Perhaps Obama would share his definition of success in Iraq with us?

Didn't think so.

He just wants to throw in the towel and leave.

Fact: We went in and we own it. AKA it's our baby!

Oh that's right, Obama doesn't want to punish the US with a baby just because we made a mistake.

I think he wants us all to realize that Iraq will never be a "success." It is a disaster, to be managed as best we can as we extricate ourselves.
McCain wants to continue pretending it is a "winnable" war that we will call a "success" even if it requires trillions more dollars and thousands more lives....and in the end it will still be a disaster.

Danni,

If we're not winning it, who is?

Kris,
Punish? Where did that come from?

"If we're not winning it, who is?"

Obviously, the Iranians.

"If we're not winning it, who is?"

no one is winning
thats kind of the point.

its not something thats "winnable"
its not a video game with a last boss.

and if it was
then we won already
saddam is dead

oh wait is sadr the last boss... he's winning??

what if he's dead

do we have a new last boss???

Obama didn't start the war, make the mess, etc.
So he doesn't need to define anything, just get us out of this mess with the least casualties. Damn you repubs can screw stuff up.
Remember, it was the rights hero, Ronnie Reagan, who said we should never commit American troops without a clear exit strategy and with complete support of the American people.

YEAH!

Well Duh!

In Bush World an evaluation of success/failure is measured against an undefined goal ----- by magic.

"Remember, it was the rights hero, Ronnie Reagan, who said we should never commit American troops without a clear exit strategy and with complete support of the American people."

I believe it was called the Powell Doctrine, named after General Colin Powell who unfortunately for himself and his country allowed himself to be used to help start a war that violated every portion of that doctrine.

Klifferd,

Someone always wins wars and someone loses them. I know it's not popular to say that, but it's true. You know who loses? The one who gives up first.

No strategy aimed at nabbing a particular ring-leader will work. Islamofascism is not run by one guy like German fascism was.

Victory is simply an American-freindly, democratically stable country which will refuse safe haven to terrorists and allow a US military base so that we can put a stop-sign on Iran's ambitions. Perfectly doable. In fact, it's in progress.

Danni,

Colin Powell was and is a stoolie who thought he detected which way the wind was blowing and went with it. He was an is of no consequence.

**** Danni,
If we're not winning it, who is?
Posted by jonryker ****

....Iran has won that war......the U.S. installed a Shia government in Iraq that is the subserviant little brother to Iran's Shia rulers......

......ironic.......huh ?.........

Perhaps Obama would share his definition of success in Iraq with us?

Didn't think so.

Posted by Kris_P_Bacon at 2008-04-01 12:23 PM

Sad to say, and an Obama supporter, that was my first thought as well. However, this won't hurt him right now so long as Hillary is non-commital, so I don't fault him for not taking a stronger position.

I agree with Klifferd, there are no winners in this war, only losers.

and an = and as a

Leftcoastlawyer,

No winners?

Tell that to the Jews who didn't get gassed and the slaves who got to leave the plantation and the Frenchmen who aren't speaking German and the Englishmen who are not Spanish Catholics and the Mexicans who do not have a French emperor and the Americans who don't have an English king and the Canadians who are NOT part of the US and the Hawaiians who ARE part of the US and the Texans who are not Mexican and the Chinese who are NOT part of the Japanese Empire and ....oh, I'm tired...

"Colin Powell was and is a stoolie who thought he detected which way the wind was blowing and went with it. He was an is of no consequence."

Not true, what he did to this nation by fathering Michael Powelll is unforgivable. