Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Do you want to leave Iraq now RT?>> I think the war may have been a mistake. I think both Bush and the Congress were influenced by intelligence that was faulty. I think we did it all wrong. I think we should have listened to the Generals that said we needed a whole lot more boots on the ground. My God... 41 had over half a million troops there during Desert Storm, and that didn't even involve an occupation. So do I think the war was a mistake? Maybe. Do I think the occupation has been horribly bungled... not by the guys on the ground but by the guys like Rumsfeld and his buddies? ABSOLUTELY! Should we leave now? No. We made the mess... we have an obligation to clean it up. We also owe it to the men and women who've lost their lives over there to try to accomplish SOMETHING.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA "He appears to be an incurious person. I think he’s very smart I don’t go with those who say he’s not smart. I think he’s very smart. But there’s a surprising lack of curiosity about things that most people think would be important if you’re sitting in that office." - Al Gore, speaking to Charlie Rose about President Bush.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>The amusing thing in all this is that other countries view you as Americans and don't think of you as Republicans or democrats or wrap you up in a political party!!<< I recall trying to explain this to a cabbie in Barcelona in 1994. His stereotype was that all Americans were pistol packing racists. Funny thing was he kept telling to watch out for gypsies, and how they can't be trusted, and how Catalonian culture was superior to Castilian (Spanish) culture.
Originally Posted By Dirk_D_from_Oregon --Should we leave now? No. We made the mess... we have an obligation to clean it up. We also owe it to the men and women who've lost their lives over there to try to accomplish SOMETHING.-- RT, Kerry and Feingold sent an email out to their supporters yesterday demanding a withdrawl. Most democrats are making this their position. Ironically, the democrats once again find themselves on the same page as the terrorists, how nice. Hillary, the one person you support is now a villian to the liberals in case you didn't notice. In other words, it's really messed up on the left because the kooks now have the loud voice over there. Hillary is dead in the water. Since your not a cut and run guy, which shows you have some common sense, you are in the same position as Joe Lieberman who is being pushed out of his party by the " new " democrats. The " progressives ". Make no mistake. If the democrats got their way and we left Iraq before the job was over, we will not be safer. The terrorists will treat the retreat like Somalia and will figure they can attack us at will because we won't fight to win. Disneyland would have a much higher chance of getting hit if democrats were in power. How's that. Tell me how I am wrong and how the democrats would make that possibility less likely.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Most democrats are making this their position. Ironically, the democrats once again find themselves on the same page as the terrorists, how nice.>> <<Tell me how I am wrong and how the democrats would make that possibility less likely.>> The U.S. Senate Democrats voted 38-6 AGAINST withdrawal. Your claim that most Democrats want to "cut and run" is clearly off base. Yes, the House Democrats voted for withdrawal, but that was largely an empty political move because they knew the prior Senate vote meant it had no chance. Even then, 43 House Democrats voted against withdrawal.
Originally Posted By Dirk_D_from_Oregon --The U.S. Senate Democrats voted 38-6 AGAINST withdrawal. Your claim that most Democrats want to "cut and run" is clearly off base.-- Don't look now, but the democrats in the Senate are going to vote again on cut and run in the next few days. It IS the democrat plan for the war on terror. They will never get their way because they are powerless, but they are exposing the big yellow stripe down their back and that is not going to play well come election time.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Don't look now, but the democrats in the Senate are going to vote again on cut and run in the next few days. It IS the democrat plan for the war on terror. >> You are flat out wrong on this. Don't look now, but it is still a MINORITY of Democrats who want a withdrawal deadline. <<Updated: 7:45 a.m. ET June 21, 2006 WASHINGTON - So much for consensus. Fissures in the Democratic Party over Iraq will be on display Wednesday when the Senate takes up two proposals to withdraw U.S. forces, touching off an election-year showdown between Republicans and Democrats. "Setting a deadline to redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq is necessary for success in Iraq," Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said in remarks planned for his introduction of a proposal that would require U.S. combat forces to begin leaving the war zone immediately and be out of Iraq completely by July 1, 2007. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid and most of his rank-and-file colleagues don't exactly agree. They back a separate nonbinding resolution that would not set such a hard-and-fast deadline. It would simply call for - not require - the administration to begin a phased redeployment of U.S. forces this year. "It's not a cut-and-run strategy. It does not set a fixed timetable or an arbitrary deadline for the redeployment of our troops," said Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. To that end, Levin said, "We believe it represents where a majority of our caucus is.">> Source: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13456702/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13 456702/</a>
Originally Posted By Dirk_D_from_Oregon RT, the democrats are calling for a pullout in one form or another. Some want to run, some want to jog, some want to walk out, but they all want to leave by a set date. This plays so into the terrorists hands it's scary. It's this lack of understanding that will keep the democrats as the minority party for years to come. Just ask a democrat what will happen in Iraq if we set a deadline and pull out before the Iraq government is ready. You might have to wait for your answer because they don't know and they don't care.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<RT, the democrats are calling for a pullout in one form or another. Some want to run, some want to jog, some want to walk out, but they all want to leave by a set date. >> Did you read the article? The majority of the Democrats are supporting a resolution that DOES NOT require a pullout by a set date. They are asking for (not requiring) a phased re-deployment beginning at the end of this year, which is EXACTLY what the administration has indicated it would like to do. The resolution sets no deadlines or requirements for the number of troops to be re-deployed.
Originally Posted By Shooba >>The resolution sets no deadlines or requirements for the number of troops to be re-deployed.<< Isn't this kind of pointless, if there are no actual goals specified? I guess it's better than the Republican plan, which could basically have troops there forever, no matter how much debt has to be racked up to do so.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan President Bush gave an update on the benchmarks for the end to this war in a speech last December. One could argue that even doing that 'plays into the hands of the terrorists.' Who sets the agenda here, us or the terrorists? I guess when the Iraq government is deemed 'ready' (I predict right before the GOP Convention in '08, sooner of the GOP gets its clock cleaned in the fall elections), the troops will leave quietly? And what happens if the Iraq government is declared 'ready' and then a bloodbath erupts? Do we go back into Iraq again? Only the first time it happens, or forever? These are all questions that ought to have been considered before the war, but anyone who asked such questions was pretty much shouted down as 'soft on terror' or something. In any case, they're the tough questions that we have to ask now and for the foreseeable future. It's easy to say stuff like "we have to finish the job, we don't cut and run" and it sounds great and all, but the devil, as always, is in the details.
Originally Posted By Dirk_D_from_Oregon --These are all questions that ought to have been considered before the war, but anyone who asked such questions was pretty much shouted down as 'soft on terror' or something. -- Those questions were considered and we are doing just what we said we were going to do. In fact, we are doing it very fast compared to other wars and reconstruction plans. The real question is why do some people insist of pushing defeat and surrender when we are winning? Will that make them fell better about America? The choice is clear. Vote for democrats if you want to quit and surrender the war on terror. Vote republican if you want to keep terrorists on the run by being on offense, a strategy that is working.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA If terrorists attacked Disneyland, would it then be less crowded? Would I be able to ride Big Thunder Mountain at 4:00 in the afternoon with just a walk-on? Perhaps the line to eat at the Blue Bayou would be shorter. All positives.
Originally Posted By deadmentellnotales If I was there when a terrorist attack took place I'd try to stop it. if i wasn't there I'd take a quick trip to it right afterword to show support. I remember on 9-11 I was doing a courier run for a bank so I had to go to SF to the federal reserve at 10 pm. I went over the Golden Gate and into a ghosttown, noone was in sight I saw maybe 1 other car on the road heading out of the city. My point? It's easy to be unsure and tepid. Thats a good thing if you have a large family or children, but me I'd show these people that their actions mean nothing to me. Moreover, Disney would probably need all the money they could get at that point.
Originally Posted By woody I want to address the topic... somewhat seriously. "What if terrorists attacked DLR or WDW?" I think the liberal elitists would be happy to see DLR or WDW destroyed with a bomb. They often think Disneyland is lowbrow entertainment and pure schlock. They would be happy to be rid of Disney's biggest symbol.
