4,000 dead Americans

[Art Sandusky 0]

Just because a situation is bad, doesn't mean you justify your cause with violence.

I know. That this is happening in the first place is what indicts this war further.

[snuffbox 0]

Goddam, Eric Cantor (VA Congressman) made a jabbering retard of himself on Hardball tonight trying to defend the Bush Iraq policy.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Uh oh...

 

"British Forces Held by Iran"

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1257281,00.html

[snuffbox 0]

The binding House bill that provides the massive budget for Iraq that the Bush Admin desires & a stipulation that the US transition out of a combat force by next Aug/Sept has passed. Bush, showing his hand's permanent base/nation building cards, has said he will veto the bill.

 

The Iraq money vs Afghanistan money for the budget is something like $96 billion to $7 billion.

[EricMM 0]

Which is, I assume, a closer ratio than it once was?

 

It doesn't matter. This won't pass the president's desk.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Well, the House has passed it today, I guess it still has to pass the Senate, though.

[snuffbox 0]

The withdrawl portion of the bill doesnt come into effect until Sept 2008, a year and half away. With so many Americans already at odds with this war as it is, this will look very bad for Bush if he vetos it. He would be saying, very clearly, that he has zero intention of leaving Iraq any time soon & presumably casting serious doubts as to whether we will ever leave.

 

While there is no explanation of what 'victory' would be, this is a glaring admission of nation-building & permanent bases. Bin Laden & Al Qaeda were extremely anxious to get the US military presence out of Saudi Arabia...if our presence is able to move to Iraq, they not only see their wishes fulfilled re: Saudi Arabia but also get an unstable breeding ground in Iraq anyway, a rallying point for global terrorism, and the continued neglecting of Afghanistan. An incredible fumble by this Administration on par with nothing in our history. This is the result of big govt naievety at the helm of our military.

[snuffbox 0]

Politically, this also benefits Dems in another way...by preempting any possible attempt by Bush to actually do something right about Iraq as an '08 October Surprise (like LBJ trying to help his Mr. Slave, Hube, in 1968).

[EricMM 0]

I don't even think it'll pass the Senate.

 

Nor would it ever, ever pass bush's desk, as he has no intention of taking America out of Iraq.

[snuffbox 0]

Lieberman would filibuster for days and drool on himself if need be. Definitly not passing the Senate.

 

But it looks great for the House to actually do what Americans want them to do, even if they can't actually end the war themselves.

[NoCalMike 0]

It seems pretty clear that Bush is going to leave this mess up to the next administration. Lets just hope he doesn't create another one in Iran, before he leaves.

[Dr. Zaius 0]

Lieberman would filibuster for days and drool on himself if need be. Definitly not passing the Senate.

 

But it looks great for the House to actually do what Americans want them to do, even if they can't actually end the war themselves.

 

"America didn't elect a Democratic Congress so they'd actually do anything."

-Upcoming G.O.P. talking point.

[snuffbox 0]

"Political theatre" has become the new 'emboldening the enemy". Not that the embloden bit has left us or anything.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

It seems pretty clear that Bush is going to leave this mess up to the next administration. Lets just hope he doesn't create another one in Iran, before he leaves.

 

Exactly. Wait for the interview towards the end of 2009 where George W. Bush says something like "Well, uh, I thought I was entrusting our troops to someone the American people could depend on, but they didn't have the will to fight the terrorists the whole way through...and that whole situation we're in with Iran now is someting I can't take responsiblity for," or something like that.

[snuffbox 0]

If the next President shifts focus from Iraq to Afghanistan (while rotating troops back home & making increases to veterans benefits when they return) with a major speech the Bush Admin will look even worse. It would preempt any of his pubescent cowboy rhetoric by actually focusing on terrorism.

[snuffbox 0]

Recent truck bomb was the worst since the war started.

 

Bush and McCain-on-a-stick are right, the escalation is clearly working.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Does McCain actually think he has a shot at winning the presidency by being a George W. Bush clone?

[Dr. Zaius 0]

Why not? McCain's a maverick politician that says what he really thinks, and doesn't suck up to powerbrokers or reverse his positions when its convenient.

 

Off topic: check out this bridge I just bought!

[NoCalMike 0]

The idea of a surge in troops is not about working or not. Of course if you add 20,000 troops to a city, it will temporarily quell the violence IN THAT CITY for awhile, however all that happens is the forces move on to somewhere else, wait it out and come back. It has basically been the entire story of the war from the beginning, our forces go into a city, obliterate it, leave, and enemy forces and insurgents regroup and come back. That is the problem, the administration still wants people to believe that we are mainly dealing with foreign fighters(other then Iraqis), when the truth is, it is Iraqi insurgent militias that are posing the biggest threat and we are in THEIR COUNTRY basically trying to wipe them out, which is a nearly impossible mission, considering all the factors that have already been discussed ad naseum.

[Art Sandusky 0]

http://bushtimeout.ytmnd.com/ There must have been a purpose for him being out there. Maybe it was more "symbolism" BS. "Look how far away the Vice President is during the President's mic time! Surely this means he no longer holds warmongering influence over the administration!"

[snuffbox 0]

I wonder how many people are going to follow Bush and blame the Democrats for the multiple deployments and extended tours?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

He's saying that now? Does this guy even care about his legacy at this point, or has he just said "fuck it" and decided to go for broke?

[snuffbox 0]

That was the meat/potatoes of his recent speech where Dick Cheney was seen watching from behind some shrubbery.

[snuffbox 0]

12,000 more National Guard may soon be called up.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17971410/

[Art Sandusky 0]

I think he's trying to bring down the entire right wing with him. It'd be awesome (in a morbid way) if he kept sending more and more soldiers for like, the next year, to the point where the only way to stop it would be to impeach him. A guy I know got home from Iraq yesterday and has been told he's going back in March 2008. So much for withdrawl.

 

EDIT: And in less than an hour, I find this: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/05/...ists/index.html

 

rofl

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Well, the terrorists really are over there at least, so that's good to know, I guess? I thought we were supposed to be fighting them, though...

 

Slightly off topic, but how about Nancy Pelosi's debacle of a trip to Syria to try and single handedly broker a Mideast Peace Agreement? What is this bird thinking?

[snuffbox 0]

Can we imagine how bad we could be off today had our former Presidents not chosen to speak diplomatically with our enemies? If JFK just ignored Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis? If Reagan would have given Gorbachev the silent treatment & sent ground troops into Russia instead?

 

Pelosi did what Bush SHOULD be doing but he's too busy thinking foreign policy is a Walker Texas Ranger ep.

 

A handfull of GOP congressman went with Pelosi but, for some reason, Glen Beck & other dipshits are conveniently ignoring that.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Yes, but from what I've heard the problem is that Pelosi misrepresented the Israeli and Syrian positions to each country, seemingly trying to trick them into negotiating again (I have no idea if any of that is true, just what I've heard reported on the radio).

 

But yes, the fact that other people were with her and none of that is being reported speaks volumes.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Slightly off topic, but how about Nancy Pelosi's debacle of a trip to Syria to try and single handedly broker a Mideast Peace Agreement? What is this bird thinking?

 

Okay, notice how I3K acts like he knows what he's talking about here...

 

Yes, but from what I've heard the problem is that Pelosi misrepresented the Israeli and Syrian positions to each country, seemingly trying to trick them into negotiating again (I have no idea if any of that is true, just what I've heard reported on the radio).

 

And then shows that he actually has no idea what he's talking about.

 

 

#1: Israel is GLAD that Pelosi was in Syria.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idU...01?feedType=RSS

 

#2: Israel actually used Pelosi as a trusted go-between to deliver a message to Assad.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/844730.html

 

#3: It's been said before, but despite all the caterwauls from Bush, Limbaugh, and the other usual cast of characters about Pelosi's trip, there were three Republican congressmen in Syria to meet with Assad AT THE SAME EXACT TIME at the behest of or at least with the tacit approval of Bush. Bush's credibility here is nil (as is Dobbs', but we already knew that).

 

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmou...white_house.php

[Dobbs 3K 0]

OK...I've tried to be nice, but I have to say "Dude, shut the fuck up", this time.

 

Okay, notice how I3K acts like he knows what he's talking about here...

 

Yes, but from what I've heard the problem is that Pelosi misrepresented the Israeli and Syrian positions to each country, seemingly trying to trick them into negotiating again (I have no idea if any of that is true, just what I've heard reported on the radio).

 

And then shows that he actually has no idea what he's talking about.

 

#1: Israel is GLAD that Pelosi was in Syria.

BLAH BLAH BLAH...thanks for posting links, though.

 

 

I try to bring a different perspective here. In this instance, I was basically just asking for clarification on an issue being discussed, and you again find a way to jump down my throat FOR NO REASON. Really, completely and blatantly unnecessary.