Bush and the midterm election

[Spazz]

Dude no of the issues important to you are important to the country at all. They all contain the word god. Nothing bout the constitution jobs or healthcare. Just buncha selfish ideas that you want others to adhere to. You really are shit homie.

[Phlegm]

According to Bush today, the Democrats have no plan to keep Americans safe from terrorists.

Bush said Democrats calling for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq aren't unpatriotic, just wrong. He said Democrats who voted against legislation to detain and interrogate suspected terrorists, the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program and the Patriot Act don't understand the stakes in the war on terror.

"If they say they want to win the war on terror, but call for America to pull out of what al-Qaida says is the central front in this war, ask them this question: 'What's your plan?' The truth is the Democrats can't answer that question. Harsh criticism is not a plan for victory. Second guessing is not a strategy.

"We have a plan for victory. We have a plan to secure this country.

[Evermore]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

[Martrae]

Unfortunately, we are well and truly stuck now. These are the type of idealists that would see us leaving as weakness and they would step up attacks on us immediately.

[Zanchief]

So what is the solution? Kill every single person who opposes you're ideology?

[Lueyen]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

[Lueyen]

So what is the solution? Kill every single person who opposes you're ideology?

No but kill every single person who's ideology dictates that they try to kill us.

[Evermore]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

[Zanchief]

So what is the solution? Kill every single person who opposes you're ideology?

No but kill every single person who's ideology dictates that they try to kill us.

And by 'us', you mean the people who invaded and deposed their government and have been occupying their country?

Gotcha.

Imperialism and mass genocide in the name of god. Boy do you have the moral high ground.

[Lueyen]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

[Zanchief]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

I really don't think it's up to Evermore of the Internet to come up with a plan for victory. I'm pretty sure el presidente should have thought of that before fucking this whole thing up.

[Lueyen]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

I really don't think it's up to Evermore of the Internet to come up with a plan for victory. I'm pretty sure el presidente should have thought of that before fucking this whole thing up.

No but he's spouting towing the party line if you will, critisim of how it's handeled and the answer is to run away.

[Evermore]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

Blindness revealed. Dude you are fighting an IDEAL. No army in the world can defeat an IDEAL. Its total rhetoric to think there ever was a viable plan for victory. What possible plan can anyone come up with to defeat an abstract? If you actually look, only greater terrorism has ever defeated this. Ask the soviets. pre kruschiev ( sp ) if you spoke up or rebelled at all you were taken out and shot or jailed and forgotten period. Americans will never do this.

Truth is WE SHOULDN'T BE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. this is costing BILLIONS and even more importantly OUR SOLDIERS LIVES.


wake up bud. this is Vietnam all over again.

[Evermore]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

I really don't think it's up to Evermore of the Internet to come up with a plan for victory. I'm pretty sure el presidente should have thought of that before fucking this whole thing up.

No but he's spouting towing the party line if you will, critisim of how it's handeled and the answer is to run away.

ah every good gambler or businessman knows when to cut his losses.

[Evermore]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

Way to re-affirm what Bush said in the quote previous to your post.

are you ok dude? the post before mine was president dickturd saying the dems dont have a plan. i said BUSH doesnt have a plan. go go gadget reading comprehension

Because you say Bush has not clue how to win does not mean he has no plan or that it's true for that matter. Saying he has no clue how to win is being critical of the plan. You have not given any sort of plan for victory, the only thing you say is that it's time to get out of there, surrender and retreat is not a plan for victory.

You did exactly what the Bush quote charges, and you did not put forth a plan for victory. You critizied and gave a plan for surrender.

I really don't think it's up to Evermore of the Internet to come up with a plan for victory. I'm pretty sure el presidente should have thought of that before fucking this whole thing up.

Zanchief is wise for a canadian

[Spazz]

No were fighting them over there so we dont have to fight them over here:)

[Lueyen]

So what you are saying Evermore is the Democrats do indeed have a plan, that plan is based on the impression there is no possibility of victory so we must give up, pack up and go home?

[Gargamellow]

Propoganda goes both ways.

[Diekan]

lol thats fucking funny. In case you dont realize it you are fighting idealism, not an army. Bush has NO FUCKING CLUE how to win in Iraq and never has. It's LONG past time to get out of there.

That's pretty much it... he had no exit plan, no plan to deal with other significant issues as they arose, he lied about why we needed to go in (blamed it on bad intel), etc...

All we're doing is getting people (on both sides) killed. Look, you can't force democracy on a people that's lived under a completely opposite system for practically THOUSANDS of years. You can't walk in there and "flip a switch" and make everything all right - it doesn't work that way.

We had no business going in, in the first place. We have business staying around now.

The issues that REALLY matter?

Ohhh let's see... hmm what issues are more important that what Mindia and the rest of the brainwashed right think...

