Bush’s New Iraq Policy: More Troops So We Can Stay the Course
George W. Bush has delayed announcing his new policy on Iraq until after the Christmas break. More troops may be sent to Iraq to help quell the mounting uprisings and help the new government and to secure the last US stronghold, Baghdad.
"Our objective is to help the Iraqi Government deal with the extremists and the killers, and support the vast majority of Iraqis who are reasonable, who want peace," Mr Bush said.
According to Condoleezza Rice, President Bush will present "a new way forward" on Iraq. Australian Foreign Minister Downer said there might be changes to current policy “here and there”.
Everyone, the public, Congress, Senate, other countries, everydamnbody that is saying "get the troops out" - start yelling at Bush to send MORE troops, as it seems he does the opposite the peoples' wishes.
The world's most powerful military is being lead by the world's biggest dip sh!t.
And for all you Bush lovers out there, why don't you take a tour in Iraq and see how you like it! I'm a partially disabled vet thanks to the US Military and Bush's leadership. AND WHAT FOR? WHAT THE HELL IS THE PURPOSE OF MY FRIENDS DYING? WHAT GREAT GOOD HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED??? I can't stand people that support the war, but have never seen the war, or never had to send a son or daughter to the fight.
...he needs to go back to the ranch and have a bellyful of good ol' turkey and stuffing so's he can get a nice, good night's sleep in order to wake up and go for a jog, and maybe spend some time cutting brush, so he can eventually sit down and sign the piece of paper that someone hands to him with his Cheney-dictated decision on it. No need to rush a decision. Don't want to put the troops in danger with something so monumental as a decision, now. Best to let the troops just cool their jets for a few more weeks. They can keep from all that inconvenient dying for just a few more weeks, can't they?
no matter how long that takes, Bush caused this situation with the public endorsement of those who re-elected him back into office and after so many years he is still no closer to catching Bin ladin, America's troops are paying price for the idiotic choice the majority of the American voters made by electing a moron and then re-electing the same moron to continue his path of idiocity and pigheadedness. All Hail King Bush!!!
now now, what makes you think the voting system was so flawless that bush won? as far as i can tell, it was probably rigged, why? because they can do it, they have the power, technology isn't hard to play with.
Come on, dude. The rules went out the window at the beginning of this thing. And they still haven't been able to destroy the enemy. Are you suggesting that they nuke Iraq flat? Still won't work. The shockwaves from that kind of action will create terrorists in places that have never even had them before as people rail against the last taboo for the US to break. Face it, the US was fu**ed going into this, and they're twice as fu**ed now.
@jocksteeluk Since they have found all the dead and non existant voting cards filed by the democrat it is no wonder the Dems won in this last election. Every state that group registered people in have hundreds of people thatare dead, or don't live where they say. It has been turned over for investigation. You blame President Bush, because you all blame everything on Bush. You are so blind to your own you can't see at all. If only people went to war were people that had been there themseeves, we would have teen taken over by the French or God who else. That is sral stupid thinking. Do you really want to sent your mom out. Get a ife. You all need to go outside and look around at what is really happening in the world.
I fall more to the middle than I do the right, but I am glad the dems won - The repubs have blown things out of control. If the dems can get us back to some kind of normalcy then i am all for it.
Ain't that easy buddy.. It's Shiite's vs Sunnis and there both killing Kurds for giggles and out troops are in the middle of it. This is probably the most important point of the war and will prove to be the toughest part. Instead of discouraging and rooting for us to loose you people should be doing the opposite. I'm not going to be the one to give you the history lesson but you should maybe try reading up on the events that have taken place in the country scents, oh lets say October 3rd, 1932.
The lesson i will give you how ever is this: The War on terror is is a proactive war. The war is, more then anything, about protecting civilians of the Western World. I'm sure you would agree that to protect the Us citicens the war must consist of prentive attacks. It's a fact made by Saddam's secret tapes, recently released by ABC, that Iraq still considered it's self at war with us after the golf war and befor we invaded in on March 20th, 2003. Russia's secret service had information on more than one occasion that Iraq had plans to attack America. There is no solid evidance that the 1993 attack on the WTC was funded by Saddam Husain, however Ramzi Yousef the mastermind behind it was a former Iraqi iteligance officer. The second ringleader of the '93 attack, Abdul Rahman Yasin, was also an Iraqi citizen. In the book "Study of Revenge" author Laurie Mylroie, and former advisor to Clinton on Iraq, provides compelling evidence that Iraq provided the false passports Ramzi Yousef and other terrorists used to enter this country. The book also shows that the hydrogen-cyanide gas that was planned to be spread by the explosion is remarkably similar to the hydrogen-cyanide gas technology Iraq perfected. After the bombing Saddam’s regime gave protection to Yasin, and it appears he was also given a sallery. Yousef fled to Manila, Philippines under the identity Abdul Basit Karim, a Pakistani national beilive to have been murdered by Saddam's regien. To boot between 1992 and 2002 Iraq had direct meetings with members of Al Quedia nearly 100 diffrent times. This includes at least eight meetings between senior Iraqi and al-Qaeda leaders in the early 1990s. Saddam mostly invested in terrorist groups that commited terrorist attacks against his foes. Because of that Saddam gave many of the groups money that he otherwise wouldn't be associated with. This list includes Palestinian terror groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Palestine Liberation Front, and the Arab Liberation Front. Saddam also gave $10,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. In April 2002, Iraq increased the amount of such payments to $25,000. To boot Husain also gave funding to Abu Sayyaf, the al Qaeda-linked jihadist group founded by Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law. Iraq and this group were behind the attempt in 1990 to blow up the Thomas Jefferson Cultural Center in Manila. Ramzi Yousef was also assosciated with Abu Sayyaf, and there is some evidence that ties the two to Terry Nichols(0kc bombing.)
so what if we arnt making progress in iraq, we should have never went there in the first place.. but now after all this mess it would be complete genocide to pull out troops.. every time i listen to liberals they make me so angry with their 'pull out troops' notion im so shocked that you people would be just fine with the genocide of millions of iraqis.. when the usa leaves iran will kill millions of shiites.. if im wrong hen please explain to me why it is a good thing to pull out troops? in every precedent when you cause a mess and just leave them when they cant be self sufficient there are many more deaths then the war its self.. i see you guys as very selfish... if you cant stop bush from causing a mess then stop trying to stop him from cleaning it up.. man, this is so wrong to pull out troops now =[ but then, maybe i need to be saved.
i know someone who just came back from iraq.. he says we are doing a wonderful thing for those people.. theres so many people there who desire democracy, and its because of other nations (iran) sending in assassins into iraq that is causing the problems!!!
aint that the pot callin' the kettle black. Republicans think every Republican polition descended from Jesus. republicans are just as stupid as democrats and vise versa. The only differents between the two is one has bad ideas and the other has no ideas.
when I read things like Quote:The world's most powerful military is being lead by the world's biggest dip sh!t. and quote:he needs to go back to the ranch and have a bellyful of good ol' turkey and stuffing Reason being, these people like many others are the same people that say." Bush lied, the war is illegal, we have no compassion for life and civilians have been targeted and killed. We are there for the oil".
Didn't the thought ever occur to anyone of you, if any or all of the above is true, how could it be this Dumbass cowboy was able to pull the wool over the eyes of everyone of our brilliant minds that we elect to represent us and the nation? He got all of us to ok the war and it took us over a year to figure it out. And not one in this country could see this coming before it happened. Then take it one step further, Bush did not only deceive this country but others as well. And we must not forget to add the thoughts of some of the other brilliant minds in the states,we need to add Bush also was able to bring down the twin towers, hit the pentagon and just for a dash of fun, was able to get rid of all the people on the plane without a trace. That was a spectacular crime. And he got away with that too!
My opinion is simple. If he is smart enough to be able to pull that off, then certainly he should be running the country. The guy is beyond brilliant! Then I look at "The war is illegal". If that is so and in conjunction with, we are there for the oil and we kill innocent people. Now that we established Bush is brilliant,were are aware he knows the war is illegal, one question remains. Why hasn't he unleashed a quarter of the US power on that piss ant of a country and take it over. Kill all of them if need be. The war is illegal he is killing innocent people, he is being blamed for it. So why not go the whole nine yards. It doesn't make sense to p*ssy foot around. The whole world is opposed,everyone across the globe knows it's illegal and no one is doing anything about it. It is a free run, cause all they will do is what they always do,whine... So why not get it done an over? It should only take an hour or so. Then he could gain control of the oil. Rebuild the place, give the contracts to all of his friends and he is set! When he is all done we can call it the NEW US WEST.
The only statement that makes sense is the thread is by proudconservative when he said, Quote:"You all need to go outside and look around at what is really happening in the world."
@shaohu Quote:I'm a partially disabled vet thanks to the US Military and Bush's leadership.
Really sorry to here you were injured but I'm lost on why you would thank Bush's leadership. You make this sound like Bush sent the military out, and they forced you to ENLIST! What did you think happens when you enlist and a war breaks out? Did you think they just collect checks, sit around the camp fire and tell scary stories. It is not his fault you sustained an injury. It is the nature of the beast.
Quote:AND WHAT FOR? WHAT THE HELL IS THE PURPOSE OF MY FRIENDS DYING? WHAT GREAT GOOD HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED??? Your profile says your from China.I didn't realize China sent anyone over to Iraq though I could be wrong. Either way I am so glad people didn't think the way you do when Hitler was making a run for his money.
if its rigged then why did the dems win this time? bush won cos anyone whos not a morron can tell kerry is a bigger moron than bush with his liberal antics.. people want a strong economy not a week one.. just now i heard on the news peloski is goung levy a royalty (tax) on oil companies..) sure they are corrupt, but its a free market (capitalism). her tax on oil is going to go right to the 'peoples congress' (kinda sounds like people republic of china)// since the money goes right to congress we wont see it it just weill help them fund socialism health and walfare
This was due to your comments on bush pulling off the twin towers and the pentagon.
There's absolutely no compelling evidence to support that.
@shoezacks
I'll go from the end of your post to the front...
You say that Saddam would pay the families of suicide bombers etc. But surely all the riches that Saddam owned will have just been passed down the line and somebody else will be doing it. This always happens, when it comes to money, you can never erradicate the problem.
As for the Sunni's and Shi'ites, Well to be reasonable, they're blowing eachother up just as much now, if not more than before.
Meanwhile US lives are being lost unneccesarily. It's imposible for any force to find suicide bombers. When someone decides to take someone elses life, it's very difficult to stop them, especially someone who is willing to give their lives to take others.
I wasn't routing for the US to lose... my countries gotten itself in this stupid state too, but my point is that the troops should just pull out. If they leave there will probably be a rise for about a month in the killings, but they would penultimately return to the same state at which they're happening now.
Some things never resolve. One group of people will always hate another. But when you get involved, you can end up getting the hate of both parties involved.
The US + Co. can't settle the disputes there, only they can.
Just because someone lives in China doesn't mean he/she is Chinese. I'm a US vet doing business in China. And the reason I say it is Bush's fault I'm disabled is because I finished my 4 years of service and was about to get out, already had enrolled with a scholarship in a good university, but then Bush broke the contract I had signed and forced me to stay in the military against my will for another year. In that year I was also forced to get a series of Anthrax shots (against my will), which gave me permanent adverse reactions, from which I still suffer. I was also sent to a place (I am not free to mention) where I sustained a permanent shoulder injury in the line of duty, which prevents me from doing a lot of physical activates that I love. SO, I think because Bush was the one that made the decisions on this and forced me to stay in, and forced me to get the anthrax shots, that it IS his fault. I love America, and the American people, but I hate what the US Govt. has become. I would never again fight for the US govt. If someone invades US soil, I will return to the US and join a militia, but I will never again fight and kill for our present govt.
1. I'm pretty sure this program isn't still running.
2. Saddam Husain was a Sunni, befor the liberation of Iraq the Shiite's were heavily oppressed. One example of this is how much more electricity the Sunnis were allowed compared to the Shiites. Shiites and Kurds were like what black people were in pre 1960's. Right now the shiites are on an even playing ground and Iran is sending in reinforcements. It's what some call a civil war. If we leave now there will be no chance of a democracy, Iraq will become a hotbead for jihadist, killing Jews, and trying to blow up our plains screamming "this is what happens when you F**** a stranger in the a$s."
