Bush supporters' aftermath thread

McG, I enjoy challenging all of your posts, because you have no concept of the problems Bushco created for this country, and the breaking of FISA laws that are crimes in this country. You don't even recognize all the republicans under indictment for crimes, and the harm these sob's perpetrated against the American People.

McG, Your pursuit of stupid and ignorant positions in your posts are easy targets. Don't expect any relief from me!

I enjoy McG's contributions here.

He has a lot of common sense.

<And he's pithy>

Nice tehat you enjoy McG's contributions.

he wrote:
How can we lose what we have already won? It may not turn in the Utopia originally envisioned, but the main objective was won in what? four weeks?

Please explain to us about McG's common sense to his claim that "How can we lose what we have already won?"

Tell us how we "won" anything in Iraq? If Bush was working towards a Utopia in Iraq, he's dumber than an idiot. It only means Bush never understood the history of Iraq; pure ignorance.

McG is not pithy; he's a slave to the right wing propaganda.

I feel the whip of unrestrained ignorance here everyday that C.I. posts.

Yeah, McG, don't address my challenges, and resort to adhominems. Just your speed: Zero.

What challenge? Utopia was my word, not Bush's. I explained earlier what I meant by "won", you choose not to accept that. *shrug*

Hmm, what to think about posts. Who thinks out what they say and who can actually articulate it with thoughtful reason and generally without feeling the need to insult anybody? JW. George. McG. MM, Tico, MA, Lash, and several others come to mind. Some like FD and Squinney and some others are even usually left of center but can express themselves sans ad hominems and their presence here is welcome.

Then there are some who think insults are a credible form of debate and actually seem to believe it makes them look intelligent to spout an insult instead of a rationale for their point of view. They all seemed to be joined at the hip too.

I wonder if there is a common denominator in there somewhere?

Oh, and PoohTigger, you are most welcome here. Glad you've joined us. Wade right on in.

Even Bush doesn't understand what American democracy is all about. He's now threatening democrats not to criticize what's happening in Iraq.



January 10, 2006
Bush Issues Stark Warning to Democrats on Iraq Debate
By DAVID E. SANGER
WASHINGTON, Jan. 10 - President Bush issued an unusually stark warning to Democrats today about how to conduct the debate on Iraq as midterm elections approach, declaring that Americans know the difference "between honest critics" and those "who claim that we acted in Iraq because of oil, or because of Israel, or because we misled the American people."

In a speech here to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Mr. Bush appeared to be issuing a pre-emptive warning to critics at a time when Democrats are divided between those who say the United States should begin a troop withdrawal now and those who have criticized Mr. Bush but say the United States should stay in Iraq as long as necessary.

In some of his most combative language yet directed as his critics, Mr. Bush said Americans should insist on a debate "that brings credit to our democracy, not comfort to our adversaries."

Mr. Bush was speaking in the same room in a Washington hotel where last month he described the effort to reconstruct Iraq before a skeptical audience: the Council on Foreign Relations, whose members greeted him with only tepid applause. But today 425 members of the V.F.W., which has passed a resolution supporting the Iraq action, interrupted the president repeatedly as he predicted that progress would be made in both fighting the insurgency and stabilizing the newly elected government.

Mr. Bush acknowledged major human rights abuses by the Iraqi police, who he said have been "accused of committing abuses against Iraqi civilians."

"That's unacceptable," he said, adding that the United States was adjusting how it trains Iraqi police officers, including the establishment of a new "Police Ethics and Leadership Institute" in Baghdad that will establish a curriculum for the nine Iraqi police academies. He made no references to disclosures over the past year of American abuses of detainees, in Iraq and elsewhere.

The president acknowledged slow progress in restoring basic services in Iraq, but argued that those problems paled in comparison to the progress he said Iraq was making.

"The vast majority of Iraqis prefer freedom with intermittent power to life in the permanent darkness of tyranny and terror," he said, an amplification of the theme he hit repeatedly in December in an effort to rebuild support for the war at home.

President Bush also pressed countries that have promised aid to Iraq to make good on their pledges. He praised Slovakia and Malta for forgiving all of Iraq's previous debts to those countries - though their concessions amounted to a couple of hundred million dollars. Among large countries, only the United States has forgiven all past Iraqi debt.

But it was Mr. Bush's warning to Democrats that ventured into new territory.

"There is a difference between responsible and irresponsible debate and it's even more important to conduct this debate responsibly when American troops are risking their lives overseas," he said without specifically naming his critics.

In discussing Iraqi politics, the president directly addressed Sunni Arabs, the minority in the new government, saying that "compromise and consensus and power-sharing are the only path to national unity and lasting democracy."

Mr. Bush added that "a country that divides into factions and dwells on old grievances cannot move forward and risks sliding back into tyranny."

He's the one responsible for dividing our country. He fails to understand anything about what makes a tyrant or a democracy.

I would tell c.i. that many of us that support the president's policy in Iraq definitely think that we won the war quickly and with honor. We are now in the process of the very difficult task of winning the peace.

I would tell him that, but I know he'd just say we're all ignorant fools regurgitating rightwing "talking points".

Fox Wrote:

Perhaps it's the poster who won't ever admit that she is logically wrong. Ever. Even when presented with evidence of said error repeatedly.

I would recommend some sage advice I read in a book somewhere.

Cycloptichorn

This is still the same war; the US against the enemies in Iraq. What is factual is that the insurgency have been able to recruit more from within and without Iraq; Osama's prayers have been answered. His god must be stronger than "ours."

Michael Ledeen says he has credible sources (from within Iran) saying that Osama is dead

Yep. Died there sometime in December, I believe.

Of course, if this isn't splashed on the front page of the NYT, no one will believe it.

That's okay. At least we know he's not in any shape to be "praying"

Heh, Ledeen is a traitor if there ever was one.

Cycloptichorn

JW, Osama's prayers have been answered; that's the reason why the insurgency in Iraq is still deadly for both our military and Iraqis.

Oops - forgot to post the link.

ONE MOMENT IN TIMEAnd, according to Iranians I trust, Osama bin Laden finally departed this world in mid-December. The al Qaeda leader died of kidney failure and was buried in Iran, where he had spent most of his time since the destruction of al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The Iranians who reported this note that this year's message in conjunction with the Muslim Haj came from his number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, for the first time.

This remarkable tempo of change is not likely to diminish, as old and/or sick men are in key positions in several countries: Israel's Shimon Peres is 82. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is 82 (and his designated successor, Prince Sultan, is 81, and was recently operated for stomach cancer). Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, although probably in his sixties, is said to have serious liver cancer, and is not expected to survive the next year.

And, of course, the patient activities of the Grim Reaper are not the only source of revolutionary change in the region. Saddam was a relatively young man (mid-sixties) when he was toppled by Coalition forces; the deposed Taliban leaders were relatively young as well (Mullah Omar is barely 50); and the likes of Bashar Assad, the Iranian mullahs (Khamenei is probably in his early sixties), and even the legions of the Saudi royal family have to contend with mounting animus from the West, and mounting cries for freedom from their own people.

Much of the demographic component of rapid change comes from the enormous disparity between leaders and people. The wizened ayatollahs of Iran, like the gerontarchs of Saudi Arabia, seek to contain the passions of a population one or two generations younger, which is probably one reason why the mullahs turned to a youngster, the fanatical Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to crush all potential opposition to the Islamic republic. Most Iranians, two thirds of whom are younger than 35, do not take kindly to the white beard and beturbaned tyrants who have banned Western music and just last week began speaking of segregating the sidewalks of the country by sex; males on one side, females on the other, even as they announced the execution of a woman who dared defend herself against a rapist.

In short, both demography and geopolitics make this an age of revolution, as President Bush seems to have understood. Rarely have there been so many opportunities for the advance of freedom, and rarely have the hard facts of life and death been so favorable to the spread of democratic revolution.

The architect of 9/11 and the creator of Palestinian terrorism are gone. The guiding lights of our terrorist enemies are sitting on cracking thrones, challenged by young men and women who look to us for support. Not just words, and, above all, not promises that the war against the terror masters will soon end with a premature abandonment of what was always a miserably limited battlefield. This should be our moment.

Faster. Please?

I really would have liked if the Pope, any Pope, understood someone whose ideas were that the sources of all the neuroses which afflicted Western man came from the doctrines and moral teachings of the (Catholic) church. :wink:

Dead or alive, bin Laden is really of no consequence these days and hasn't been for some time. It's the ideology he promotes (promoted?) we must discredit/destroy in order to make progress in the GWOT. We're working on it, but I agree with Dr. Ledeen........

Faster, please