After last night's speech by Bush......

[Bugman]

That book was published in 1992,not that long after the end of the war.If asked today,General Schwartzkopf might have a different opinion.I dont presume to speak for the man,its just a thought.If he has expressed an opinion about the current state of affairs,i am not aware of it.

 

[tickledgirl]

That book was published in 1992,not that long after the end of the war.If asked today,General Schwartzkopf might have a different opinion.I dont presume to speak for the man,its just a thought.If he has expressed an opinion about the current state of affairs,i am not aware of it.

Yes, people certainly do change their minds. Like the Secretary of Defense who said in 1992:

"I would guess if we had gone in there [Iraq], I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We'd be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.

And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don't think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties. And while everybody was tremendously impressed with the low cost of the [Desert Storm] conflict, for the 146 Americans who were killed in action and for their families, it wasn't a cheap war.

And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam (Hussein) worth? And the answer is not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

Anyone? Maniac, surely you remember who that wimpy little liberal pansy was? A guy who foresaw just how badly a war in Iraq could go?

I'll give you a hint: Not only did he forget what he'd learned under Bush 41, but he also forgot how to hunt safely. His good buddy took a shotgun blast to the face for the latter failing. We're all getting it for the former, most especially our fallen and the families he mentioned...

 

[kis123]

Kis, are you paying attention to your own words? it's funny how you talk about Bush doing something with the votes in Folrida, but Whitewater doesnt mean anything. please, that is pretty bad. can you show me irrefutable proof that Bush "cheated" with the votes in Florida? touche...

you keep harping on Bush sending troops to their deaths. uh, then can i please see you bash a particular Democrat by the name of Lyndon B. Johnson who sent a LOT MORE troops to their deaths in Vietnam? c'mon, it's the same thing. Vietnam was a nothing war, just like this Iraq war. be fair.

oh wait, you cant. i'm curious, what was your stance on "Daddy" Bush and his predecessor Ronald Reagan? i'm guessing the same type of bashing you are doing now.

for all the "wrongs" Bush has done in your eyes, people can point out to you the "wrongs" of Bill Clinton or any other Democratic President. bottom line is this. no matter who the President is, there will ALWAYS be a set of people upset at the President. problem is, too many are so hate filled to see Bush is not doing a terrible job. if he did, how on Earth did he get elected a second time? his "Daddy" didnt even do that....

Electing Bush a second time only proves the American public can make the same mistake twice! Besides, look at the alternative-I wouldn't let Kerry rempresent my big toe much less this country; he's almost as much of an idiot as Mr Bush. But at least we have proof he actually served in the military and has a war under his belt don't we? Oh yeah, those swift boat vets who surfaced out of nowhere-forgot all about them. They disappeared as quickly as they came didn't they?

One thing you're right about is I didn't like daddy bush or Reagan. Iran-contra scandal comes to mind. Reagan was the reason my mother started voting Democrat; prior to that she was a staunch Republican. My mother was a government employee; I remember three times we didn't know if we were going to keep a roof over our heads when Reagan was in office. Hell, I tend to wonder when the Alzheimer's started?

You NEVER leave your own people to fix problems overseas. You take care of your own and put them first. The problem in Iraq will NEVER be fixed as long as they tie their religious beiefs to their war. Simply put, we are losing over there as thousands of insurgents come in from other areas of the Middle East to replace the ones our soldiers are told to kill. We will NOT win over there and it's Vietnam all over again. This time it's worse because we didn't have to go there in the first place.

You know what's really interesting about all of this wonderful dialogue between you and maniac is that you repeatedly call me "liberal." That is so incredibly far from who I am. Just because I use my right to free speech to point out the truth doesn't make me a liberal. I do not subscribe to liberal politics; I don't believe in extremes at all either left or right. There are those around this forum that use the word liberal as if it's some sort of leprosy diagnosis. It's the term they use when they're protecting their loser president, plain and simple. That's gotten old and tired too, and like maniac's outbursts and underwear, should be changed.

 

[kis123]

Yes, people certainly do change their minds. Like the Secretary of Defense who said in 1992:



Anyone? Maniac, surely you remember who that wimpy little liberal pansy was? A guy who foresaw just how badly a war in Iraq could go?

I'll give you a hint: Not only did he forget what he'd learned under Bush 41, but he also forgot how to hunt safely. His good buddy took a shotgun blast to the face for the latter failing. We're all getting it for the former, most especially our fallen and the families he mentioned...

I think I just heard a pin drop!

 

[Capnmad]

Y'know, I could be wrong, but I think this thread's long overdue to be sent to the Politics and Religion Forum. Agreed, or what further criteria need be met?

 

[tickledgirl]

Y'know, I could be wrong, but I think this thread's long overdue to be sent to the Politics and Religion Forum. Agreed, or what further criteria need be met?

I second the motion.

 

[maniactickler]

I think I just heard a pin drop!

No, i think what you heard was the brain of a liberal hitting the ground!

 

[Bugman]

Yes, people certainly do change their minds. Like the Secretary of Defense who said in 1992:



Anyone? Maniac, surely you remember who that wimpy little liberal pansy was? A guy who foresaw just how badly a war in Iraq could go?

I'll give you a hint: Not only did he forget what he'd learned under Bush 41, but he also forgot how to hunt safely. His good buddy took a shotgun blast to the face for the latter failing. We're all getting it for the former, most especially our fallen and the families he mentioned...

The mention of Mr. Chaney's hunting accident really has no relevence to anything here.This is the kind of thing that we all need to get away from in my opinion,regardless of what we think about someones stance on politics.

Again,this was written in1992,soon after the war.Perhaps,if the job had been finished at that time,when almost everyone supported our action much bloodshed and treasure might have been saved in the long run.This is just speculation of course.

 

[tickledgirl]

The mention of Mr. Chaney's hunting accident really has no relevence to anything here.This is the kind of thing that we all need to get away from in my opinion,regardless of what we think about someones stance on politics.

You're quite right. That wasn't very constructive.

Again,this was written in1992,soon after the war.Perhaps,if the job had been finished at that time,when almost everyone supported our action much bloodshed and treasure might have been saved in the long run.This is just speculation of course.

If was in 1992, but it clearly applies to 2003, and today. Predictions that an invasion would be difficult, would lead to us running Iraq, and that we'd be stuck there were all as accurate in 2003. And many people made them. But Cheney chose to listen to dreamy visionaries instead of what he knew..

 

[Bugman]

Mistakes have been made,there can be no doubt about that.If we were going to go in,the force should have been much larger.I seem to remember reading that many military men suggested a force at least 2 to 3 times larger.

But we are there now,the only issue that matters is what now?The only two options are increase the troop strength enough to finish the job,or cut and run.Neither is very appeling,but it seems to me if we bail out now it will be viewed much as Somilia was in 1993.Give the Amercians a bloody nose,and they will quit.

The lose of life is of course not comparable,but i think the anology is valid.And Tickledgirl,you are a very smart person and passionate in your views and i can respect that.We both,i'm sure want what is best for our country even if we might differ on what that is.

 

[tickledgirl]

If the US was allowed to commence flyovers, why were they so secretive on them?(kennedy\cuba)

As for lincoln, the "enemy on US soil" didnt even present themselevs till way into the war and after the North had "invaded" virginia, Lincoln suspended the right as the secession began and ANYONE who said anything favorable to the south was Jailed. The US supreme court even ruled it unconstitutional but lincoln and the military ignored the ruling of the court. Lincoln stated, "all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law." This all applied to the rest of the Union and not Maryland and anyone who was critical of the war were imprisoned by the military. People can be critical of the iraq war and they get front page columns of some papers

Goodie, I can't believe I forgot this, but it's come up in another context. The Constitution specifically allows Habeas Corpus to be suspended in the case of rebellion. So what Lincoln was doing was explicitly Constitutional.

As opposed to the current administration that simply claims "there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution."

 

[kis123]

No, i think what you heard was the brain of a liberal hitting the ground!

No it was the sound of a screaming, insulting, liberal-name-calling, so-called conservative! 😛 They make a special sound when irrefutable facts are presented.