) Are a part of the most fundamentally stupid anti-war movement this country has ever seen 2) Claimed Bush lied about WMD's but floated their own lies about what happened at Abu Gharib, what happened at Guantanamo and how many Iraqi civilians actually died in the course of the war. 3) In other words, were not above doing the exact things they claimed such abhorrence for. 4) Are now in common cause with the extreme right in their suspicion of government, their anti-semitism and their hatred of Israel 5) Also opposed the war in Afghanistan when it became convenient to do so 6) Believed Nick Berg, decapitated by Al Queda, was asking for it and deserved his fate 7) Never gave a moments thought to the well-being of the Iraqi people before the war and are still basically unconcerned. 8) Missed the anti-Vietnam party and therefore want to recreate the "hipness" of having a war to protest. 9) Claim support for the troops while happily endangering their lives with negativism that emboldens the enemy (see Osama's many videotapes) 10) Have successfully applied the Vietnam comparison thus lying to a generation that wasn't around then 11) Are motivated, above all else, by self-preservation, ignorance, no understanding or even a desire to understand history and political resentments tied to the 90's. 12) Would gladly see America seriously hurt if it would appease people and groups that hate us 13)Want Bush impeached as pay-back for Clinton no matter how much money, time or distraction from bigger things it costs the country or how ultimately dumb the idea is. 14) Are morally dishonest and cowardly in the face of the real threat, the Islamofascist. 15) In fact, in their child-like view, they think Bush is a fascist...or they're trying to sell the idea. 16) Don't know what fascism IS 17) Don't know what geo-politics is 18) Don't know what national interest is 19) Don't know the history of the Israeli state 20) Don't know the history of the Arab states, their attacks on Israel or their one time ties to Nazi Germany 21) Will continue to blame Bush until long after he has left office, and when benefits are reaped from our intervention, they'll be happy to take the credit.
Before we begin... Loving the big lebowski reference :P Anyways moving on...
How the hell can someone say that someone who protests a war in iraq, afganistan or even vietnam doesn't know anything about Arab states / Israeli state history?!
They're hardly relevent...
Nobody deserves to be decapitated...
Hell i'm gonna save myself a lot of time and just say i'm 100% against the war yet completely disagree with a lot of things on that list...
Title: Congressional Report on OKC Bombing To Identify Islamic Terror Connections? Source: Noted Within Article URL Source: http://www.libertypost.org Published: Nov 30, 2006 Author: Patrick B. Briley Post Date: 2006-11-30 03:37:27 by OKCSubmariner Ping List: *TerrorismCoverup* 6 Comments
Copyright 2006 by Patrick B. Briley
A principal investigator for the House International Relations Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has revealed these new findings in the Islamic terror connections to the OKC bombing:
Some real abuse of the English language here. Almost makes me think that English really *should* be the official language of the U.S. ... I particularly enjoyed the "golf" war.
To the point:
1. The war in Iraq is illegal by international standards such as the U.N. Charter and the Nuremberg Treaty, both of which made preemptive war illegal. Since the U.S. signed both of those treaties, and the U.S. constitution dictates that any treaties the U.S. enters into become U.S. law as well, the war in Iraq is illegal both under international law and U.S. law.
2. It would be shocking if Iran killed millions of Shiite Muslims if the U.S. were to withdraw -- since Iran *is* millions of Shiites; the largest Shiite Muslim country in the world.
3. Bush was not re-elected. He was elected President in 2004; he was appointed President by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000.
4. Research does not indicate that France ever had any aspiration to conquer the United States.
5. Saddam's links to terrorism amount to paying lip-service, probably to appease the more fundamentalist forces in his country. Osama bin Laden called for the overthrow of Saddam. Saddam spied on al Qaeda.
6. Neither the United States nor Britain nor Iraq nor the rest of the world has anything to show for the thousands of lives lost in the Iraq war or the billions of dollars spent on it.
7. Bush, the leader of a democratic nation, is ignoring the will of the majority of the people he is supposed to serve, flying in the face of the notion of democracy.
8. Only a third of the U.S. still supports Bush. You Bush supporters, with all your howling and wailing, have become one of the things you hate most -- a vocal minority.
the iraq war isnt illegal.. i mean even the dems voted go to war but now they turn there face and are agaisnt it. The U.N? i never seen softer more corrupted people in my life (i.e. the oil for food program)
so iran is just all innocent? they can get away with saying isreal is going to be wiped off the map repeadily every day?
As l'anglais pointed out which you did not read, the Iraq war is technically illegal. Justifying it by saying even democrats voted for it doesn't make it any less illegal. It is a violation of International Law and in direct violation of the UN Charter.
You also referenced Oil for Food which again is a huge misconception. If you do a little light reading you will again find that the people responsible for the actions within the UN made hardly anything at all compared with the billions made by Texas energy companies. Yet this little fact goes mainly unreported in the mainstream press.
You should read the book Failed States. it shows a lot of hard core facts about some of the misconceptions that regular people have.
Here are the latest Bush approval numbers from PollingReport.com: Poll - Dates - Approval % L.A. Times/Bloomberg - 12/8-11/06- 42 NBC/Wall Street Journal-12/8-11/06- 34 ABC/Washington Post-12/7-11/06- 36 CBS-12/8-10/06- 31 USA Today/Gallup- 12/8-10/06- 38 Pew-12/6-10/06- 32 Newsweek-12/6-7/06- 32 CNN - 12/5-7/06- 37 FOX/Opinion Dynamics-12/5-6/06- 38 WNBC/Marist RV-11/27 - 12/3/06- 37
I guess the point is that EVERY poll has Bush doing badly.
"the iraq war isnt illegal.. i mean even the dems voted go to war but now they turn there face and are agaisnt it."
Members of the Democratic Party voted to go to war in October 2002, a little over a year after Sept. 11, 2001. The country was still largely united in the patriotic feelings caused by the attacks and, for the most part, saw little reason to question Bush and his administration. The Democratic Party and American people were also subjected to statements such as these about Iraq:
"America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." -- George W. Bush (proven to be a false statement)
"I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government." -- Dick Cheney (proven to be a false statement)
"[Saddam] could have a nuclear weapon within a year or two." -- Dick Cheney (proven to be a false statement)
"We know where [Iraq's weapons of mass destruction] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Donald Rumsfeld (proven to be a false statement)
"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." -- Condoleeza Rice (proven to be a false statement)
In the cross-hairs of all this misleading, fear-mongering propaganda from the administration, it's no surprise that the Democratic Party initially supported the war on Iraq.
It is too bad that more wasn't made of the resignation of David Kay as head of the U.S.'s Iraq Survey Group. In the documentary "The World According to Bush," Kay expressed his frustration at similar statements of certainty from the administration regarding Iraq's WMDs. He was in Iraq looking for such weapons before the U.S.-led invasion, a search that was unsuccessful. He said that he sometimes felt like calling Rumsfeld and asking where the weapons were, because his team wasn't finding any and Rumsfeld seemed to know exactly where they were. He resigned, disillusioned, after Bush quoted him as saying that weapons had been found by his team.
"The U.N? i never seen softer more corrupted people in my life (i.e. the oil for food program)"
That has nothing to do with the legality of the war. By your argument, I could justify breaking U.S. law because the executive branch of its government is dishonest and morally bankrupt.
"so iran is just all innocent? they can get away with saying isreal is going to be wiped off the map repeadily every day?"
Do you suggest that we should wage war against sovereign nations based on statements their government officials make? Is the U.S. to fight any country that says it doesn't like Israel? And the context within which I brought up Iran was only to say that it wouldn't pour into Iraq to wipe out the Shia population, since Iran is the world's largest Shia nation.
I'll ask you this: Based on two of the asserted reasons for invading Iraq -- human rights abuses and harboring terrorists -- Saudi Arabia should be targeted by the U.S. Saudi Arabia commits horrible human rights abuses, and most of the 9/11 hijackers came from that country. A poll of fighting-age men in Saudi Arabia revealed that more than 9 out of 10 of them sympathize with Osama bin Laden.
So aren't you disappointed that Bush has not tackled this major opponent of freedom in the Middle East and this major source of danger to the West?
Those 21 points must certainly be, point by point, the most asinine statements on modern politics I've read in a long, long time. Why?
1) A childish insult. 2) A lie. Ignores photographic evidence and first-hand testimony, as well as the lack of an objective bodycount to refute early numbers of Iraqi dead. 3) Not a point, but a conclusion drawn from the above falsehoods - very poor writing here. 4) Ignores that our founding fathers were VERY suspicious of government, and that Israel's religion is a non-issue, unless you want to say that our opposition to Iran is because of our anti-Muslim sentiment. 5) A lie, as the only complaint about Afghanistan, for the most part, is because of it's post-Iraq neglect. 6) A lie. No one has said Berg deserved to be decapitated, but that the government ought not to have put him there in the first place. 7) A lie. The well-being of the Iraqi people has been one of the primary concerns, so this point is just a complete lie. 8) As much a baseless fabrication as the last. 9) A cheap, old talking point. You know what's dangerous? Putting to few troops with too little equipment into a nation that was no threat to our nation. Guess who did that? 10) One should probably prove the Vietnam comparison is false before declaring it a lie. 11) Ironically reflective of the Neocons who got us into this war. 12) Another cheap, libelous talking point. 13) Cheap reference to the Clinton bogeyman. Bush's shortcomings and deception are more than enough to merit impeachment. Clinton's positive legacy is in stone - what revenge is needed? Indeed, enough time and money was wasted on that. 14) More childish namecalling. 15) Proves it's easier to dismiss a point than to argue it. 16) Baseless assertion 17) Baseless assertion 18) Baseless assertion 19) Baseless assertion 20) Baseless assertion 21) Ironic reflection on modern "Blame Clinton" Republican talking points.
Either you're a very funny or a very misinformed person.
“If we leave now there will be no chance of a democracy, Iraq will become a hotbead for jihadist, killing Jews, and trying to blow up our plains screamming "this is what happens when you F**** a stranger in the a$s."
I think someone started smoking weed again. Democracy isn’t going to happen for a really long time if ever. “Freedom” in much of the Middle East is a pipedream with no hope or no good if it comes. Israel and Hamas are the best examples of “democracy” (One more reason not to be hopeful). The "jihadist" are there to fight us when we leave they 1) disappear 2) continue to kill but will only target Iraqis because most of the “jihadist” are Iraqi.
As for finger sticking I haven’t done that since I was 3. jk
I’m going to have to say Phil Hendrie is like most radio hosts I have heard a complete numskull. 1) I don’t know nor care. 2) The media covered Abu Gharib and Guantanamo believe what you want 3 and 4) just made me laugh 5) That’s a no 6) Don’t know him so I dont think any of that… but I image he didn’t disserve it. 7) The only part I would agree with because it’s not my nation and it wasn’t a threat. Also I don’t see Bush wearing red booties and a cape. 8) lol “god damn hippies!” 9) Makes him sound like the “extreme right” he was complaining about. 10) … so whats he pushing here? It was not our fight and only seems to get more people killed so if that’s the comparison then i dont get it… 11) Speaks to his ignorance … also I refer you to 9 12) … I refer you to 9 13) I would like to get “pay back” it was blatantly partisan, stupid and was completely uncalled for. However no matter how much Bush may disserve it, President Dick “Shoots people in the face” Cheney… yeah… Don’t think its gonna happen. 14) … the real threat here is the stupid people still using yesterday’s talking points 15) huh… well when you try to interpret the law and then usurp the power of congress (or congress just stamps your card) you can say authoritarian but not yet fascist. 16-20) yeah… look whos talking 21) I would laugh but the out come of “Bush’s folly” is too damned morbid.
@ morons What is it with the Hitler/WWII comparisons??? If someone kills millions with no reason then make the Hitler/Stalin/WWII comparison until then stuff it.
I stopped reading about half way down. This was due to your comments on bush pulling off the twin towers and the pentagon. There's absolutely no compelling evidence to support that.
Perhaps if you kept reading on you may have found that was my point.
@ shaohu Your answer was fair enough and I can see why you would hold such resentment. But you didn't answer the questions in the thread. It was your reply that triggered them.
