MERRY CHRISTMAS TO EVERYONE.
There were fewer pages in the past. A efficiency model was introducedwhich led to the limiting of posts/page to increase loading times and to reduce lag. So in the past, there were fewer pages...
C.I,
Could you provide some info on what the links are about? I hate following blind links.
Bush's Approval Rating Falls 6 Percent
LAST UPDATE: 12/21/2004 9:11:29 AM
United Press International
U.S. President George Bush's approval rating has slipped 6 percent from November to 49 percent, a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll published Tuesday said.
The slide makes Bush the first incumbent president to have an approval rating below 50 percent one month after winning re-election.
When asked how the United States has handled Iraq during the past year, 47 percent of 1,002 people surveyed by telephone said things have gotten worse, 20 percent said the situation has improved and 32 percent said it is about the same. The differences fell outside the question's margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Also for the first time, USA Today said a majority of 51 percent disapprove of the decision to go to war in Iraq, and 58 percent disapprove of the way the United States has handled Iraq over the past few months.
Quote from above post, "...20 percent said the situation has improved and 32 percent said it is about the same." It seems more than half of the people really do not keep up with the news, even after Bush said the insurgency problem has gotten worse. These are the same people that voted in the last election.
Well...consdering the limits of his intelligence, Revel, I think it is very unfair of reporters to ask the president questions that require answers.
:wink:
If the Sunni's opt not to vote, they can be just the masses in America that op to not vote in the elections. No one can force them to participate, but they should be made aware of the consequences of not participating.
Suppose the 1/30/2005 Iraqi election fails as a consequence of all elected candidates being murdered before the end of February by the Iraqi insurgents.
What do you recommend the US do about it?
What do you recommend the US do now to prevent it?
That's a scary proposition but not beyond possibility Ican, as the terrorists no doubt have every one of those candidates targeted.
ican711nm wrote:DontTreadOnMe wrote:australia wrote:You can't attack terrorists. That was what was ingenious about the bombing. Who do you attack back? If it was a country, then attack them, but it wasn't, it was groups here and there, cells here, sleepers there. You are fighting an invisible enemy who think nothing of giving their life away.
then why the g.d. hell are so intent on backing the war in iraq. you are saying the exact same thing i have been saying for 3 bloody years !
jesus! al qaida is a "shadow army".
one more time... we are fighting spies and and sabateurs. we have to fight them with the same... and guard the freaking borders.
dammit. this soooo frustrating.
Good Defense versus Good Offense; that is the question.
The Maginot Line versus a strong and ready counter attacking military?
A wise person attempts to remove those governments that harbor al Qaeda with the realistic expectation that if one does that to enough such governments, few if any such governments will harbor them. If few if any such governments harbor al Qaeda they will either cease to be effective or cease to exist. But such an approach requires far more patience than hiding in a
closet. Also it is far more time consuming and expensive in lives and money than hiding in a
closet.
An unwise person puts up
walls to keep al Qaeda away from the civilians al Qaeda wants to murder (i.e., hides in
closets). Historically, such
walls have proven to be expensive to build and maintain, ineffective, and relatively easy to circumvent, tunnel under, or blast through. Worse, the citizens al Qaeda wants to murder cannot survive huddled behind
walls, because to survive they must make their bread and earn their bread in places that either don't have
walls or cannot afford
walls.
right.... so then we can look forward to toppling the following for starters;
pakistan
iran
syria
chechnya
the phillipines
suadi arabia
sudan
katar
uae
north ireland
and the united states... where al qaida has been harboured for who knows how long.
ican, it's not unwise to enforce the existing laws regarding border control. it is unwise to continue soft handling the borders in order to allow illegals to stream across the border to supply cheap and submissive labor.
OCCOM BILL wrote:Interestingly enough, I just noticed that I got a PM from Frank earlier. He said Bush is a moron.
frank said
what , sonny ? can't find my derned ear horn ...
DontTreadOnMe wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:Interestingly enough, I just noticed that I got a PM from Frank earlier. He said Bush is a moron.
frank said
what , sonny ? can't find my derned ear horn ...
Actually...he was kidding.
I have not referred to George Bush in that way since he won re-election.
Although I did make a remark about his intelligence earlier today...but not using that other word...and really just trying to be funny.
ADDED IN EDIT: In fact, it was just up above on this page!!!!
darnit !
i was waiting for someone to repeat it in
BOLD, ALL CAPS, WITH EXCLAMATIONS !!
never get to have
any fun around here. mumble, mumble...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4116487.stm
Attack on US troops is worst yet
Large groups tend to gather in the dining area
Nineteen US soldiers have been killed in an explosion at a US military base in Mosul, making it the worst single incident for the US military in Iraq.
Six Iraqi civilians were also killed in the attack which happened in a dining tent at the base at noon (0900 GMT).
