The Dems believe that a problem can be solved by running away from it. If you support them, you get ‘Murtha-ed’, who now won’t get his piece of the spoils. (Shocking!!) Since the Dems got about 55% of the recent vote, all I can say is: Run, little mice, run away!!
If the GOP would have kept their promises in the ‘Contract with American’ you would not be crying like a wheezing beotch right now.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
If the GOP would have kept their promises in the ‘Contract with American’ you would not be crying like a wheezing beotch right now.[/quote]
What?
dayum
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
If the GOP would have kept their promises in the ‘Contract with American’ you would not be crying like a wheezing beotch right now.
What?[/quote]
I think he means “asthmatic bitch.”
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Note that while my views are generally liberal, I have repeatedly posted that more troops are needed in Iraq to stabilize the region before you can pull out.
It’s nice to see that at least a few generals agree with me.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
If the GOP would have kept their promises in the ‘Contract with American’ you would not be crying like a wheezing beotch right now.
What?
I think he means “asthmatic bitch.”
[/quote]
Ordinarily Pookie I wouldn’t wish an illness on anyone, but with you I hereby make an exception. You are simply a vitriolic turd. Adios, shithead.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Ordinarily Pookie I wouldn’t wish an illness on anyone, but with you I hereby make an exception. You are simply a vitriolic turd. Adios, shithead.[/quote]
Aw, you’re so cute when you’re angry.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Aw, you’re so cute when you’re angry.
[/quote]
Yeah, kinda like a pissed off little kitty, isn’t he?
Well, the criticism has been that Rummy ignored the advice of Generals and Commanders. Perhaps, Democrats can make an about face, and lead by example. As of now, their leaders are floating the withdrawal/troop reductions plans pretty hard. Will they take the advice of these same Generals? Or will they too ‘ignore’ their advice?
I don’t think I’m being biased here. It’s an honest question as to how the Democrats are going to react to these often cited ‘ignored’ military leaders. Which direction will the Democrats go?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, the criticism has been that Rummy ignored the advice of Generals and Commanders. Perhaps, Democrats can make an about face, and lead by example. As of now, their leaders are floating the withdrawal/troop reductions plans pretty hard. Will they take the advice of these same Generals? Or will they too ‘ignore’ their advice? [/quote]
Unfortunately, my guess is that they will go with what seems popular, rather than try to fix the situation. Public support for the war has all but dried up.
The public outcry would be huge if more troops were committed. The only possible - and remotely at that - solution would be for allies to join the effort. I don’t see how that would ever happen. The US would have to kiss way too much ass.
Odds are the troops will be pulled out slowly; and we’ll be left with a huge mess that’ll make trouble for at least another generation.
Thank you, George, Dick and Donald.
I love how you make sweeping generalizations like “The Dems …” like you know what you’re talking about and they’re even one, single discrete group. I don’t think it’s fair to do with the GOP either. The closest that can fairly be made is general declarations about the dumbasses in the Bush administration. Fortunately, they’re not representative of the entire GOP. Unfortunately, there wasn’t enough challenge to their decisions and viewpoitns.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, the criticism has been that Rummy ignored the advice of Generals and Commanders. Perhaps, Democrats can make an about face, and lead by example. As of now, their leaders are floating the withdrawal/troop reductions plans pretty hard. Will they take the advice of these same Generals? Or will they too ‘ignore’ their advice?
Unfortunately, my guess is that they will go with what seems popular, rather than try to fix the situation. Public support for the war has all but dried up.
I don’t think I’m being biased here. It’s an honest question as to how the Democrats are going to react to these often cited ‘ignored’ military leaders. Which direction will the Democrats go?
The public outcry would be huge if more troops were committed. The only possible - and remotely at that - solution would be for allies to join the effort. I don’t see how that would ever happen. The US would have to kiss way too much ass.
Odds are the troops will be pulled out slowly; and we’ll be left with a huge mess that’ll make trouble for at least another generation.
Thank you, George, Dick and Donald.
[/quote]
Yes. We can’t stay indefinitely, and there’s little reason to believe we won’t be left with something worse than what we had before we went in when we finally have to leave.
Filling a 22-gallon tank in Baghdad with low-grade fuel costs just $1.10, plus a 50-cent tip for the attendant. A tankful of high-test costs $2.75.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001949017_cheapgas06.html
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, the criticism has been that Rummy ignored the advice of Generals and Commanders. Perhaps, Democrats can make an about face, and lead by example. As of now, their leaders are floating the withdrawal/troop reductions plans pretty hard. Will they take the advice of these same Generals? Or will they too ‘ignore’ their advice?
I don’t think I’m being biased here. It’s an honest question as to how the Democrats are going to react to these often cited ‘ignored’ military leaders. Which direction will the Democrats go?
[/quote]
Iraq is Bush’s mess and if the Democrats are smart they will lean on him to do something.
He is the Commander-in-Chief and he is the only one that can make a change.
Democrats can cut funding but that is not going to happen.
We stayed in Vietnam for 10 years after Nixon took office and Iraq will not be any different.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Blah Blah blah, I’m a completely insane delusional wingnut whom no one listens to in real life so I must start thread after retarded thread in the politics forum showing everyone that I do, in fact, live in my own little world in Ohio and have nearly no idea what I’m talking about. Ever.
I apologize for this, my fifteenth retarded thread in so many days.
[/quote]
It’s OK Headhunter. No harm. We all go crazy once in a while…for a couple years.
Headhunter, do your students throw erasers at you when you have your back turned? I would.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, the criticism has been that Rummy ignored the advice of Generals and Commanders. Perhaps, Democrats can make an about face, and lead by example. As of now, their leaders are floating the withdrawal/troop reductions plans pretty hard. Will they take the advice of these same Generals? Or will they too ‘ignore’ their advice?
I don’t think I’m being biased here. It’s an honest question as to how the Democrats are going to react to these often cited ‘ignored’ military leaders. Which direction will the Democrats go?
Iraq is Bush’s mess and if the Democrats are smart they will lean on him to do something.
He is the Commander-in-Chief and he is the only one that can make a change.
Democrats can cut funding but that is not going to happen.
We stayed in Vietnam for 10 years after Nixon took office and Iraq will not be any different.[/quote]
That’s the absolute worst advice to give the democrats. There was a clear mandate concerning Iraq. Doesn’t matter if Bush will adopt a democrat backed plan, they had best produce one. Or, the voters are going to remember that the democrats sat on their thumbs when given the chance.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
That’s the absolute worst advice to give the democrats. There was a clear mandate concerning Iraq. Doesn’t matter if Bush will adopt a democrat backed plan, they had best produce one. Or, the voters are going to remember that the democrats sat on their thumbs when given the chance.[/quote]
You are drinking a little bit too much kool aid here.
It’s a nice fantasy to want to blame the democrats for whatever happens next, but you should face the reality that the commander in chief is going to have to call the shots while he is in office.
Sorry, but that’s the way things are structured. Keep showing us how hard you are trying “not to be biased” though, it’s rather amusing.
However, I am sure a lot of head scratching is going on with respect to finding a way to blame democrats for whatever happens next…
[quote]vroom wrote:
Sloth wrote:
That’s the absolute worst advice to give the democrats. There was a clear mandate concerning Iraq. Doesn’t matter if Bush will adopt a democrat backed plan, they had best produce one. Or, the voters are going to remember that the democrats sat on their thumbs when given the chance.
You are drinking a little bit too much kool aid here.
It’s a nice fantasy to want to blame the democrats for whatever happens next, but you should face reality the that the commander if chief is going to have to call the shots while he is in office.
Sorry, but that’s the way things are structured. Keep showing us how hard you are trying “not to be biased” though, it’s rather amusing.
However, I am sure a lot of head scratching is going on with respect to finding a way to blame democrats for whatever happens next…[/quote]
The Democrats can’t sit back and not put up a plan. As has been pointed out time and again, the last election was very much about Iraq. Hate to tell you Vroom, but your stance is the one republicans are hoping for.
Allowing the President to do whatever he wishes, without presenting a democrat alternative plan, will equal a short lived majority. That shit will not fly with voters. And if you don’t believe it, than you misread the last elections.
It can be a “withdraw in 6 months” plan, if that’s what they want. Or, a “stay until Iraq’s military is completely up and running” plan. I made no statement as to what kind of plan they should adopt. The President doesn’t even have to adopt their plan. It’s damn likely he won’t. They just need to be seen as actually as having tried to put forth their own plan.
Not even putting one together will be a disaster for their new majority. That is a reasonable statement. Believing the democrats can afford to now continue to criticize, without a widely backed plan of their own, is naive.
And, what the hell is this accussation that I pretend not to be biased? I am real damn biased. I put forth strong points of view, and make no apologies for what I believe in.
In this discussion, I asked a legit question. One that a democrat, republican, or libertarian could ask. What are the democrats going to propose? Which avenue will they (the majority) suggest we go? Will they recommend staying in Iraq, no timetable? Or a short span timetable to withdraw, regardless of Iraqi force readiness?
Perhaps you should review your own biased knee-jerk responses. Instead of opening up the old and tired “kool-aid drinking” comments.