Another poll, but telling

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Maybe now we will be able to make the Iraqi's work for their own country instead of them believing we will prop them up indefinitely.

Thats a firece arrogant attitude to take, Brad. I know I wouldnt react well to it.

Guys who invaded my country: you must be responsible for your own country,

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Thats a firece arrogant attitude to take, Brad. I know I wouldnt react well to it.

Guys who invaded my country: you must be responsible for your own country,

I agree to a point. When a nations own citizens refuses to stand up for themselves for five years and depend on the U.S. to prop themselves up because they don't want to........... Where do you set the limit?
Yes we were the aggressors and invaded. Yes by international law we are responsible for their well being and safety but where do you draw the line? What do you do when they refuse to take responsibility? We can defend them from foreign forces. We can provide the money and services for their well being but we can't defend them from themselves if they don't want to.

[Rose]

It was a FOX news poll. That is all.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Thats a firece arrogant attitude to take, Brad. I know I wouldnt react well to it.

Guys who invaded my country: you must be responsible for your own country,

Repeated link: We owe the Iraqis exactly nothing.

As for a change in strategy: Victory in Iraq.

Originally Posted by bradclark1

What I bingo'd is you finally recognize that Bush has been lying

How and where did you "bingo" that people like Sea Demon accept the claim that Bush lied? :hmm:

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

What I bingo'd is you finally recognize that Bush has been lying and the blind faith crowd are finally opening their eyes. More Republican politicians are realizing Bush has lost all sense of reality and are swapping sides. Maybe now we will be able to make the Iraqi's work for their own country instead of them believing we will prop them up indefinitely.

I made no such assertions of Bush lying. I think all the "lying" charges are totally bogus anyway. Bush is putting more heat on the Iraqi's because we have a two party system. And one side of that equation....your side, is intent on surrender, weakness, betrayal, and lack of foresight. So I think Bush is realizing that because of the whining from the left, and their own lack of any plan whatsoever, he's got to put some heat on these people before he leaves. Republicans like Hagel won't last anyway in the long run. So who cares?

Put it this way, getting our troops out of Iraq "as fast as possible" is not a solution to the problems. Finding a way to end the chaos, establish security, and root out and destroy terrorist elements is the winning end for the USA here. That's what Bush is working toward. Of course that means Bush wins and looks good. And you guys can't have that, so you root against the USA and whine that we have to get the troops out now and call it a failure. Despite those pleas from you lefties, Bush ain't doing that. Thankfully. So any point you could have made is totally moot.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

As for a change in strategy: Victory in Iraq.

How and where did you "bingo" that people like Sea Demon accept the claim that Bush lied? :hmm:

Thanks AL. And excellent links there. There is absolutely no substitute for victory in war.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Thanks AL. And excellent links there. There is absolutely no substitute for victory in war.

I suggest you carefully read both articles I linked to and not base you opinion of them on their misleading titles.

[Skybird]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...011101572.html

In another interview with German newspaper Die Welt, Brzezinski also said, that a military solution would be possible ,maybe, if having 500000 troops in Iraq and letting them brutally brake lose and wage war like it was done in the past. What reminds me of the destruction of a Vietnamese city, "in order to save it". The president's plan he called pointless, a lost cause, and expressing nothing, and he said that in the long view america has to accept that it's mere presence in Iraq alone is what enflames the conflict more and more - which makes it a logical conclusion that the 26000 additional troops will not ease but increase the violance. The declared goal of taking on the militias of Al Sadr he put into relation by referring to their numbers (60000) and the unifying effect such a direct confrontation would have, and that it escapes one's understanding how a growing of one'S enemy's numbers and cooperation standards should be a road to victory. Next he said that all neighbours in the region have a legitimate interest in what happens in Iraq, and that this is a valid demand for being taken into account - even if the US interests is different. US interests therefore do not rule out Iran's interests, for example. One must not like it, but you can't come around Iran. He cautiously expressed his fear that Bush may try to escape the mess he has brought the US into by trying to widen the conflict and get Syria and Iran involved in fighting, so that the war will widen. He compared the atmosphere of rejecting and/or fleeing reality to the level the WH has seen during Watergate. Here, like in the WP interview and in other comments before he expressed that you cannot gain anything anymore if you behave like a colonial power. These ages are gone.

One must not like his conclusions, but I can't see how one can avoid their content
eternally. Take them as an illustration of how stupid and self-hurting this invasion has been.

http://www.welt.de/data/2007/01/23/1186054.html

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

I made no such assertions of Bush lying. I think all the "lying" charges are totally bogus anyway. Bush is putting more heat on the Iraqi's because we have a two party system. And one side of that equation....your side, is intent on surrender, weakness, betrayal, and lack of foresight. So I think Bush is realizing that because of the whining from the left, and their own lack of any plan whatsoever, he's got to put some heat on these people before he leaves. Republicans like Hagel won't last anyway in the long run. So who cares?

Put it this way, getting our troops out of Iraq "as fast as possible" is not a solution to the problems. Finding a way to end the chaos, establish security, and root out and destroy terrorist elements is the winning end for the USA here. That's what Bush is working toward. Of course that means Bush wins and looks good. And you guys can't have that, so you root against the USA and whine that we have to get the troops out now and call it a failure. Despite those pleas from you lefties, Bush ain't doing that. Thankfully. So any point you could have made is totally moot.

I'll tell that to (R) Sen Warren. I wouldn't call making the Iraqi's do their jobs running. It might be okay with you to sacrifice U.S. troops needlessly but not me. Put our strength in making them take care of themselves. Your way has already proved to be the way of the loser.

[Enigma]

And one side of that equation....your side, is intent on surrender, weakness, betrayal, and lack of foresight. So I think Bush is realizing that because of the whining from the left, and their own lack of any plan whatsoever, he's got to put some heat on these people before he leaves.

Ho hum. Where does one begin?

First off, that whole thing about the left being hell bent on surrender and betrayal and all that yap, I think i'll pass. Seriosuly, if we cant elevate the conversation above "your side is chicken!" with absolutly absurd comments like this, is there really a point?

As for the left not having a plan, you may have a point. (with the exception of Biden, who will scream his plan until somebody listens. Including TIm Russert.) However, throwing anoter 20'000 troops into a conflict with no clear objectives, no time table, and no support at home or in the international community isnt exactly a stellar plan either. Ask Lyndon Johnson.

Foresight?!!? Invasion without exit strategy? You kidding?

As for the poll that started this conversation, it is an obviously skewed poll with an obvious agenda, but a network that makes no bones about its bias under the guise of not being bias. It's a joke, pure and simple, designed to be used by ....well,...those who see it conveniently fit to be used. :hmm:

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

I suggest you carefully read both articles I linked to and not base you opinion of them on their misleading titles.

:rotfl:

[bradclark1]

As for the left not having a plan, you may have a point.

Most of what Democrats are saying and have been saying is set benchmarks. That sounds like a plan to me. Two words that cover a lot of territory when broken down.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

I'll tell that to (R) Sen Warren. I wouldn't call making the Iraqi's do their jobs running. It might be okay with you to sacrifice U.S. troops needlessly but not me. Put our strength in making them take care of themselves. Your way has already proved to be the way of the loser.

That's exactly what Bush is doing. But it would be nice if the left-wing whining would stop for a change. Bush has to step on these people because your side is pushing for total surrender. I just wonder whether or not we're going to leave them with an inactive terrorists underground that is waiting for us to leave before they resume. Because of the left's abject weakness, this is a distinct possibility. The timetable being sought now and rush to get everyone out, even if the job remains undone will most assuredly make this a reality.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

:rotfl:

Hey, crap happens.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Most of what Democrats are saying and have been saying is set benchmarks. That sounds like a plan to me. Two words that cover a lot of territory when broken down.

Benchmarks help the bad guys gauge our activities. The only way to deal with terrorists is screw the banchmarks, and go all out and destroy them. Unfortunately, With a Democrat congress, Bush has no choice but to do some of this their way.