Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/21/iraq.poll/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI CS/08/21/iraq.poll/index.html</a> 61% disapprove of war in Iraq, while barely over 1/3 of Americans approve. We can only hope this translates into change in November.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy And then what?? Cut and run baby!! Surrender!! We can't win!!! We run wars by CNN polls!!! Iran and the terrorists thank you for being so gutless! I love how libs listen to their own rigged polls and say this is how the president should make decisions.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I'm not happy with the war. I'm not happy with any wars. But, we can't just up and leave right now or we will be turning right around and going back in...this time taking on MORE of the region.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy You go that right Wahoo. Part of the low approval rating for the war by the way is the fact that we are not really fighting it hard enough it seems. But the democrat " plan " of running away like we did in Somalia when Bubba was running the show is not the answer.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I'm not happy with the war. I'm not happy with any wars. But, we can't just up and leave right now or we will be turning right around and going back in...this time taking on MORE of the region.< this is the rub....cutting and leaving willnot end the terrorism against us either, in fact all one has to do is watch the TV the last week ( CNN or FOX - take your pick) - and anyone who thinks Iran is not gearing up for more than electricity is being less than honest with themselves. Remember we were NOT in Iraq when 9/11 happened....tothink that leaving there immediately makes us safer is also wrong. Do I have all the answers - no. Do I think the war in Iraq is going well or is being run correctly since we've been there - no. But just leaving makes us no safer tomorrow than today... that is the real issue.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<Remember we were NOT in Iraq when 9/11 happened....tothink that leaving there immediately makes us safer is also wrong.>> vbdad, I know you are on the fence on who to support but one thing is certain. The democrats will pull us out of Iraq if they get into power regadless of the results it causes. They have flat out said it again and again.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd Shhh, there there, it's democrats who are going to take over, not ignorant lying republicans. While an ignorant lying republican might think their only alternative is to "cut and run", there are many many alternatives, which are time sensitive, and can not be discussed until the number one problem, bush, and all the republican traitors, who support him.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <<<Remember we were NOT in Iraq when 9/11 happened....tothink that leaving there immediately makes us safer is also wrong.>> vbdad, I know you are on the fence on who to support but one thing is certain. The democrats will pull us out of Iraq if they get into power regadless of the results it causes. They have flat out said it again and again.< which is exactly why I have said all along that many moderates are not particularly thrilled with either party right now and looking for a candidate and platform to support -- cut and run may be what was used to sway 51% of 35% of the voters in Connecticut - but it won't fly nationwide.... And to sell it as the answer won't work either. I'd like to see a real plan to deal with Hezbollah and Iran before this thing gets further out of hand.. and a roundup of our real allies in the world ( maybe Germany today again - but sure as hell not France again ) - and figure out what is the best action before the war comes home.... add to that someone who actually will speak honestly, not partisanly about the state of the economy and jobs as well as address the immigration issue.. so yes, I am on the fence...but I am still waiting for the parade to go by
Originally Posted By YourPalEd The thing that is so ludicrous about the republican is how obvious their ploy is. First, they attack a weak country, iraq, which had been weak since the 92 bush war decimated them. Hey that was successful. Do you remember why bush senior lost. I do. He lies constantly too, bush sr., you know, a very sad man, very alone, even more than you and i. While we hate war, all through clinton's administrations, there were still bombing runs on any form of military buildup in iraq. The values of the known traitor, george bush, are diametrically opposed to doing anything about anything. This is especially true about war. Since we are the strongest he wants to beat everyone up, before they know what happened. I guess he thinks he gains respect, but what will happen is everyone will gangup on him back. It happens every time.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<I'd like to see a real plan to deal with Hezbollah and Iran before this thing gets further out of hand.>>> I think this is the opposite of george bush's plan. I wish he would listen to you. He might be doing his best, but not towards peace.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> Remember we were NOT in Iraq when 9/11 happened << Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. >> to think that leaving there immediately makes us safer is also wrong. << But if staying there indefinitely also doesn't make us safer (and arguably increases our danger), why stay? Because of our love for the iraqi people? That's pretty much the argument that the GOP has been reduced to. >> 61% disapprove of war in Iraq, while barely over 1/3 of Americans approve. << Bush makes a lot of big talk about his love of democracy. But isn't our government supposed to represent the will of the people? Americans are lining up 2 to 1 against the war, yet bush's message is that "we're not leaving as long as I'm president". Another quote from his press conference - >> "What's very interesting about the violence in lebanon and the violence in iraq and the violence in gaza is this - these are all groups of terrorists who are trying to stop the advance of democracy". << The hamas government in gaza was democratically elected. Hezbollah is an active part of the democratically elected government of lebanon. Iraq happily voted themselves a muslim theocracy. So democracy is blossoming throughout the middle east, just as bush "says" he wants. Yet he's not happy with the results. >> The democrats will pull us out of Iraq if they get into power regadless of the results it causes. << I can turn that quote around on you. The GOP thrust us into a needless war in iraq with no heed to the results it caused. Do you really think iraq is better today than in january `01 when bush took office? >> add to that someone who actually will speak honestly << That's asking too much of W. Didja hear the comment he made about the justifications for the iraq war yesterday? Something along the lines of "no one in this administration ever said that iraq ordered the attack on 9/11". That's not what the accusation is. But the statement he actually made is so carefully parsed that it's a weaselly intent to mislead while saying something that's technically correct. And it's not the kind of thing that he's smart enough to think of 'on the fly'. No - he went into that press conference with the phrase pre-written by someone else, with the deliberate intent to confuse and mislead dumb or inattentive listeners. Just like always. How low is that?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <>> Remember we were NOT in Iraq when 9/11 happened << Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. the points beingmade by many are if wepull out of Iraq and stop bullying the muslim fanatics - we will be safer.. the point is we were attacked long before we went into Iraq - and pulling out will not stop another attack-- I never said 9/11 + IRAQ now did 1 ?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I can turn that quote around on you. The GOP thrust us into a needless war in iraq with no heed to the results it caused. Do you really think iraq is better today than in january `01 when bush took office? < and do you think it will be better tomorrow if we leave ?
Originally Posted By ecdc Why are we there in the first place? Bush got asked, point blank the other day, what the connection between 9/11 and Iraq was. His answer? "None." It's time to determine a timetable to leave because we've done no good for America and we continue to do no good for America. The only reason to stay is because we've created a terrorist environment in Iraq that didn't exist before we were there. A handful of low level terrorists lived there, but they did not attack within Iraq. Now they're doing just that and they've been able to recruit thousands more. How many times must it be said: Iraq was not a threat, it was never a threat, there were no WMDs; our young men and women are dying for nothing over there. It's a ridiculous waste that is supported largely by men and women who have never seen war and will never see it up close. They spout off meaningless phrases about "freedom" and "finishing the job" when we don't even know what the job is, but they would never have their own children join up or join up themselves. It's the ultimate in cowardice.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> the points being made by many are if we pull out of Iraq and stop bullying the muslim fanatics - we will be safer. << That's not my point. I'd say that nothing we're doing in iraq is making us any safer, and likely is increasing our danger. The way to make us safer is to reprioritize who and how we are fighting, as well as to take greater steps to secure our own ports and borders. It's becoming a foregone conclusion that iraq will be partitioned - either sooner or later. So lets make it sooner. But bush won't hear of it. It's "stay the course" straight through the end of his term, with no acknowledgement that it's his administration and this course that has made hash out of the middle east. But he's too proud to admit to bungling the whole operation, and stubbornly insists that we don't change a thing. It ain't working, and it's dragged on longer than WWII. I think we could reasonably consider other approaches. Except we can't because bush says so. Is this acceptable?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <It ain't working, and it's dragged on longer than WWII< 1939 - 1945 6 years / Iraq 2003 -2006 ? my math must be bad ? Also remember how WWII ended and what caused the end - do the same to Iran and Iraq and the war probably ends this time also - is that what you're advocating ? I highly doubt it If not - then you can't compare
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Gadzuux pretty much sums up the liberal democrat gameplan on Iraq. Here goes. Iraq was a lie by Bush. Iraq was better with Saddam. We can't possible win in Iraq. We might as well leave now because we are going to lose anyway. When we do leave all will be fine in the world..or it won't change much. See, this is who these people are and why such ignorance about history and terrorsim makes them beyond dangeerous if they were to trick people into voting for them. Want to see what is going to happen with the dems? Ned Lamont is what is going to happen. The " we can't win a war" crowd is so not American they are doomed, doomed to defeat and deep down they know it. These losers hae a plan all right... surrender to the Muslims who take surrender as a green light to kill all of us. I just can't get over how stupid a group of people can be when all they have to do is look at how their man McGovern did when he pulled the same surrender routine. Hey libs... Americans don't want to act like the French. Nice campain strategy though. Get ready to blame the voting machines come this November and 08.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd There is no such thing as libs, or harvey the rabbit. No i personally know exactly what an intelligent, honest democrat would do, which of course would solve all of bushes problems instantly. It's pretty obvious to all, but those who do not have the skills. They will communicate.
