Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Another one. Jesus Baldheaded Christ, another one.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:07 AM
Original message
Another one. Jesus Baldheaded Christ, another one.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 12:08 AM by WilliamPitt
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N28277588.htm

Democrat Gov. Warner rejects Iraq withdrawal date
Reuters
By Daniel Trotta

NEW YORK, Nov 28 (Reuters) - The United States needs to set milestones for progress, not a firm withdrawal date, before it can leave Iraq, Virginia governor and prospective Democratic presidential candidate Mark Warner said on Monday.

"This Democrat doesn't think we need to re-fight how we got into (the Iraq war). I think we need to focus more on how to finish it," Warner said.

"To set an arbitrary deadline or specific date is not appropriate," he said. "... It is incumbent on the president to set milestones for what he believes will be the conclusion."

...more...

*sound of smashing things*

'K. Do we need to have another chat about buying into GOP talking points?!

Can anyone sincerely believe that we will EVER get out of Iraq without a full and complete vetting of how we got in? Do dismiss how we got there is to let the people who did this have a free pass, and allows them to CONTINUE DOMINATING THE POLICY DISCUSSION.

:grr:

Unreal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. That's right you dumbass Dems.
Keep it up. Pretty soon you'll be pandering for votes in Orange County because no respectable Democrat would vote for your dumb asses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
2. PodPeople and space lizards
That's my explanation and I'm sticking to it!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. Say, Swamp
I've seen your drawings and I was wondering if you really think that these politicians are alien lizards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #12
20. I'm fairly certain the creature known as "David Icke" is a lizard


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #20
35. Fair enough
I was just wondering if you bought his stuff, or were using it ironically. You never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #35
51. I never even heard of the reptile named "Icke" until this last Spring.
After another DUer told me about Icke I went to his website. When I saw that he was profiting from exposing the lizards, I realised that he too is an alien lizard. THEY are quick to eat their own, especially if a profit can be made. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demnan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #51
210. Eat their own!!!!
Yeah, how the fuck would he know what they look like and all. And he is blond (like the people he says are most susceptible). Thanks for the laugh. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eeyore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:21 AM
Response to Reply #12
170. Hey David
Refresh me on your previous DU name. I remember your avatar, I remember your snarky demeanor, and I remember you disappearing with a bang around the 2004 election.

Do tell. I honestly don't know the details.

thx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #170
233. Ummm, I don't think dead men can tell such tales
do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eeyore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #233
235. LOL!
I guess I'll never know now.

Until the ghost reemerges to haunt us again!

}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
32. Fucking idiots.... THEY JUST DON"T GET IT
do they?

I think they all need to be boots-on-the-ground Marines before they can have an opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #32
58. There you have it.
People tend to forget the FUCKING HELL our brothers and sisters are experiencing at this very moment. I'm sick of platitudes and partisan politics and BROWN NOSING!

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
188. Yup. The Pod People have taken control of the country. No doubt
about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
3. Amazing, and yet, a progressive antiwar candidate runs against Hillary
and those who shout hurray are called third party wackos...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. You saw that?
Fucking incredible! It seems that someone was on a personal crusade today to attack everyone who is an anti-war Dem or Green, or those who refuse to kiss the ass of corporate whores regardless of political affiliation... Jesus Mary Joseph on a piece of burnt toast! :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. Yeah, I saw it. There is a certain DUer who gets way bent out of shape,
unless of course, it is him doing the DLC bashing. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #18
36. Yes, you have to agree with MrXXX, or you
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:21 AM by WannaJumpMyScooter
are scum.

Kneel before ZOD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. Whoa pard'ner....I didn't mention any names.
Although it does ring a bell. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. Ummm, oops... I did. Big whoop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #36
55. Psst!
Please edit out the name in your post. Thank you. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #55
66. Oh yeah, that was a typo...
glad you caught that.

Thanks bro.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
114. You can call me wacko, you can call me anything you want
You really can, LincolnMcGrath. And I still will not support supporters of this egregious war. Sent both Bill and Hil messages to stop spamming me because until they mend their ways, they will see no silver from me.

Call me a radical.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #114
217. As a Democrat, I can criticize another Democrat.
Especially one who isn't doing his job, like Warner. These people are elected by Democrats to do the Democratic thing. If they don't they deserve to be criticized by Democrats. I'm not a Green or a Libertarian and don't much care for those parties. I actually think they should get their own websites and leave this one for Democrats. But when I want to criticize fellow Democrats for acting like Republicans, I'll do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #217
218. As a taxpayer, I can hold accountable the people whose salary
comes out of my pockets, no matter their or my affiliation. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #218
221. Are you a Libertarian, sfexpat2000?
I always get a little cautious when someone says "money out of my pockets". If you're not, I apologize in advance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #221
222. Lol! No, I'm with the other guys you don't like!
I registered Green when no one stood with the Congressional Black Caucus in 2000. Broke my heart.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #222
224. It broke my heart, too.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 12:03 PM by zanne
I was incredibly disappointed in the Dems when they were quiet as mice about the 2000 election. I'm still incredibly disappointed in them much of the time, but I'm staying to fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
229. The guy running against her is a Democrat, not a third party candidate
He may, however, be a wacko is he actually believes that he has any chance of knocking off the most popular Democrat in New York.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WannaJumpMyScooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #229
231. I live in NY, and I don't think she is that
popular.
She can pander to the Jewish vote all she wants, but even the Likkud Jews I know do not believe Iraq makes Isreal safer.

I think she is buttering the down side of the toast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. In order for a re-fight you have to have actually fought at least once.
Dems rolled over for the IWR vote. Yeah maybe we don't need to question WHY nobody brought up obvious facts about all the lies by the Boosh administration...LIKE HELL WE DON'T. This is just another symptom of the Lee Hamilton whitewash job done on 911. Why don't we go back to the original question about the 2000 election?

Sure, let us not ask why our lot is to just do or die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
183. That would be the same Lee Hamilton who whitewashed Iran-Contra
as well.

If an internal investigation were to be done regarding America's war crimes, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see Lee Hamilton's name among the group.

http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/hamiltoniran-contra.htm

"......former Congressman Lee Hamilton, chairman of the House select committee investigating the Iran-contra affair, was shown ample evidence against Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, but he did not probe their wrongdoing. Why did Hamilton choose not to investigate? In a late 1980s interview aired on PBS 'Frontline,' Hamilton said that he did not think it would have been 'good for the country' to put the public through another impeachment trial. In Lee Hamilton's view, it was better to keep the public in the dark than to bring to light another Watergate, with all the implied ramifications. When Hamilton was chairman of the House committee investigating Iran-contra, he took the word of senior Reagan administration officials when they claimed Bush and Reagan were 'out of the loop.' Independent counsel Lawrence Walsh and White House records later proved that Reagan and Bush had been very much in the loop. If Hamilton had looked into the matter instead of accepting the Reagan administration's word, the congressional investigation would have shown the public the truth. Hamilton later said he should not have believed the Reagan officials. However, today, George W. Bush is considering appointing Hamilton UN ambassador."
Uncovering the Florida cover-up: The good fight continues
A Past Look, 25 December, 2000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. Damn. He's full of it on this subject. At this point, I must reject Warner
HOW we got into this mess is a PRESSING matter, not something we should walk away from because its a little too messy, governor.

People are dead and dying still because of lies. That is but the tip of the iceburg upon which we find ourselves. Those responsible MUST be held to account.

I think it might be called JUSTICE.

I do not want this person as our nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
6. And I had high hopes for Gov. Warner...
Given a choice in the primaries, I won't vote for anyone who doesn't oppose our occupation in Iraq. I guess I will have to look at someone else to vote for in the primaries. bummer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Me too
And it's sad. :( I was hoping too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. It's enough to make a preacher cuss....
But there's a lesson here for Democrats....somewhere. Sometimes you need to put politics aside and follow your heart and mind. If it was wrong to go into Iraq, then it is wrong to stay in Iraq. If they keep this up, they will be held responsible for the entire debacle. Don't lie down with dogs or you'll get up with fleas. There are so many lessons to learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
8. my response to this on another thread-- it's a smokescreen...
...by yet another DLC dem who's thinking about a 2008 presidential bid:

You can't have milestones without clear and unambiguous objectives. This is a mission that morphs into something else every few months.

Let's see, it started over WMDs, but they were actually eliminated back in the early 1990s, so now it's time to end the occupation. But wait, you say-- it was REALLY about deposing the Evil One. But, well, that milestone's been reached too, so it's time to end the occupation. But no-- invading Iraq was actually all about cutting their ties to international terrorism. There really weren't any-- sorry about all those dead folks-- so now we can stop the occupation and the killing. Well, actually the mission was all about introducing democratic institutions, especially parlimentary dabate, a western style constitution, and citizen voting. But, dammit, that's been done too, and the Iraqis had their own ideas about how to handle it. Really though-- it's really all about defeating the insurgency-- the insurgency that DIDN'T EVEN EXIST when we invaded Iraq in the first place. No, no-- it's really about rebuilding Iraq-- rebuilding it after WE destroyed it-- and we're not done destroying it yet, so it's too soon to even begin THINKING about the rebuilding milestones....

Smokescreen. Warner didn't actually articulate what these mythical milestones might be, because he has no more idea of what the actual mission is than anyone else. Or maybe he does, but just doesn't want to list milestones that are measured in units of millions of barrels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelewis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
9. I think some people think that airing our dirty laundry would hurt our...
image. "We just have to pretend daddy's not drunk again." They're understandably concerned that if certain truths did come to light, the damage to our country could be catastrophic. While I think that makes absolutely no sense, it's the only thing I can think of as to why so many people ignore the truth. We do this not just with Iraq but with all of our dirty laundry. Imagine what would happen if a majority of people started believing 9/11 was an inside job or that global warming was real. It'd be chaos and pandamonium. On some level, they may be right but living a lie is no way to live. Why build a future on fantasy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. It is disappointing
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 12:30 AM by FreedomAngel82
:cry: Seems like the only person I can support now for 2008 is either Russ Feingold or John Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. That one's easy - Feingold n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
14. Pitt
I agree with Warner on this, and on the issue of a firm withdrawal date. I think that publicly establishing that the war is a sham and a snowjob will cut the US war effort off at the knees. I know that some want this to happen, but I think it would be a disaster. The fact is that we're there, and we need to secure Iraq. Holding hearings on Bush's lies isn't the way to do that. Fixing a date will have the same effect.

If, when the war ends, you want to dig into Bush's own Gulf of Tonkin and hold whoever responsible, then fine. But the aims of the war right now are more important than nailing any one person or group of people to the wall.

I expect some friendly disagreement, of course...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. The thing is
This administration is in there for another three years. That means they hold the policy high ground, especially on Iraq. If we don't "refight how we got into this," we will never develop the necessary political capital to force a withdrawal plan.

They don't want to leave. We have to force them to. The only way to do that is to nail them to the shed for what they've done here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #16
26. I think you're right about all of that
We just disagree about the benefit of "forcing a withdrawal plan," as in you see benefit and I don't. Again, finishing what we've started is far more important to me than sending administration figures to jail immediately. I don't want another Vietnam, and I don't think we've reached that point where another Vietnam is inevitable yet. But the more Murthas get in front of cameras and call for a pullout, the closer that point gets. I don't want it.

I say let's wait until Iraq is at least somewhat stable and Al Qaeda in Iraq is a scattered shambles. Then, let's prosecute whatever crimes were committed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlemingsGhost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
40. At what point do we address the Iraqis desires, ...
and give them back the resources that are rightfully theirs?

How is it that we seem always seem to talk as if they aren't capable of deciding that for themselves? As far as I can tell, a vast majority of the Iraqi people want us out ... NOW!

When do we actually follow through on the so-called reason we went there in the first place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #40
65. I think that's wrong
I don't think that a majority of Iraqis want us out immediately. Do you really think that they'd prefer utter anarchy to the mere serious anarchy that they enjoy today?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlemingsGhost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #65
85. How does one enjoy "serious anarchy?"
Furthermore, what is the difference between the two?

It that like "sort of" pregnant?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #85
101. Just a word joke
Har har.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #65
140. I think they would prefer option number three
Stability. But they aren't going to get that. We guaranteed that from the moment we started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #26
53. I am unable to rationalize or accept
any arguments that assume we can, in some way, do good for the nation of Iraq or for ourselves by remaining there. We can't.

We have created, inspired and fueled the 'insurgency.' We will continue to do so. Real, live terrorists will practice their craft there and get better. That will further translate into the wider world, as it definitely has in Jordan and probably did in London.

Lots of people will die, there will never be democracy there but instead we'll have a sweet little civil war, the region will become further destabilized (P.S. Sharon is about to be tossed out on his ass, which means our one solid tactical ally in the region is about to lose his gig), our reputation will continue to deteriorate, the social fabric of the country will begin to show significant wear and tear as billions are poured into the sand over there, and stories about how we got bullshitted into this thing will continue to pile up; that particular cat is all the way out of the bag.

I am not one who, when asked how we get out, says "By plane, boat, car, whatever." But refusing to discuss some kind of withdrawal plan is flat madness. Insanity. We need a plan. We cannot just bug out; the crime committed upon the Iraqi people by our invasion would be enlarged by orders of magnitude if we leave them to rot in the disaster we've created. And there are plans, several of them quite good.

We need to force a withdrawal plan. We do no good there whatsoever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #53
63. We disagree about the feasability of winning
As for a withdrawal plan, I'll look at anything. But a withdrawal plan is far different from a withdrawal date. Plans are good. Some of 'em even work. But a firm date would be bad.

My plan: let's leave when we know that Iraq won't descend into a state of nature if we do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #63
125. Winning what?
A prize?

A plan?

Here's the plan, the U.S. goes broke.
The former Soviet Union showed us how.
The U.S. become the former United States.

You can not make a country "like" you with the examples of kindness we have shown them.

A state of nature? Like Afghanistan?
Or do you mean until their oil dries up?

Better take another look at your plan, the piggy bank and the military pool(non merc)is emptied.

Time to wake up from this nightmare.

The "wanna be" candidates for President need oil/corp. dollars to run, so they are selling this crap. Stop buying it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #63
146. What exactly is that you think we can win?
Perhaps we are trying to win back our wounded pride from the Vietnam era? Or perhaps some of that black gold to stave off the end of oil? Is it possibe that we are trying to win back our national masculinity that was hurt by that cheese eating surrender monkey, Bush Senior?

When exactly will it be time to leave? When will we know that Iraq won't descend into "a state of nature"? Who benefits if we "stay the course", to quote yet another Vietnamism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timtom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #53
203. As a Vietnam vet...
I've always been impressed with the withdrawal "plan" there:

"Quick! Here's the next helicopter! Jump on! Hurry!"

Are they Communist? Yeah, pretty much.
Are they better or worse off than before.

Way better off than when the US jumped in, full tilt boogie.
Probably better than under the extreme right-wing regimes of Madame Nhu, Nguyen Cao Ky and other puppets.

There would most likely be way less insane bloodshed in Iraq, at any rate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #26
137. We started the rape
it would be humiliating not to finish it?

We are postponing the inevitable just as we did in Vietnam. From the moment we destabilized the region, we guaranteed them a bloody civil war. They can have that now or they can have that in 10 years. How many of ours and theirs do we need to murder and maim before we understand this? It was a bit more forgivable the first time we made the mistake but this time it's a complete do over. We couldn't have made as many Vietnam parallel mistakes if we had tried to. Maybe the powers that be did, in fact, try to but we all know the definition of insanity, don't we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GrpCaptMandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:24 AM
Response to Reply #26
172. Hope you don't mind me leaping in
but if history is any indication, waiting until "Iraq is at least somewhat stable" will require more time than you, I or this Republic have.

We have made Hell over there. It's time to talk about getting the whole world involved in putting out the greasefire that we started.

Establishing the idea that we *will* leave is critical to success. And even that idea hasn't been articulated by the administration. Ranges run from 2009 to 2039.

The Iraqis need to know we have no designs upon either empires or colonies. Otherwise, they'll just go ahead and fight for the supremacy of who leads the revolt against us.

Iraq will never be "somewhat stable" until it is free to make its own choices, and that includes freedom from US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WyLoochka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #172
206. Agree - actually it is past
time to talk about getting the whole world involved in putting out the greasefire BushCo started and actually get it involved now.

As long as the US is there calling the shots, even if in the background, there will be "insurgents" against the US.

The US being in Iraq in perpetuity has been the plan of BushCo all along, we all know that. The intent was to both commandeer the oil and water and to set up permanent bases from which to harass the middle east and far east well into the future.

These plans MUST be repudiated and abandoned. It is not at all helpful to have Dem politicians aiding and abetting the BushCo imperial plan by saying we have to wait until things are "stable," in order to vacate Iraq. That just means we have to wait until all the back room deals have been sealed and puppets put permanently in place in the Iraqi government to implement those deals and force the Iraqis into submitting to wholesale theft of their oil and giving up land to permanent US bases.

And I don't agree with this "over the horizon" stuff either, it's a smokescreen to disguise that the US is still in essential control of Iraq. Bring the troops home - all the way home - NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:36 AM
Response to Reply #26
189. Unfortunately, the "finishing what we started" mentality was what
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 04:37 AM by Seabiscuit
prolonged Vietnam as well. It's an exercise in futility and only results in more and more bloodshed every day, week, month and year it continues in effect.

Iraq cannot and never will be "secured" by U.S. military forces. It's an insane delusion to think that the Iraqis any more than the Vietnamese will ever allow that to happen. The only reason there is an "insurgency" is because we're still there, and it will remain until we leave. Then and only then will the Iraqis be able to operate on their own to eventually "secure" Iraq in whatever form they eventually choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
astonamous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #26
201. I ask you...
Again, finishing what we've started is far more important to me than sending administration figures to jail immediately.


What have we started? We need to start demanding an answer to that question now. Everything up to this point has been lies, miscalculations, lack of planning, war profiteering and photo ops.

Nothing positive has come out of invading Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #26
211. Let me ask you something..
... lets say you dug yourself a hole, and now you are in it. Water starts running in and you start bailing it out as fast as you can.

But after 2 effing years of bailing the water level is STILL RISING.

Do you get out of the hole or do you drown? Because there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THAT AMERICA CAN "SECURE" IRAQ, NO MATTER HOW LONG WE STAY. And the water is rising every day right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. We have to get justice too for what happened
*sigh* We can't let them get away with it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #17
33. Then let's do it
But let's not do it at the expense of our endeavors over there, especially if we can do it after we're finished. I guarantee that Bush and his cabinet won't go into hiding after their time in office is up. You'll know where to find them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. "friendly disagreement"
Heh heh.

That's a pretty rare species of disagreement around here.

Good on you for expressing your opinion clearly and without using waffle words.

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #19
27. Thanks,
If I get banned tonight, remember this: we'll always have Will Pitt's thread on Mark Warner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #27
147. Why would you get banned?
You're expressing an unpopular opinion but you aren't trolling as far as I can tell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:49 AM
Response to Reply #147
149. You're right
I've been banned here once for doing the same. I guess it just depends upon who makes the call and what mood they're in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #149
178. Okay, now you will get banned
Because you've admitted that you were tombstoned and came back. I'm not going to alert on you because I think this is useful dialogue but someone will. Shush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #19
54. Agreed
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. securing Iraq...what does that actually mean?
The "insurgents" live there...they aren't leaving. We can't hope to outlast them. What, in your mind, constitutes victory?

We found out there aren't any WMDs, we took Saddam out of the picture and helped them get a start on democracy. It's up to them whether or not to continue in that regard and to fight for whatever kind of govt. they want...it is their country after all. Let's declare victory and get the hell out of there. Why not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. Because
Because we won't have stability or victory until Zarqawi's boys are dead or scattered, and I still think that this is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #28
31. "Zarqawi's boys" are growing in numbers the longer that we stay.
It's not possible to kill them all. The more we kill, the more they multiply. If a country came here and tried to change our government, can you imagine that Americans would fight for generations to save our way of life. I guess in that scenerio, Americans would be the "insurgents".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #31
44. No, no, no
"The more we kill, the more they multiply."

I don't think it's true. It's certainly unproven, at the very least. I think you confuse the insurgents (whom I think are mainly Al Qaeda, former Baathists, Saddamites, and foreign intelligence services) with your average Iraqi who just wants stuff to stop exploding. Americans would resist the overthrow of our government because very few of us hate it that much. Most Iraqis hated Saddam's government because it was a violent, totalitarian shithole. They may be furious with the US' subsequent actions there, but most Iraqis were pretty pleased that the Baaath regime was taken out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #44
64. Only about 7% of the people who blow things up over there are
from out of the country. The rest are Iraqis who hate Americans, and maybe hate the other groups such as the Shiites or Sunnis, also. We go there and kill someone's loved one who happens to be an "insurgent". Do you in your wildest imagination think they aren't going to pick up a machine gun or make a IED in retaliation for the death of their loved one? Of course they are...they hate us and that is why the numbers of insurgent attacks are way higher than they used to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #64
67. The 7% figure is meaningless
I didn't argue that. As for your hypothetical situation, it is exactly that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #67
72. It would be foolish to believe that "hypothetical" doesn't happen.
Maybe that is why the occupation isn't going the way the fools that are running it had planned, you remember, flowers and candy in the streets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #72
77. I'm sure it happens
But to what degree? And the flowers and candy would never have lasted anyway, even if they'd materialized. I think that Iraqis in general DID greet us with flowers and candy, if only figuratively. Which is to say that I think they were generally pleased with the toppling of Saddam.

There is, of course, the exception of the Sunnis. I think that many Sunnis have a very unreaslistic view about the way that Iraq should be governed. They're mad because they don't run things anymore. They're going to have to get used to being a minority for a change, and that's all for the good. (Just ask the Shiites and the Kurds).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #77
87. They may have been pleased with the toppling of Saddam,
but since then, they have become displeased and want us out. Rep. Murtha sited an Iraqi poll that stated that 80% of Iraqis want us out. 45% thought that it was OK to shoot Americans. I don't have a link to the specific poll, but Murtha would not site that poll if it weren't true.

I know it's hard to face the fact that the US just can't do whatever it wants to do in Iraq. Nation-building should not have been the US policy. Have you forgotten that we attacked a country that didn't attack us first?

And to answer your first question "to what degree?", I don't have a specific answer, but all statistics on insurgent attacks have indicated that the numbers are rising at an alarming rate. So I would feel safe in saying that my "hypothetical" happens a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #87
100. Yeah, I saw that
Look- if things are as bad as that, then I'll freely acknowledge it. If those numbers translate into Iraqis voting in a government that asks us to leave, then we've got to go. But I'm just not sure that that's the case. We'll see shortly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #100
109. I can only hope that after their next election that they ask us to leave.
We will see. I hope you have found mostly friendly exchanges in opposition to your opinion. I've read through the thread and have seen mostly a good debate. I hope you think so, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #109
112. If it means
that the Iraqis think that they can take care of their own security, then I'm with you like nobody's business. I hope this works out somehow.

Rock on, Wayne.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #112
124. What would you say if they asked us to leave, but the powers that
be in the US don't think they can handle their own security? If * decides to stay because Rumsfeld doesn't think they can handle their own security, would you go along with the admin or have faith in the Iraqis to find their way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #124
129. Let's went.
I would probably say get out. Even if I believed that the Iraqis could not fend for themselves, at that point they would be a sovereign nation, and the choice would be theirs. Also, if the government and people wanted us out, they would not be cooperating with us, making our mission truly immpossible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #129
133. The people already want us out and they are not cooperating...
so to quote you - "our mission is truly impossible." You cannot catch or kill insurgents without the help from the general populace and they are not helping us now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #133
136. I don't know how many are hindering us
I doubt that very many are. Most are probably watching and suffering, like the natives in any war.

I was talking about cooperation in the form of logistics, sending forces to be trained, etc... That is still very much going on, if on a smaller scale than we'd like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #136
142. Rep. Murtha knows much more than me, but he says that we aren't
getting cooperation from the people. We can't "go get those guys" without knowing where they are. That info comes from the people. The people don't want to give that info, then we can't find the insurgents, then we are there forever trying to find these shadow figures by ourselves. We will never be finished.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #142
145. Can we do it with 500,000?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #145
155. 500,000 US troops? 1st of all, we don't have that many troops.
2nd, I am not sure that an increase would help find the insurgents. It might help train more Iraqi security battalions. But in general, I think it would just further destroy the country and kill more of it's innocents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #155
158. Who knows?
I'm glad I'm not calling the shots, because this one is a pickle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #158
161. a serious pickle to be sure. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #77
153. Worked well after World War I
The Germans needed to get used to being a minority for a change. They got a little upset but really, what could they do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #153
157. That's absurd
We're only asking the Sunnis to get along with their neighbors without sending out the death squads. Is that too much to ask? If so, then we're truly screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
King Coal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #157
212. We're already screwed. We're screwed because of the reason we went
to war. We went to war for profits. Face it. We need to cut our losses, apologize, and leave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:55 AM
Response to Reply #44
152. Do you have any proof that the terrorists aren't multiplying?
Do you know what causes people to become terrorists? Suicide bombers? Can you empathize enough to know why they hate us? I know it wasn't patriotic to ask those questions in the aftermath of 9/11 but four years have passed now and those questions desperately need to be asked and answered, otherwise we are doomed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #28
150. Ah, Zarqawi
The man of a thousand lives (and deaths). How is destroying Iraq going to scatter the new terrorists? We are the very best recruiters of new terrorists ever. Bin Laden, Zarqawi et al. must be thrilled with us, we're stupid and loyal! Praise be to Allah!*


*Nothing against Muslims, everything against fundamentalists of any ilk, be they Bush or Bin Laden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #28
176. "Zarqawi's boys"
that's the funniest god-damn thing I've read all day.

Didja hear? He's been sighted again:



Spoooooky!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #14
24. There is an assumption that "we can secure Iraq"...
and that we can win this war. Why? Because we are Americans and are superior to the rest of the world because our "freedom" is more pure? Why should we adopt this ugly loser of a step-child?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #24
29. No
Not because our freedom is more pure, but because we are Americans and can do most anything we want if we roll up our sleeves and do it. We've botched a lot of it so far, if not most of it. But that is no reason not to determine to do it better than we have.

I assume that this is possible, and you assume that this is impossible. I think yours is the shakier position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #29
46. With George Bush leading the effort, I confess...
I do not feel confident. But I'm not sure my position is "shakier".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #46
52. Shit, who knows?
I don't know the reality on the ground over there. I just know that we've got to try until either we win or it's plainly obvious that we're getting our tails waxed. I don't think that that's the case yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #52
56. "I don't know the reality on the ground over there."
:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:23 AM
Original message
Do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
236. 1st cousin has made 3 trips to mess-o- potamia
Only Brother has made 6
Nephew has made 2

I have been there also..... I know a little something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #52
159. So, if this is winnable
I think you need to sign up and go over. You can let us know how it's going on the ground. Goodness knows, our media isn't telling us shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #159
160. I'll do it tomorrow
I'm not doing it because you told me to. I was going to do it anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:35 AM
Response to Reply #160
179. That's actually good
You'll have much more information after you've been on the ground there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #29
156. You position isn't supported by what's happening on the ground n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #14
37. There are no "aims of the war right now."
There have never been any aims other than removing Hussein from power-- a goal that makes less sense now than when we protested it in the first place. Hussein gassed 5000 Kurds during a war, and we killed a hundred thousand Iraqis in our invasion. Hussein, according to the most extreme estimates, has killed 300,000 Iraqis. We've killed more than that in our two invasions of Iraq.

We have to admit we had no reason to go in, and we have to admit that those who sold the invasion lied to do it. Simply leaving them in power until we reach some non-defined goals in Iraq is ridiculous. They still won't admit they were wrong--how can we trust them to do the right thing now? Plus, they are the ones defining the goals--so they will just keep redefining them so that we stay in Iraq and they are never brought to justice for the slaughter of 100K innocent people.

If you have a first grade teacher you catch molesting children, do you let him finish the school year, or do you remove him at once? That's our question. You might quibble that comparing Bush's crimes and sins to child molestation is inappropriate, and I agree. Considering the number of children Bush's lies exploded into tiny, bloody fragments, Bush's crimes are far worse, and far more disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #37
50. That may have been so 3 years ago
But it's a different world today. We're charged with fixing what we broke, and it would irreparably hurt both the US and Iraq if we refused to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:20 AM
Response to Reply #50
117. It's more true now
We don't have any idea what "fixing" Iraq means. No matter what we do, Iraq will fix itself, and it will fight us until we leave. Hanging around longer will just prolong the inevitable struggle that will emerge when we leave.

Three years ago Bush could have gone in, conquered, then replaced the government so fast the insurgency had no chance to organize. Now it's too late. We are the hated occupiers, and the Iraqi resistance will fight us until we are gone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #117
121. That may be so
I hope that Iraq can fix itself. If we were to leave soon, and Iraq did not descend into anarchy, but used the foundations of government that have been put in place over the last year, wouldn't you think that that was a good result?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #121
141. No. You said the key word
You said that Iraq could use the foundations "put" in place. It's still a government from the outside, imposed by outsiders, and enforced by an outside force. A conquering force. That's not democracy, and it never works. Iraq has not yet gotten to form a government that all of its people had to form together. It has only received a government that some of its people wrote, with our backing and the implicit understanding of what we wanted them to do.

That's just not going to result in a workable government. With enough troops and police--enough force, in other words--that government can be made to function, in the same way Hussein's Baath government functioned--and in the same way the current government is functioning. With brutal force, in other words. The best out current strategy will achieve is a government equal to the one we removed.

The reason we are hated in the Middle East is because this is what we always do. We remove a government we don't like--be it dictator or democracy, as in Iran--and we replace that government with a brutal, bloody autocracy that the people hate. And then we prop up that autocracy over all attempts to reform. The government we "put" into place in Iraq will be the same thing, even if it pretends to be a democracy, and it will be a problem we will deal with for the next thirty years.

At some point we have to stop controlling the Middle East, allow them to form their own governments, and then deal with government. No matter how long we stay in Iraq, we will still have to do that some day.

The government forming in Iraq has a chance to make it, if we get out of the way and let ALL factions form it into something workable. The longer we stay, the less chance that will happen.

I'd like to see some middle path. I'd like to see us get out now, and yet fund the recovery of Iraq. I'd like to see us place our own troops under a UN peacekeeping force completely out of our control, so that we do take the risks and pay the costs of cleaning up the mistakes we made, but aren't involved in controlling anything. As long as our troops are there, there will not be a democracy, or any representative government, in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #141
148. Shit, you could be right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #121
162. Great result!
Unfortunately, the more likely result is that they will become an extension of Iran, complete with religious fanaticism. In a weird way, Iran will get the last laugh. They will have won the longstanding battle with their rival, Iraq and given the US the biggest black eye it has had since Vietnam. Not bad and they've barely had to lift a finger.

Yay, America!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #162
165. That would suck. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #14
38. What war effort? This was not a war, it was an
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:04 AM by Catrina
illegal invasion, based on lies.

80% of the Iraqi people want us out. They will keep fighting us until we leave. I think since it is their country, we ought to do as Bush claimed he would, 'leave when the Iraqi people tell us to go'.

How dare we think that the Iraqi people need us to take care of them. Haven't you heard? They are WORSE off now than they were under Saddam. How many more years of killing their citizens, torturing them, robbing them of their resources, depriving them of their jobs by hiring foreigners to replace them, plummeting them into poverty, turning their country into a giant market-place for big Corporations, Internation Money changers etc., how many more years do you think it will take before they stop fighting us, and telling us to get out?

How many more dead Iraqi babies, US troops, maimed for life civilians, soldiers, destroyed buildings, stolen money, corruption will it take? When something is this bad, why prolong it?

What Warner is saying is the equivalent of an argument someone might make that because a murder happened three years ago let's not talk about it anymore, because it might get the murderer's family a bad name.

NOW is the time to leave and NOW is the time to start hearings, to prosecute those who cause this disaster and to start trying, at least, to restore our Constitution, and our reputation before both are irretrievable.

The Iraqis are standing up for their country ~ Warner needs to wake up, they are fighting us because we are their enemies, an invading force that has ripped their country apart. But they will take care of their own country after we leave ~ maybe other countries with some moral authority (we certainly don't have any left) can help them through the UN.

Warner is just another neocon enabler and apologist. To even suggest that this cruel, treasonous war should be allowed to last one more day, coming from a so-called Democrat, is simply not believable. We compromised and accepted excuses for the IWR once. Never again will I support anyone who supports this criminal invasion. Warner better figure it out. The people of this country and the people of Iraq want this war over. He is now in the minority and it's a criminal minority at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #38
48. Hear, hear!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #38
57. That's the rub for the Democratic Party, isn't it?
Your opinion must somehow coincide with mine. Who wins? Who knows?

I don't buy that 80% of Iraqis want us out immediately. Show me a poll if you can. And even if you can (which I strongly doubt), that doesn't mean that 80% of Iraqis are hiding in basements with IEDs, ready to rock. It's a tiny fragment of the population, and I think that it's mostly Al Qaeda and old Baathists, with some foreign intelligence agents thrown in. I say we get those guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. Less than two percent of those captured or killed have been
from somewhere other than Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #60
68. So what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #68
164. To translate
Because less than 2% of the "insurgents" killed are foreign, more than 98% of the "insurgents" killed are Iraqi. Get it? BTW, I put that term in quotes because if we used other people in the scenario, say, the British and the Americans, circa, say, the 1770's, we would be calling the Americans fighting back on their own soil "patriots". Funny how words work, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #164
166. They were insurgents
But they were good insurgents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #166
180. And that would make the Iraqis
bad insurgents? I hate to tell you this, but they are kicking our asses and we will be paying for this little debacle for generations to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #68
194. So they aint Al Qaeda for starters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #57
74. OK, Dave...go get 'em.
Keep your head down. I hope you are lucky enough to get an armoured vehicle and body armour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #74
80. Heh
Me too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #57
76. "I don't think that a majority of Iraqis want us out immediately."
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:35 AM by thebigidea
I don't believe that. Show us a poll that says that. Otherwise, why the hell should we believe you? You admit you don't know the reality of the ground, now we're to believe you can read Iraqi minds?

"and I think that it's mostly Al Qaeda and old Baathists, with some foreign intelligence agents thrown in. I say we get those guys."

Not even the Pentagon is saying that any more. That's summer of 2003 bullshit. Try reading a little more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #76
81. Hey man, show me where I'm wrong. I'll read it.
And I didn't make the original assertion, so it's not up to me to disprove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #81
84. yes you did - post 65. Prove it. You're talking out of Rumsfeld's ass.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:45 AM by thebigidea
show us where you're right. You claimed that before anyone said anything about 80%. Prove it.

oh, that's right - you can't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #57
78. "show me a poll if you can"...

snip>
First and foremost, polls consistently show that the majority of Iraqi people do not want to be occupied by a foreign military. Most recently, a poll commissioned by the British Ministry of Defense showed that 82 percent of Iraqis are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops. So however well-intentioned, the U.S. military presence in Iraq breeds resentment that is fuel for the insurgency.
http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=3219&StartRow=1&ListRows=10&appendURL=&Orderby=D.DateLastUpdated&ProgramID=37&from_page=index.cfm


google search> Military Poll Iraqi leave percent
http://news.google.com/news?q=military+poll+iraqi+leave+percent&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&sa=N&tab=nn&oi=newsr



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #78
82. It's one thing to
oppose the presence of US troops in theory and another to support the immediate withdrawal. That's the poll that would make my point. I'll try to find one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #82
86. so lets get this straight:
they oppose the presence of US troops, they support bombings against them, but they don't want the US troops to leave.

logic pretzels: they're worthlessly delicious!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #86
202. That's why * keeps gagging on them.
Logic does BAD things to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #78
88. OK, here you go
This poll says that 57% or Iraqis want us out immediately, despite acknowledging that it would cause more violence. But it was taken in April of 2004.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

I'd like to see the numbers now.