Oh I know...

How about:

CRIME
EDUCATION
JOBS
TAXES
THE ENVIRONMENT
HEALTH CARE

Just thought I'd... you know... throw those out there. I mean after all... you'd think that the above list would rank pretty high on the list for anyone with more than two brain cells. I guess for the Mindia's they rest jjjuuussstttt under stoping gays from getting married... because after all THAT is really what's most important... frivolous shit like that.

[Diekan]

So what you are saying Evermore is the Democrats do indeed have a plan, that plan is based on the impression there is no possibility of victory so we must give up, pack up and go home?

VICTORY OF WHAT?!?!?!?!?!??!?!???!!!?!??!11//1

What victory is there to be gained in Iraq? I thought our "objective" was to stop global terrorism, was it not? We've already found that Iraq had nothing to with 9/11, they had no WMD's, no ties to bin Laden... what fucking "victory" are you talking about? The terrorists we're supposed to be fighting are not all living in Iraq, sharing some apartment down on main street.

I want to know what "victory" you're referring to... really tell us... tell us all what this magical victory is supposed to be?

The only victory I am aware of, as to being our objective after 9/11, was to stomp out terrorism and kill bin Laden.

[Lueyen]

I want to know what "victory" you're referring to... really tell us... tell us all what this magical victory is supposed to be?

There is nothing magical. Regardless of your feelings on the validity of our actions in toppling the Hussein regime, it's done and it can not be feasibly undone. This has the adverse effect of leaving a giant power vacuum in the country, and it is our responsibility to facilitate the forming of a new governmental leadership and to ensure that the transition of leadership in the country doesn't boil down to a decision decided by which brutal warlord has the biggest gun. The difficulty of this transition should come as no surprise to anyone, it was in my mind from the start a foregone conclusion. This is the final objective we must accomplish, transition to a secure government which can effectively deal with what lies ahead for the country. This will not be accomplished by half haphazardly pulling our forces out of the country, nor necessarily graduated removal by a strictly adhered to schedule.

In regards to military victory gained by defeating ones enemy, first ask yourself who is it exactly we are engaged in armed conflict with? The answer is groups who by use of force wish to vie for control of the country or regions there within. This is exactly the groups and people who will take control via violence and threat should we abandon the Iraqi people a second time. We are also fighting terrorist organizations, much like the local groups who would vie for power on a regional level, terrorist organizations vie for power and influence over the entire country, it is imperative that we do not withdraw from the country leaving this enemy any reasonable foot hold.

The only real way I can see to accomplish any of this is through an Iraqi government and security forces. If we withdraw for any of the reasons given for immediate complete withdrawal we yet again leave the people of Iraq at the mercy of those who use violence and threat to garner power. If we put forth any sort of schedule of graduated removal, and place that plan and strict adherence to it above all else, then we give the forces who pit themselves against us a road map for plan of attack.

I want us out of Iraq, I don't want to be there a second longer then necessary. I think things over there could be run better, that we could have a better plan for exit if you will. What I think we do need is a reasonable exit strategy, with it's primary focus being to get the new government up to speed, to help facilitate it growing to the point it can take over the situation for us. That means if we have a schedule in place, it is imperative that we not loose site of the goal in preference to keeping with that schedule.

Most Democrats seem to favor withdrawal above all else, and that is the only concise plan offered to get the hell out. I may not like to a large extent the plan in place now and it's effectiveness or lack there of, but it is in my mind the only option in comparison. Show me a Democrat who can stop bashing Bush long enough to give a clear plan of withdrawal one whose primary concern is to stabilize the country in such a way that withdrawal will not send the country into chaos, a person who realizes what is at stake, and how precarious the situation is, a person who will deal with the reality of the here and now instead of focusing on the past, and do what is right accepting responsibility to a strong degree for the outcome and they will have my support. As is it appears to me that the DNC plan is to withdraw our forces as quickly as possible without regard to the after affects, because it will simply blame those effects on the Bush administration. That I can not get behind.

In short achieving a withdrawal from Iraq, while still leaving behind a stable country are the conditions of victory. Tucking and running will not by any stretch of the imagination accomplish this, that will result in events similar to Vietnam at it's end.

Edit: oh yea

Imperialism and mass genocide in the name of god. Boy do you have the moral high ground.

My feelings on Iraq and terrorism are not based in any sort of religious, or racial ideology, nice attempt at a pigeon hole though.

[Tossica]

None of the democrats have access to the entire military force and legions of strategic military advisors at this point so it's a little tough to call them out for not having a tight strategic plan in place. I think once you make the decision to try a new strategy, you then use the tools at hand to craft a plan. If I ran and won the presidency, I would prepare for a different approach to the Iraq situation where US presence in Iraq is drastically cut back and then hire an entire team of the best advisors to help make that concept a reality.

[Arlos]

ROFL, even some of the neocons that got us INTO this war are complaining about how Bush & Co. have manged it.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A leading conservative proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq now says dysfunction within the Bush administration has turned U.S. policy there into a disaster.

Richard Perle, who chaired a committee of Pentagon policy advisers early in the Bush administration, said had he seen at the start of the war in 2003 where it would go, he probably would not have advocated an invasion to depose Saddam Hussein. Perle was an assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan.

"I probably would have said, 'Let's consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists,"' he told Vanity Fair magazine in its upcoming January issue.

Asked about the article, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, "We appreciate the Monday-morning quarterbacking, but the president has a plan to succeed in Iraq and we are going forward with it."

Other prominent conservatives criticized the administration's conduct of the war in the article, including Kenneth Adelman, who also served on the Defense Policy Board that informally advised Bush. Adelman said he was "crushed" by the performance of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Adelman also said that neoconservatism, "the idea of using our power for moral good in the world," has been discredited with the public. After Iraq, he told Vanity Fair, "it's not going to sell."

The critiques come as growing numbers of Republicans have criticized Bush's policies on Iraq. The war, unpopular with many Americans, has become a top-tier issue in next week's congressional elections.

Perle said "you have to hold the president responsible" because he didn't recognize "disloyalty" by some in the administration. He said the White House's National Security Council, then run by now-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, did not serve Bush properly.

A year before the war, Adelman predicted demolishing Saddam's military power and liberating Iraq would be a "cakewalk." But he told the magazine he was mistaken in his high opinion of Bush's national security team.

"They turned out to be among the most incompetent teams in the postwar era," he said. "Not only did each of them, individually, have enormous flaws, but together they were deadly, dysfunctional."

If the results werent so tragic and horrible, the level of dysfunction would be hysterical.

-Arlos

[Lueyen]

None of the democrats have access to the entire military force and legions of strategic military advisors at this point so it's a little tough to call them out for not having a tight strategic plan in place. I think once you make the decision to try a new strategy, you then use the tools at hand to craft a plan. If I ran and won the presidency, I would prepare for a different approach to the Iraq situation where US presence in Iraq is drastically cut back and then hire an entire team of the best advisors to help make that concept a reality.

Fair enough, but what do you then do when your military commanders tell you they need current troop levels or even an increase, or when the president of the fragile Iraqi government says the country needs continued US support on a wide scale to facilitate a smooth transition to as yet lacking native forces in military operations.

Essentially you are saying a concrete plan can't be formed because we don't and can't know all the details, that unless you are in the position of executive administration you don't have a clear enough picture of the entire scope of the situation to make detailed or even "rough draft" plans. If this is the case and I tend to agree it is, then what makes anyone so sure that it can be done better and that the Bush Administration is managing it so badly? Yea I know "Bush is stupid", but that doesn't even explain how it is that things are being managed so badly with the multitude of people who are experts advising him. Saying "I think we can do better" or "I don't agree with the objectives" would be one thing but to assert that an absolute horrid job of management is being done and paint some rosy picture of how you can clean the mess up quickly amounts to back seat driving. If you don't have enough to go on to postulate at least something that has some solid aspects of a plan, then you don't have enough to be making realistic appraisals of performance.

If the next presidential election sees a change in the political party of the presidency, and it is on a basis of a mandate to get us out of Iraq, if the situation is not as easy as the left would have us believe what then? Will we do what we must for a stable smooth transition or will we abandon the cause, leaving the country high and dry? If a candidate (and one who is looking to be re-elected) runs and wins primarily on a basis of getting us out of Iraq they will have no choice but to do everything possible to do so. If the country is not yet in a state where we can withdraw the majority if not all of our troops without mass chaos, faced with political pressure especially surrounding a "promise" and re-election we would likely see a premature withdrawal and it will be very much like what we saw happen in Vietnam. Of course for our future president in this scenario, political fall out over something of this nature can be made to roll off them like water by blaming Bush... but in the end we will have failed to "finish" what we started, and the people of Iraq will be worse off where they should have been better off.

Now I know there are those that would like nothing more then for something like this to come to pass, they can then say "I was right, it was a complete catastrophe with major fuck ups" but in the end that only makes it better for political gain and acquisition of power and makes it worse in all other aspects, talk about despicable character.

Edit: The last statement wasn't an accusation or insinuation toward anyone who frequents this board, I don't think anyone here is really that much of a pathetic excuse for a human being... but I can say with certainty that there are politicians that are.

[Phlegm]

More Bush on the campaign trail:

Bush said Democrats calling for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq aren't unpatriotic, just wrong. He said Democrats who voted against legislation to detain and interrogate suspected terrorists, the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program and the Patriot Act don't understand the stakes in the war on terror.