Bush says we will nevr back down.

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

"We Never Back Down"

Quote:

(WASHINGTON) President Bush accused Islamic extremists on Thursday of seeking to ``enslave whole nations and intimidate the world'' and charged they have made Iraq their main front.

"The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia,'' Bush said. The president has been stepping up his defense of his Iraq policy in the face of declining public support for the war and a crucial test in Iraq with the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum.

In a speech before the National Endowment for Democracy, Bush likened the ideology of Islamic extremists to communism. And he said they are being ``aided by elements of the Arab news media that incites hatred and anti-semitism.''

``Against such an enemy, there's only one effective response: We never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory,'' Bush declared.

He spoke as recent polls show declining American support for the war that has thus far claimed more than 1,940 members of the U.S. military. His Iraq policy faces a crucial test in Iraq's Oct. 15 referendum on a new constitution, a vote that Bush has said terrorists will try to derail.

``We are facing a radical ideology with inmeasurable objectives to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world,'' Bush said.

Bush again tells only half a story. What he left out that Iraq was from a moslem standpoint a secular nation that now a breeding ground for terror and may turn into another Iran as a result of his Iraq policy.

As to "we will not back down" Not as long as he has a safe place to hide in.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,416 • Replies: 72

No top replies

What a pathetic a-hole this guy is.

0 Replies

Your problem is you are afraid to tell the truth..BUSH IS CORRECT in his thesis.

""The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia,"

The reality however, is that it may be immpossible for the US to "win that battle".

He may be exagerating a bit when he talks about spreading the empire from Spain to Indonesia.

Yet, it really is none of our business what the "muslim extremists" do so long as it does not effect the security of the US.

0 Replies

Correct in his thesis or not. Bush by virtue of his ill advised invasion of Iraq. Has done his very best to spread the infection. Bringing recruits from all over the Moslem world and given them a base to train, recruit and operate in. We invaded Afghanistan to eliminate it as a base for terrorism {Bin Laden} and created a far worse situation in Iraq.

I am waiting for that admission from Bush. I am also waiting to hit the lotto for 100 million. Which do you think will come first?

0 Replies

#43 will go down in history as the worst and most hated United States president.

The rest of the civilized world sees what a piece of **** he is.

0 Replies

I just pity the poor bugger that has to come along and clear up his mess after he's moved on.

I recently bought the stones new album (VERY good by the way) and every time I hear the track "Sweet Neo Con", I just feel so sad that all those young men are out there risking their lives for such a bunch of manipulative crooks.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Correct in his thesis or not. Bush by virtue of his ill advised invasion of Iraq. Has done his very best to spread the infection. Bringing recruits from all over the Moslem world and given them a base to train, recruit and operate in. We invaded Afghanistan to eliminate it as a base for terrorism {Bin Laden} and created a far worse situation in Iraq.

I am waiting for that admission from Bush. I am also waiting to hit the lotto for 100 million. Which do you think will come first?

Lotto! :wink:

0 Replies

Bush and his cronies have not lost a loved one; talk is cheap.

0 Replies

"Thou Shalt Not Kill."

0 Replies

This administration has not even satisfied "thou shalt not torture."

0 Replies

"Thou shalt not kill" is an oxymoron at this point in the war. The coalition forces have already killed upwards of 100,000 innocent Iraqis according to expert estimates.

0 Replies

Synonymph wrote:

#43 will go down in history as the worst and most hated United States president.

The rest of the civilized world sees what a piece of **** he is.

I like him fine. I wonder why you think this.

0 Replies

Synonymph wrote:

"Thou Shalt Not Kill."

Are you saying, then, that there has never been and will never be a justified war?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

"Thou shalt not kill" is an oxymoron at this point in the war. The coalition forces have already killed upwards of 100,000 innocent Iraqis according to expert estimates.

How many people, innocent and guilty, were killed by Americans in WW1 or WW2???

0 Replies

The only justification for war is for defense of our country. It is the only justification that is legal and morally correct. Killing innocent people on false justifications are illegal and morally wrong.

0 Replies

Synonymph wrote:

"Thou Shalt Not Kill."

Thou shall not kill what??

Ants?
Bugs?
People in self defense?
Other??

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

The only justification for war is for defense of our country. It is the only justification that is legal and morally correct. Killing innocent people on false justifications are illegal and morally wrong.

It was for self-defense, and the justification wasn't false, even if among the large amount of evidence, some individual pieces later turned out to be mistaken.

The basic case for invasion was still correct. Man's technology is progressing faster than his wisdom. The probable result is either an eventual Armageddon or else ongoing, sporadic WMD wars periodically wiping out millions. When the Cold War ended, many people were relieved at the thought that the Soviets and Americans were not going to destroy the world with WMD. The relief was premature. Even just one of certain types of WMD detonated in a population center might kill a half million people. As technological progress brings these superweapons into the hands of more and more groups, and smaller and less sophisticated groups, eventually some will be used. It's inevitable. At least we can take a few reasonable measures to try to delay and minimize it. One such measure dictates that whenever an evil madman has WMD, he be forced to disarm. In cases where such a madman delays, lies about, and obfuscates his disarmament, eventually the matter must be resolved. The next time it happens, which won't be long, the same logic will apply, if we don't want the proliferation of WMD to get completely out of control.

0 Replies

Yes, Brandon and woiyo, it's complicated--

I said "'Thou Shalt Not Kill.'" In quotes, you'll notice. Not my words, just a little something the neocons preach but don't practice. A little something they use when it serves their purposes.

You radical conservatives are so f*ucking stupid. Hopefully some day you'll wake up. You're being taken for fools by the Bush administration.

0 Replies

Yes, all the justifications used by this administration to start the war in Iraq was not only false, but exaggerated to win the congress' approval. Unfortunately, most of our allies knew they were false, and did not support the US attempts to get UN approval.

Hans Blix, the leader for the UN Inspectors said there was no proof Saddaam had WMDs. Smith told this administration that Saddam's attempt to purchase yellow cake from Niger was wrong. We had UN Inspectors looking for Saddam's WMDs, but Bush chased them out to start this war.

Bush did not start this war to defend America or Americans. There was no proof of WMDs or Saddam's ability to deliver WMDs to American soil. His missiles had a limited range that made it impossible to deliver his WMDs on American soil.

Fear is no excuse to start a war.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Yes, all the justifications used by this administration to start the war in Iraq was not only false, but exaggerated to win the congress' approval. Unfortunately, most of our allies knew they were false, and did not support the US attempts to get UN approval.

Hans Blix, the leader for the UN Inspectors said there was no proof Saddaam had WMDs. Smith told this administration that Saddam's attempt to purchase yellow cake from Niger was wrong. We had UN Inspectors looking for Saddam's WMDs, but Bush chased them out to start this war.

Bush did not start this war to defend America or Americans. There was no proof of WMDs or Saddam's ability to deliver WMDs to American soil. His missiles had a limited range that made it impossible to deliver his WMDs on American soil.

Fear is no excuse to start a war.

It's known that Hussein had WMD and programs, the only question is how recently. If a few pieces of information turned out to be incorrect, the basic picture of a dictator with WMD and WMD development programs was not. I cannot believe that you still persist in this delusion about lacking the means to deliver the WMD to the target. Just take them apart, smuggle the pieces into the target country, and put them back together. How long am I going to have to hear this absurd nonsense abiut delivery systems. The delivery system for the antrhax attack was the US mail.

0 Replies

Bush says we will nevr back down.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know