But even if I was wrong, and I may very well have been, I still say that the goal of a stable Iraq is too important to cast aside right now. Iraqis might say different, but they can't see the future and don't know how bad things will get. Neither do we, but I'm guessing pretty damn bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #88
90. which is ironic, considering how bad all your other guesses were
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:53 AM by thebigidea
you don't know what you're talking about, but boy - do you want to talk about it!

seeing how spectacularly wrong you've been on this issue, doesn't that perhaps warrant a bit of a pause to rethink your other positions on Iraq? Maybe, oh, I dunno - maybe they're just as wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #78
89. This may help you...
More from the same poll. You have to read them together, and form your own thoughts.

snip>
The survey was conducted by an Iraqi university research team that, for security reasons, was not told the data it compiled would be used by coalition forces. It reveals:


Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified -- rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;

82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;

less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;

67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;

43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;

72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.



The opinion poll, carried out in August, also debunks claims by both the US and British governments that the general well-being of the average Iraqi is improving in post-Saddam Iraq.
The findings differ markedly from a survey carried out by the BBC in March 2004 in which the overwhelming consensus among the 2,500 Iraqis questioned was that life was good. More of those questioned supported the war than opposed it.



Under the heading "Justification for Violent Attacks", the new poll shows that 65 per cent of people in Maysan province -- one of the four provinces under British control -- believe that attacks against coalition forces are justified.
The report states that for Iraq as a whole, 45 per cent of people feel attacks are justified. In Basra, the proportion is reduced to 25 per cent.
The report profiles those likely to carry out attacks against British and American troops as being "less than 26 years of age, more likely to want a job, more likely to have been looking for work in the last four weeks and less likely to have enough money even for their basic needs".



Immediately after the war the coalition embarked on a campaign of reconstruction in which it hoped to improve the electricity supply and the quality of drinking water.
That appears to have failed, with the poll showing that 71 per cent of people rarely get safe clean water, 47 per cent never have enough electricity, 70 per cent say their sewerage system rarely works and 40 per cent of southern Iraqis are unemployed.


http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=8985


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #89
93. That sucks. Guess I was wrong.
I guess I was wrong.

I don't think that that effectively counters my main point, though, which is that Iraq's problems will metastasize if we pull out now. The inarguable fact is that the administration botched this war. But that to me is all the more reason to try to do it better, not abandon it at once.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #93
96. get used to saying "I guess I was wrong," then.
too bad mistakes here cost thousands of lives, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #96
98. You're a sweetie-pie, ain't ya?
Yeah, my bad, sorry to the thousands who died because I made that misjudgment.

I still don't really think that that matters very much at the time being. If the Iraqis vote in a government that asks us to leave, then you win. If they don't, then you lose. We'll see, I guess. I think it will be better for both the US and Iraq if we stay until the place is secure. You don't.

Wheeeeeee!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #98
99. this isn't a game, nobody wins anything.
you're going to look back on all of this and feel incredibly sheepish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #99
104. I doubt that, you big softie
But you can think that if you want. I'm confident that I'm right about this. We'll see soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #104
105. nothing like confident incompetence.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 02:11 AM by thebigidea
its worked so well for Fearless Leader.

I look forward to you continuing to speak on behalf of the Iraqi people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #105
107. You're cute when you're angry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #107
111. and your tired old 2003 rhetoric is pretty ugly, so we're even.
My god, at least update this nonsense once in a while. Even the Pentagon hasn't been using some of those old chestnuts you've been handing out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #111
115. Why Ike, whatever do you mean?
It's a complicated situation, and I'm calling them as I see them. I'm not as sure of my guesses as you are. You might wonder which approach is wiser, with so many unknown factors in play here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #115
118. there's nothing complicated about your simple coloring book view of Iraq
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 02:23 AM by thebigidea
your so-called "approach" is nothing but Fisher Price's My First War. Don't try to pretend you've been some kind of gnomish Kissinger on the situation, you've just been spewing cookie cutter phrases that every low rent talking head and plasticface pundit has been regurgitating since we got into this mess. Spare me your wisdom, o foreign policy wizard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #104
169. Given how strongly you feel that you are right
I think you need to get some skin into this game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:11 AM
Response to Reply #93
167. You're right on that point
Things will get worse for them but as shown in our example, Vietnam (and what an amazing example it's becoming), we are merely putting of the inevitable while maiming and killing plenty of Iraqis and Coalition, er, American forces in the meantime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:01 AM
Response to Reply #93
186. DuhWAH???
A botched war is a reason to try to do it better? Try, try again? I'd say more, but I find myself speechless.

:wtf:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #89
97. VLR...you are GOOD!!!
Thank you for proving the point regarding what the Iraqis want for their own country. Why do we think we know what is better for them than they do? If they want democracy, it is within reach now. It won't be easy for them to get there, but if they really want it, it's there for the taking. We have done what we can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #97
102. Not to mention it's the FREAKIN CRADLE OF CIVILIZATION!!
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 02:09 AM by Viva_La_Revolution
I think they have enough experience to run their own freakin country! Where do we get off thinking that our way is the only right way??!! Oh yea. We want our (ahhm.) I mean their oil.

Facts are fun! :)


thanks!

edit. spelling is a learned art
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #102
106. That's a non sequitur
The fact that Iraq is the "cradle of civilization" has no bearing on the fact that Iraqis haven't been in control of their government, like, ever.

I don't find this "arrogance" line particularly impressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #57
103. Your opinion if you claim to be a Democrat
should be on the side of what's right. I certainly don't expect that anymore from the Republican Party.

This war was illegal, it was lied about, there is no doubt about that now. War crimes have been committed, huge corruption, torture, the murder of civilians, men, women and children. We are creating terrorists each time we kill another Iraqi. The longer we stay, the more hatred we will engender.

Joe Liebermann is wrong, he has been proven wrong. He was wrong from the beginning, but then the question is 'why does he so stubbornly support a war that is bad for his country'? I'd like to ask him that.

Where did the 80% number come from? The Pentagon, the Generals, gave that number ~ 80% of the Iraqi people want us out.

I have an Iraqi friend. He lives there. He hated Saddam. He hates the occupation of his country. He fears every day for his family ~ he has power only a few hours each day. Same thing with water. He doesn't hate Americans, but he hates this administration.

He wants the occupation of his country to end. So do most of his friends and family. He believes any government 'elected' while there is an occupation, is, he says a puppet government. Read the Iraqi blogs, that is how most Iraqis feel.

Even the military disagrees with your Al Queda numbers. No more than 5% of the insurgency is foreign. And they were not there until we got there. Another thing the Iraqi people hate us for.

I say we mind our own business, and btw, if YOU want to 'get those guys' you can download recruitment papers from the internet now. It speeds up the process for those who are anxious to go there to contribute to the killing fields that is now Iraq.

Check out these 'insurgents' ~ we 'got' them good. That ought to make us feel safer! Yes, Joe Liebermann wants us to keep doing this. Why?

http://cryptome.org/kid-kill/kid-kill-01.htm

This is how it all started, and it has only grown worse since then. You want to continue this? Well, of course your children will not be under those bombs. What do you think the people whose kids will be want?

<img
src="">

9-year-old Ibtihal Jassem is rescued by her uncle Jaber Jouda, in Basra, Iraq, in this photo dated Saturday March 22, 2003, after the bombing of the Mshan neighbourhood by coalition warplanes. Born deaf and mute, Jassem not only lost her right leg in the U.S. bombing of Basra two days after the war in Iraq began, but also all seven members of her family. After she was rescued by Jaber Jouda, who found her with her right leg almost severed, Jassem has lived with her grandparents.

Yes, by all means, let's keep doing this ~ I wonder how many of that poor little girl's relative are now part of the resistance?? No wonder it's growing, and that was only the first week!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #103
110. You might be right about Iraqi's opinions
I don't know. It would be useful to see more polls. If I'm wrong, then I would think twice about sticking around.

But the emotional appeals are useless, I think. People get their heads blown off in every war. It happened in the Civil War, and in World War II, and every other one. Does that mean that those wars were wrong? No. It just means that war is awful. It has no bearing on the necessity of making it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #110
119. The difference is that WE started this war!
We've never invaded a country before and there is a lot of resentment because of the fact that we invaded Iraq. There was no "necessity of making it."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #119
123. You're right, I need to clarify
I didn't mean the necessity of starting the war, I meant the necessity of continuing it until it is finished. As opposed to leaving now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #123
127. Who is going to say "It's finished"? Us...the Iraqis?
Me? You? Will Pitt? Rumsfeld? Halliburton?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #127
131. Um, TheBigIdea, perhaps.
I answered your question upthread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #131
135. Please don't make me search for it...it's late...give me a post #.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #135
138. Sorry. 129. You already saw it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:44 AM
Response to Reply #138
143. Thank you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:22 AM
Response to Reply #123
171. The necessity of
"staying the course"? Deja fucking vu!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:04 AM
Response to Reply #110
163. I think the fierce resistance is all the proof we need
But the emotional appeals are useless, I think. People get their heads blown off in every war


'Emotional appeals' are what's driving this resistance. Another incredible mistake always made by dictators and colonialists, is to underestimate the love that ordinary human beings have for their loved ones and fellow citizens.

The incredible 'emotional appeal' of the sight of a loved one blown to bits by an invader seems to be pretty strong, actually. Throughout history, it is that 'emotional appeal' that has resulted in a fierce desire to avenge the death of that loved one.

While you are so dismissive of babies' heads being blown off, unfortunately for the war-mongers, their surviving relatives get extremely emotional about it, and always have.

So once again you are wrong ~ as was this administration, who, like you, simply didn't understand that basic human reaction to the wanton killing of other human beings. It was evident as soon as one of our 'brilliant' Generals said 'we don't do body counts'.

Unfortunately for him, apparently the Iraqis do ~ more than 3000 Iraqis have been blown to pieces over the past several weeks. That raised the numbers to more than 100,000 people, not to mention the maimed and the tortured.

Tell me something. Less than 2,000 people died in the WTC. Why did we start two wars over that if 'emotional appeal' is useless? George Bush sure used it to get support for his wars.

So long as Americans have that callous attitude, that human life is dispensible, they will be 'shocked and awed' when the people whose relatives they permanently liberate from the planet, do what the Iraqis are doing now.

Looks like it is the Bush administration that is 'shocked and awed' now. No flowers or candy for invaders who think so little of the lives of others ~ what a shock!! You too, must be shocked that the Iraqi people are no different than Americans when their loved ones are blown to bits. Why would you have thought they would be different? Amazing, really. The only difference seems to be, we went after the wrong people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #14
45. It's not a "war" - it's an occupation.
Check out the dates recorded for the ending of prior wars. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #45
61. Call it what you want
The aims are the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #61
70. which are?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #70
71. They are
to create a stable country that isn't a terrorist playground and get the hell out of there. Preferably we would leave a real democracy in Saddam's place, but even an I Can't Believe It's Not a Democracy will do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #71
75. that is what our leaders would tell us
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:43 AM by LSK
But the facts on the ground indicate otherwise. It has indeed become a terrorists free-for-all. As long as we stay there, Iraqis will see us as occupiers and will fall pray to terrorist recruiting. Meanwhile our soldiers continue to die and who knows how many Iraqis are caught in the crossfire. I will not even talk about torture, some are saying it is worse now than even under Saddam.

Did you see the video on Randi Rhodes website that shows some "contractors" driving around Iraq shooting randomly at cars?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5461705&mesg_id=5461705


Our politicians try to say that we are working to secure Iraq, but EVERY report for 2.5 years now from Iraq indicates otherwise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #61
213. "Aims"?? You mean rape and pillage, right?
Privateers and corrupt regimes have been doing that for millenia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mysterywriter Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
62. Well said. I agree with him on this and I think he will
make a great president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #14
69. well, considering the war is right now a DISASTER
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 01:29 AM by LSK
I dont see how it could get any worse by talking about leaving or how the whole thing is a fraud.

Iraq is a mess. Its a disaster. Its going to be 3 years before you know it and THERES NO PROGRESS. The only thing Iraqis can agree on is that WE ARE THE PROBLEM.

THE FACT IS WE CANNOT SECURE IRAQ. PERIOD. END OF STORY. We had our chance. How much longer must we prove that WE CANNOT GET THE JOB DONE???

I dont know how you can "cut the war effort off at the knees" when the war effort already has its legs chopped off?

AM I GETTING THROUGH TO YOU??

IRAQ IS A HOUSE ON FIRE AND WE ARE POURING GASOLINE ON IT!!!

BTW, WHAT THE HELL ARE THE AIMS OF THE WAR?? What are we doing to make things better? What steps would indicate things are better? We are not even getting this. THE REPUBLICANS DONT WANT TO GIVE ANY DETAILS. More importantly, beyond words, our ACTIONS indicate that we are doing NOTHING to help things, but with incidents such as Abu Graih, and now the video of "contractors" shooting randomly at cars, and other things, our actions indicate that we are making things worse.

President Bush as per the IWR was supposed to update Congress on the war effort. THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE.

In SUMMARY, there are no aims of the war and its most important for people to stop dying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #69
73. Sure, there's progress
The only question is if it will sustain and progress, or if it will be erased. I'm confident that a withdrawal will cause the latter.

The progress, as if you need to be reminded, is the new government that's being hammered out as we speak. Elections in two weeks. Let's see how it goes. The last ones came off pretty well, all things considered.

That might not be good enough for some, but it's something and it's worth seeing through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #73
79. the last election day was one of the bloodiest days ever in Iraq
And the violence did not stop. It did not even slow down. I see any new government as just a puppet government of the US. Im sure most Iraqis do also. Especially if we have our troops still there.

We have to leave Iraq. Plain and simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #79
83. I doubt it
If most Iraqis are risking death to vote, I think they will take their government a bit more seriously than that. That's the success: that no matter how bad the violence is, Iraqis are voting anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:27 AM
Response to Reply #83
174. It matters not who votes
but who counts the votes. Who will be counting the votes, BTW?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #73
92. That's putting lipstck on a pig and calling it progress.
American military should not be deployed to do gunboat diplomacy to deliver democracy. The *voting* is a great picture for the television but has virtually no hope of engendering long range stability for Iraq. Remember, the great republican love shouted about the Iraqi purple fingers back in January. American military power can not force Iraq to embrace the tenants of democracy. That is a political aim which should involve political means, not military.

All that glitters is not gold. Holding up an Iraqi vote cast under the conditions of occupation as a moral equivalent of progress is specious at best. Democracy - American style supposedly arrived on this date, is a pretty picture for American TV audiences. If successful progress is just giving the appearance of voting then why are there so many people dead and for what Noble Cause.

This stunted pig is wearing cheap lipstick and it is past time to bring the troops home.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #92
95. We disagree
Not much more to say than that. I think the voting was a great thing, and I hope that it lays the foundation for a future stable government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #95
108. Iraqis voting was not the reason for war. The cost was
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 02:17 AM by Pithy Cherub
over 2100 American familes burying a family member, over 15,000 who are missing body parts they had before leaving American soil, tens of thousands of Iraqi's left dead, and who knows how may maimed so republican chickenhawks, apologists and Iraq War supporters (like Warner) can say, "look at them with they voted". Progress, isn't it? That is moral degeneracy and it is practiced by those without any skin in the game and using others peoples' families to play war games. It is beyond despicable and not defensible. To squander America's moral authority for so little *progress* with the lasting value of a tissue in hot water, is beyond contempt.

You are correct. We disagree. Vehemently. It is a matter of Life and Death!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #108
120. Right
The original purpose of my entry into this thread was to suggest that the reasons for war and the crimes that may have been committed to get us into the war are now not as important as making sure that we leave Iraq with some semblance of victory over there. I still believe this to be the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #95
116. in other words, you can't respond in any meaningful way.
because you're all out of empty phrases and useless talking points. When confronted with reality, you just repeat the original line. Booooring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #116
122. That's right, dood.
You're awesome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #122
126. well, that pretty much pegs your age.
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 02:29 AM by thebigidea
no wonder your arguments were so infantile. Well, have fun with that sharp wit. It'll obviously bring joy to millions. Its already bored me to tears, so I'll leave you to be fileted alive by folks twenty times smarter.

There is a limit to how many times I can be bothered to read such idiocy as "you're cute when you're angry" in lieu of an argument.

Besides, I'm late for my getting hit on the head lessons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #126
144. Where does it peg my age?
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 03:23 AM by DavidBowman
I don't insult people just because I disagree with them about politics. I don't know what that says about my age, but it makes me a much nicer person.

I'll bet you're a big hit at parties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #95
130. So why didn't that last great session of Iraqi voting allow us to be done
and get out?

What will be different this time? Or the Iraqi elections in a year, or 5 years, or 10 years?

Or the next milestone trotted out by the Bush administration at several month intervals to convince us of "progress"? End of Major Hostilities? Capture of Saddam? First Democratic election? Constitution? First NFL game played in Iraq? Desperate Housewives broadcast in HDTV in Iraq? Which milestone will be sufficient? :shrug:

Can you define "victory" or completion of the "mission"? Or is it like art, or pornography, we will simply trust you to "know it when you see it"? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #130
134. You don't have to trust me
It's not my decision (I imagine that that's comforting to many of you). If Iraq wants us there, and we feel that we're winning, I say we stay.

A good indication might be Desperate Housewives on HDTV in Iraq, since you mentioned it. In fact, Mark Warner should've used that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #134
175. It's not comforting at all
Because the Neocons who are running this current fiasco think exactly as you do. The sad thing is they have access to much better "intelligence" than you do and they still persist in this debacle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:26 AM
Response to Reply #73
173. Oh, goody
Do they get to have ink on their fingers again and can we have the members of Congress copy them again in a shameless attempt to gain political capital from a sham?

Sorry, an occupation government will be seen as a puppet government, even if it isn't. And perception is more important than what might be but probably isn't the reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #14
132. Hmmm
Based on that logic, you would recommend that a rapist be required to assist the person he/she raped to overcome said rape.

Why would cutting off the war effort at the knees be a disaster and as well, for whom would it be a disaster?

The UN needs to take over the peacekeeping mission and we need to get totally, completely out (even out of our precious new Middle East bases).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #132
139. Right.
"Based on that logic, you would recommend that a rapist be required to assist the person he/she raped to overcome said rape."

Yes, that's correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #139
151. OK, now you should put on your fire-proof suit.
You can't be serious...I hope you just forgot to put your sarcasm icon next to your words here.

This could get real ugly, real fast if you really think that. Please say you don't really believe that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidBowman Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #151
154. I couldn't resist
The payoff was too good. Sorry, Tavalon, I didn't mean to make fun of you, but the comparison was too... out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #154
197. LOL, you're not doing much better on your second foray
through DU, but it IS fun to watch you try. I'm pretty sure I have your first attempt pegged, though I haven't been able to tie the two names together.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
In Truth We Trust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:41 AM
Response to Original message
15. Paper Ballots NOW! Hand Counts NOW!! IMPEACHMENT NOW!!!
no more dino's either!

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #15
47. NOW!!
And ain't that the Truth?

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
23. Warner *borrowed* the Iraq GOP talking points,
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 12:49 AM by Pithy Cherub
because he has absolutely no experience, knowledge or abilities in the foreign policy national security arena. Warner is entitled to an opinion, but has no creds to state why people should follow him. We get the newspaper too. He COMPLETELY skips the fact that accountability is necessary to move forward and reclaim America's moral authority in the world. There are a wealth of better Exit Iraq plans out there.

Warner didn't disappoint as much as make me laugh at how he is training to be the new 2008 version of Lieberman. Warner, Joementum II, updated just in time for 2008! :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
25. I can understand his point
I have mixed feelings about the whole thing. It seems sick to me that one half of our country can push for an invasion which destroys the country, and the other half can then pull us completely out, leaving the mess we created. I'm sure no one in Iraq gives a damn about the soul-searching of our partisan politics, they just want the people who broke their country to fix it. And he's right: the fact that the invasion was wrong doesn't make our abandonment of the nation we broke right.

So I get what Warner and Clinton and Kerry are saying, and can empathize strongly with it. I wonder what decision I'd make in their position. I'd have trouble just pulling out and leaving Iraq in the shape the Republicans put them in.

But I'm not in their position, and I don't agree with their decision. I don't see how we are going to fix anything we broke. I don't see how our presence there makes anything more hopeful. The fighting is happening because we are there. The possible Civil War will happen whether we pull out tonight or ten years from now.

If Warner or Kerry or Clinton or anyone else wants to set a legitimate, concrete condition that will allow us to leave, I'll listen. It needs to be more defined than "When things are stable enough for us to withdraw." But if they can define it as, say, when Iraq achieves a certain election goal, or consitutional goal, or troop training goal, and the goal itself is something quickly achievable, I can accept that. It's not as good as pulling out by morning, but it's better than hanging out for the next ten years.

Anyway, my thoughts. One more thing--Kerry or Clinton or Warner would all make better decisions than BushCo or McCainCo or any other RepubCo that could win in 2008. Even if they say the same words, they would all do a better job than Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrewerJohn Donating Member (499 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #25
94. Well, the people who broke their country
are never going to fix it. Either they don't know how or they don't want to (I vote the second). And they are in power for the next three years, unless something wonderful happens. What to do in the meantime?

Three. More. Years. of this insanity. Are the R's listening to whatever sage advice our Warners, Kerrys and Clintons are offering about conditions, goals, or whatever? Let me hazard a guess...NO. In fact, I fully expect things to be an order of magnitude worse by the time they come to their accounting in '08. There will be some kind of softening maneuver to make it look otherwise for the elections, like temporarily pulling some troops back, but no real change. How can this be fought?

The only way I see is to attack the occupation full on, at every opportunity. Make BushCo own it, or lose their nerve and be condemned as wafflers. They deserve to be in the Hague for starting this, and we should be all about sending them there. Having a strategy for actually getting out is fine, but I can't pretend that one would have any chance of actually being enacted until we get the criminals out of office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:29 AM
Response to Reply #94
128. I don't completely agree.
Bush has no plan to get us out, and no idea what victory looks like, so he's being seen as ineffective. The last thing we should do, from a political standpoint, is look as ineffective as him. A reasoned strategy makes us look wiser. (I'm not saying Warner has the right strategy, I'm disagreeing with your implication that we don't need a strategy, we just need to point out Bush's failures).

As for being stuck with this for three more years, not necessarily. Congress is up for election next year. If we have a strategy, we push it before the voters, and that pressures the Repubs in Congress to listen. If they don't, it offers a chance to replace them.

Bush Daddy didn't listen to the Dems in Congress, either, and eventually the Dems and Repubs stopped listening to him. They began passing the legislation they saw fit, and overriding Bush Daddy's vetoes. Bush Daddy had more overridden vetoes than any other president. That's when the economy began to turn around, in fact, when Congress ignored Bush.

That's our goal now. Win in 2006. Make Iraq such a liability for the Repubs that they turn on Bush and support our ideas. To do that, we have to do more than complain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qibing Zero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #128
187. Look, we all want to end this madness ASAP,
but it's not like we don't have a strategy for what to do with Iraq, or that the dems couldn't easily create one.

We want to help them. Helping them requires first of all that we get all of our people out of their country save for, say, an ambassador or two. Our mere presence is now what gets their families shot, tortured, and blown up. If we're not doing it, the 'insurgancy' is. And if you don't want to take my word for it, just look at some of the polls linked to in this thread. They don't want us to stay and fix things - they want us out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #187
215. I wasn't clear
I wasn't disagreeing that we need to get out now. I was disagreeing that the Repubs aren't listening to Warner and Clinton and Kerry. You were implying that only a full assault and unified cries for immediate withdrawal will have any effect, that the Republicans won't listen anyway, so we have to scream so the people will listen. I think that's a bad strategy. Emotionally fulfilling, but bad, and harmful.

The Republicans are listening to Warner and Kerry and Clinton. The Republicans, not counting BushCo, want out of Iraq very badly right now. They would love nothing better than the Democrats to get us out, so they can blame the Democrats for the failure, yet not have to defend the situation in Iraq any more. To that end, they are listening to plans that they can agree with. They won't pull out immediately--too much like admitting they are wrong, and they won't do that. They won't set a timetable--there are a lot reasons, some legite, why they won't. But what Kerry and Warner and Clinton and others are doing is giving them a way out. The Repubs keep saying we need to stay until our goals are met. The Dems are saying "Okay, we get that. Now, let's define those goals."

That gives the Republicans a way out, so they are listening.

That's what I was trying to say. I think we should pull out immediately, too. But it won't happen. I can understand what Warner et al are up to. I'd probably like them better if they called for immediate pullout. But I won't condemn them as DINOs for taking a practical approach to get us out. In the end, they are trying to get us out, and that's a lot better than what BushCo and the Repubs are doing.

Now, if we had the power to end it, and they took this position, I'd oppose them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #94
177. One.More.Year
if we get a majority in the House. Let's work toward that, shall we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #177
216. Yes, we shall
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
30. Is this thing on?
Attention Attention:

1.The presence of US forces is the #1 Iraq de-stabilizer. PERIOD

2.Murtha did not call for immediate withdrawl, he said pull back to the perimeter

3. Refer back to #1 till it sinks in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #30
42. ScrEEEEEEEEEEEch......
The choir is good to go. It's the latest guest preacher that needs to be introduced to Murtha's word before speaking out loud again....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
34. But, gee, he's a Southern Governor from a Red State, just like Bill
We could win with him I tell you!

:eyes:

At least Kerry wants to get all the troops out by the end of 2006.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
39. This Warner guy is stinking to high heaven.
NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
49. big fat Sigh
I don't get it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:12 AM
Response to Original message
59. I can't even go there. My Senator Feinstein is

a filthy war profiteer



So, I can't cast stones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #59
182. "They can't all be winners, kid."

I mean, you don't land one like this every day:



But, you know, I'm not philosophically opposed to cloning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
91. Typical DLC corporatist sheep.
I saw Warner on C-SPAN last weekend, and I was very unimpressed. Just another jello-spined "centrist".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
113. The Fox Neanderthals are going to be throwing this right back in our faces
:grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GrpCaptMandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:12 AM
Response to Original message
168. So which is it?
Has the DLC gotten to Warner?

Since he lacks military experience, has he overcompensated?

Has he never met Dennis?

