What?

I thought it was plausible deniability for 30 years then "oh yeah, that, uh.... right.... JUST KIDDING LOLZ!"

Actually, no. The goal of the original mission was to rid Iraq of WMD, rid the area of Western facing terrorisim and spread Democracy throughout the Middle East.

The "next step" as you say was a means to that end, and one that has proved to be a strategic blunder.

-spence

The media has been quite for awhile now. Things are doing much better over there.If you have anyone close to you, that is over there, they will tell you the same thing. History will prove we did the right thing. Then you Dems will take credit for it somehow.

First page of his speech included 11 references to things Americans are afraid of.

Yeah, we're sick of hearing it over and over again. :doh:

Over there?

You mean how Egypt has slid further away from Democracy?

How Iran is exploiting our weakened global position to persue nukes?

How Saudia Arabia continues to oppress women while we enrich their kingdom?

And this is all worth 4,000+ dead and a trillion dollars siezed from the US Taxpayer in a marketing scheme and borrored from a communist government?

Yes, there have been meaningful advances made in Iraq, but we have to date seen little that indicates the Iraqi's are capable of running a government on their own. The very same sectarian divide that Saddam kept quiet under an iron fist is still there waiting to explode.

Our International standing (read LEVERAGE) is still in the dumper, and even more so with the fall of the US Dollar.

And with all of this, America, the great nation she is is still the best place in the world (unlike some, I don't expect to be speaking Farsii any time soon).

Best case for the Bush legacy is that he's remembered as an incompetent dope who poisoned his administration with other equally incompetent dopes and arrogant, fanatic idiologues. How the pragmatic voices of reason were time and time again tossed aside in favor of those who would tow the line, and use every issue as campaign fodder without regard to impact of the American way of life.

Worst case is that either McCain or Obama makes great strides to rebuild the American brand, which I think either is capable of doing, as this will wipe Bush's folly's with a neon highlighter.

-spence

And the media has still been quiet about the situation with our troops on the ground. Regardless of whether going in was foolish or not, the sad fact is the Bush Admin & Rummy made one colossal upgefucht after another over there. But a lot of hard work and good leadership by our troops has made a positive impact and due to the Surge, the corner may have been turned for good. But that does not get mentioned.

I completely disagree.

The media has covered the Surge at length over the past year. I've seen it in print, online and on the evening shows. I've seen the positive elements of the Surge reported as well as the tenuous elements reported. Helped = yes, worked = not so quick.

Granted it's not a daily front page story, but there are other issues like elections, the economy and Lindsey Lohan who deserve their time.

This is just more media baiting from the right wing.

-spence

evil doers. you know...we kill them.

No, it's not their fault. We made them evil. They are the victems here. I feel bad for them. I am sure if we all become hatefull Muslums we can all live in peace.

Hence the problem, the blending of evil doers with hateful Muslims...or put another way...the blending of political and religious extremism...or put another way...the blending of an entire spectrum of issues into...

Us against them.

Only 6 words total just to make it easy to swallow. I sure wish the world were this simple.

-spence

It's them against us. that's a fact.

Spence obviously doesn't get it.

all pray the same
all blow up the same

right buckman?

No, but if you think you can reason with these kind and gentle folks then have at it. Tell me again why they attacked us, so I can understand how the pacifist would have handled things. We did get attacked didn't we?

No?

But its "us" against "them" so does "them" mean "all of them"?

Maybe some of them?
Maybe a minority of them?

Which is it?

Should we go burn down the Arch Diocses of Boston because a couple priests were kiddie touchers?

wrong.

Before you make a statement like that, you need to analyze why they are against us, or why it is that they threw the 1st stone at us.

Our foreign policy has been against them for decades. The problem is oil and Israel. If our country ignored those 2 issues and made decisions in regards to foreign policy without taking them into consideration, you would see a happier Muslim population in the middle east and a population that would have no reason to want to attack Americans. But because we want their oil and because we worked with england to create the nation of Israel in the 40's and displace millions of Palestinians and force them to live in refuge camps for decades, I can see why we are hated. You certainly can not think that we as a nation have done nothing to pour fuel on the Muslim fire for years and years..
To think that the Muslim population would sit back and let us screw them over time after time is like the thought that the American Indians who once roamed the great planes of our country would sit back and let the white man steal their lands without raising a fist in defense. Were they against us? or were we against them?

open your eyes

Holt sh@@t, do you ever listen to your self. Maybe we should give America back to the Indians. Last I checked your car and boat run on fossil fuels too. Are you saying that if we just leave them alone they will be peaceful. Hell they have been killing each other off for thousands of years. They no nothing of peace and to blame it on Israel is pathetic. How about the Muslums taking over Europe or is that Ok. As long as no one who is not a Muslim is in their country.

common sense man... common sense. If you were my neighbor and I built a guest house on your property against your will, what would you do? Give me a kiss and polish my shoes? Sounds ridiculous doesnt it? The thing is that i would never do that in the first place.

So lets say I did build a guest house on your property and your screaming and yelling about it.. no one listens to you and those who do, say that my grandparents once owned your land so your out of luck.. you have no options so you use the only option you have left to get me off of your land... violence. Then people start paying attention to you and you think your going to get your way, but the people paying attention have labeled you as a terrorist. Now you have no way out.. you might as well just kill yourself, or better yet, kill me and yourself at the same time.. no one wins.

But.. If i had the decency to treat you right in the first place and respect your rights, we'd be having a cook out right now..

Please explain why Indonesia while it has the largest muslim population in the world seems to be fine with hindus, christians, and other religions (including jews) living there?

For example you'll see muslims, jews, christians, hindus all in Kuala Lumpur.
You don't see the muslims freaking out and beheading anyone?
Why is that?

And just to be clear, if there's one group that hates muslims more than the right wing, its hindus.

I don't believe for a minute that all Muslums are bad. But the terrorist that are beheading, blowing up schools and shrines, targeting children and killing all over the world are all Muslum. And Indonesia has had a few attacks of their own. It's no Utopia over there. The world is full of people living on land that was once owned by others. We are not British over here.

I could sell you the land:hee: Not a great analogy but I get your point. It's just that this is how the world works. things change, wars happen, land changes hands, and it is not going to be any different in our life time. No matter how many Prayers for Peace rallies you attend.

once we kill them all, everything will be fine.

bombs away

Where are they targeting children again?

What about the IRA? They're not muslims.
What about the wackos we've had here in the US? Not muslims.
Random bombings in the former soviet union? Yet again. Still not muslims.
Tamil Tigers? Not muslims.
Most of the conflicts in Africa? Not muslims.

And apparently you WANT us to be the British with kingdom building in the middle east and "killing all them muslims".

Here we get to the crux of where I disagree Nebe with you and Obama. There is major disconnect on the wealth of this country. The days of old money and privledge are LONG gone. There are very few living off the family trust fund. And those that do, good for them, their families earned it. Obama has defined the wealthy as people making over 250k. Do you think the people that make say 250k to 1 million a year have it easy? They have to work and show results and have loads more pressure than most. I worked with people making big $ for most of my career. I've seen the sacrifices they make and the cost they pay. Yet Obama says, lets tax these people more! Well, these people have more expensive houses, they pay MORE property taxes, they have more expensive cars, they pay MORE property taxes. The more $ they make, the more income taxes they pay. The Obama plan is that teh people who work hard AND SUCCEED, must carry the burdern of those that don't. This country was built on hard work. The government should provide the opportunity to succeed, but not penalize those that do.
I wish I could find the exact quote, but he ended a speech by saying " We need to focus on healing and helping Americans"
I dont need healing, I don't need helping, and quite frankly its not the governments job to be sticking its nose in my business.

Forgot the next step:shocked:

Your joking right?

Hmmm. Narragansett. That name sounds native american......plan on giving up your home?

You should get a job writing talking points for them. Your very defensive when someone says anything bad about a terrorist. I'm sure you and your children will be safe if they board your plane. You know they looked those little kids in the face and crashed that plane into the towers.

I don't condone the IRA or any of those now defunct groups. Don't forget the Black Panthers.

Yes

Honestly I'm not even going to acknowledge what you said before what I quoted below because you're now on the defensive and can't come up with a mature response. Slinging it doesn't win you any points with anyone. And in reality, I'm defending muslims, not terrorists, but obviously I *am* supporting terrorists because all muslims are terrorists right?

Howabout the KKK?

you prove good points and i am not disagreeing with you, but the problem with capatilism is the rich get richer as they reap the profits from growth, and the poor get poorer as they have to pay more to fuel those profits. I think Obabma is concerned with that aspect. I really dont know to be honest, but it is an issue that needs attending and I dont see McCain looking out for the little guy.