Originally Posted By Dabob2 <The term " exit strategy " is a form of surrender.> I believe it was coined by Colin Powell for the first Gulf War. (I could be wrong about that.) You know, the one that had a reasonable plan and went well. And in which we did not surrender.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy The way the dems use " exit strategy " is a term for losing and leaving. The exit strategy has always been the same in Iraq.. victory. We have discussed in detail what victory is and what it means, but it goes ignored by the left. They would rather claim Bush lied without any evidence or proof.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'd like some Republican answers, Beau. Taking away the concept of lying for a moment, because I'm afraid we'll never know about that part of it and also, I don't buy so much into the Bush lied stuff as it relates to this war.... does it concern you at all that the intelligence we had turned out to be so wrong re: WMDs? Do you care to ever get to the bottom of how that came to be? Or is that of no concern to you? I mean, I can accept that there was general agreement that Saddam had WMDs. But it troubles me that none were there. What other sorts of things does "everyone know" that may be wrong about other threatening countries? If the WMDs were, as some believe, spirited away to other places, doesn't it concern you that this could happen while the whole bloody world had its eyes on Iraq?