Fuck if this doesn't bum me out! I had some hopes for him.

On the other hand, I have a feeling we libs aren't going to *get* a candidate to our liking. We're going to have to hold our noses . . . AGAIN.

The alternative is to turn America over to another rightwing-fundie-susceptible Repiglican . . . AGAIN.

The prospects are as shiny as a mirror in fog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:38 AM
Response to Original message
181. Can someone pleaaaaase get Al Gore on the phone?
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 03:41 AM by impeachdubya
Some of us would REALLY like him to clear off his calendar for 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #181
228. Has he ever called for the immediate withdrawl of troops?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #228
232. Lets ask him.
He's been pretty scathing vis a vis this war, I know that. But if you've got a better candidate, there's plenty of time to convince me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:56 AM
Response to Original message
184. There's another Dem I can't support then.
I will not support any candidate that does not make withdrawal from Iraq as their number one campaign issue. I'm done with nuance on this issue. Our occupation of Iraq is the most egregious and destabilizing event committed by the USA during my life. No pullout? No support!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:59 AM
Response to Reply #184
185. Agreed. If the Democratic Party can't come up with a candidate who
is looking to ACTIVELY END this disgrace and hold Bush accountable for starting it in the first place, and if the party "leadership" decides it's "bad strategy" to seek these ends, then the party will unworthy of support IMO.

What will happen is unclear now though... Will the party go through the door that Murtha has opened for it, or will it stick with the Hilary/Warner path?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:38 AM
Response to Original message
190. Another one bites the dust!
I guess the perfect candidate is still yet to be found. Even if found, I am sure there would be someone to smack him/her down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #190
191. God, I am soooo tired of politicians who don't get it. So, he's young,
blow dried and an asshole. No vote from us and my family has 14. Go and get dry behind your ears, Warner. We're done with little boys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:59 AM
Response to Reply #191
193. Actually....
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 04:59 AM by Behind the Aegis
...the cannibalism has already started. It was just a few days ago that people were touting the wonders that was Warner...now, this! Hang'em high!

I am already sick of this shit! What year is this? OH YES! It is 2005! We have almost 2 fucking years before we need to be worrying about this, but, most do not have their "eyes on the prize," 2006!

I used to think that just FR and Rethugs were so dogmatic...what a fucking wake-up call! The acrid nature of some here is so off-putting.

The 'perfect' candidate will NEVER be perfect!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #193
196. so, talking about a person in leadership and our opinions about
their public positions is not allowed? WTF?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #196
200. Oh no!
I am not one of "those" people! Knock yourself out. My reaction is about how some will be "lauded" here, then, once something not so great is found, will be ripped apart like a piece of meat.

Hell, today, I was pointing out how another candidate might be attacked and I was treated as if I was the one launching the attack! I am all for dissecting a candidate, but there comes a point where we have to ask ourselves...is it better to have a DINO in a seat or a Republican?

How many times have you seen a Democrat "cross the line?" I have seen it a few times. How many times have you seen a Republican "cross the line?" I have seen it...well, I have seen it so few times, that I don't even have to take my shoes off to count the number of times! So, who is better a (D) or a (R)? It won't ALWAYS work out that way, but I would rather retake the House in 2006 than sit and piss and moan about who MIGHT be the 2008 candidate!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phylny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 06:40 AM
Response to Reply #193
205. "The 'perfect' candidate will NEVER be perfect!"
Amen!

I am not, nor have I ever been, a supporter of *'s war. I'm not ready, however, to discount Mark Warner over this, because I lived in Virginia while he was governor, and I found him to be intelligent, honest, straightforward, and compassionate - qualities not seen in the current administration.

Having said that, I wouldn't mind if he were the #2 on the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:53 AM
Response to Original message
192. he just lost my vote n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:07 AM
Response to Original message
195. Oh, NO!
A democrat in a red state engaged in politics??? Well spank my ass and call me Charlie.

Jesus, we should be glad he's even in a position where what he says gets into the paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lakemonster11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
198. "Democrat Gov. Warner"?
They're even using the Republicans' awful grammar!

"Democrat" is a [email protected]*^ing noun, jerks.
"Democratic" is the adjective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #198
199. EXACTLY!!!!!
that just PISSES me off! And it is Reuters too! :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mutley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
204. I suppose "set milestones for progress" are slightly better than
"stay the course" "stay the course" "stay the course" "stay the course" "stay the course" "stay the course"

Though of course I'd much rather see a set withdrawal date -- even if it was another 6 months or a year before that date. How will the Iraqi army ever be motivated to learn how to take care of its own damn country if they know the US will be there indefinitely?

But we most certainly DO need to "re-fight how we got into (the Iraq war)." Those who lied and caused thousands and thousands of deaths need to be held accountable. Justice must be done. Maybe I'm being cynical, but I gotta wonder who's been lining the pockets (or making death threats) of Gov. Mark Warner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
207. Yeah, he said this awhile back. More DLC crap. They WANTED this
war, have no doubt about that.

I would never vote for this person. Doesn't have a clue about right and wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
208. Did you see that Zogby questioned why no media attention on Kerry or Hagel
for Kerry's detailed withdrawal plan and Hagel's speech advocating withdrawal?

He said both were the most thoughtful presentations, yet the media roundly ignored both - in service to the White House, no doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
209. So this means that
when I stop by to visit DU tomorrow morning, the front page will be covered with threads promoting more progressive dems who don't need a "free pass," because they were smart enough to know better to begin with, right?

Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
214. Warner is either out of touch or is completely bought off.
Personally, I say both.

So, we are to give this treasonous war of mass murder and theft a 'pass'?

Fuck that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dying Eagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
219. I think DU can finally agree......RUSS FEINGOLD for President!!!!
As we watch cowardly Dem's fall one by one into this trap.....keep in mind The Chessehead President is on his way!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #219
230. Amen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuelahWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
220. And how many of his own kids or relatives
is Warner willing to send over there to "finish the job"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
223. I don;t disagree with him about withdrawal but he is dead wrong ..
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 12:01 PM by Armstead
when he says we don't need to reexamine how we got into this damn mess.

Brotehr Bush and everyone else who supported his drive to war put us into a no-win position. Every choice we now face sucks the big one. There are no "good" answers.

The best we can do is get out as quickly as possible, without doing it so prematurely that Iraq will never recover. We fucked that country, and we owe it to them to at least get out carefully....The talks about timetables, as soon a practicable, dates etc. are just Beltway masturbations....I say we make the benchmark "as soon as possible" and leave it to the military experts to figure out how best to accomplish that. (Real military experts, not Rumsfeld or the Bushbots in uniform.)

But where I totally disagree with folks like Warner is in saying it doesn't matter how we got into this mess. Aside from figuring out how to extricate ourselves, there is NOTHING more important than doing that.

The way we got into the war is a template for everything else that is wrong with this country at the moment. Until we face that honestly, we will never get beyond the current sorry state of affairs that the USA has become.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
225. Damn, and I had high hopes for Warner
Oh well...

We'll see how things shape up next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
226. Politically Stupid
Do these politicians live in a vacuum or are they really Repukes posing as Dems? I have to wonder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
227. sound a lot like many of the other potential '08 candidates...
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 03:25 PM by Freddie Stubbs
Bayh: find realistic way to define success, then set benchmarks

Edwards: was "wrong". Wants "significant" reduction of troops after elections early next year. He'd tie the proportion of troops withdrawn to benchmarks set for Iraqi soldier performance.

Biden: no withdrawals until political situation improves, but sees 100K troops back home by '07. Does not rule out more troops if necessary. Wants admin to come clean about targets for Iraqi troop training. More civillian staff in Iraq.

Clark: add civillian component; consider adding troops; adjust the mix on the ground; establish clear benchmarks for training

Clinton: No immed. withdrawal, no troop increase, set specific benchmarks for training Iraqi forces and make it clear to Iraq that the US's military committment is limited.

Feingold: 12/31/06 is a "target date" for troops to come home. But he's flexible.

Kerry: begin drawn down of 20K troops after elections in Dec and continue if successful.

Richardson: "It is now time for the military commanders to design a phased, definitive withdrawal plan."

Warner: No immed. withdrawal, no troop increase, set specific benchmarks for Iraqi forces. Eschews "debating the past."

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2005/11/dem_08ers_on_th.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-29-05 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
234. As a "religous DU'er" I sort of take offense at your "expletive" about
Edited on Tue Nov-29-05 08:16 PM by KoKo01
"Jesus Bald Headed Christ." And, as I know you are Catholic...and I am Episcopalian...you have to understand what I see as some kind of putrid HYPOCRACY!

Now..given that you were just doing a DU "Discussion Post"...it's forgiven in that you needed to say what you needed to say...given where you ARE in THIS time frame in America....

But still......it was kind of "mean." :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-02-05 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
237. if we discuss how we got into Iraq, might have to give back OIL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-02-05 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
238. Nice that the war can UNITE the Dems and repukes
now we can all agree to stay the course.

Calling Sen. Joe, your President wants to thank you. geesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jun 18th 2021, 04:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC