecdc "And didn't Matt Lauer call it a civil war first?" I don't know that he called it a civil war first, but he did announce that NBC had determined that the situation in Iraq warrants calling it a civil war in their news division, and that's how they'll refer to it.
Originally Posted By SuperDry Things are going just great in Iraq. In fact, I read all about it just yesterday in a soldier's blog. It's only the biased coverage from the drive-by MSM that makes you think otherwise. That's why liberals keep losing elections. There - glad I got that out.
Originally Posted By DAR <<In fact, I read all about it just yesterday in a soldier's blog.>> I recogonize the gist of that statement but it would be nice if all of us stopped for a minute to consider what the soldiers are thinking and not what we tell them.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<President Bush is decidely not calling it a civil war.>> Because if the administration actually officially recognized it as a civil war, then there would be no reason for us to remain there. Who's side would we be on?
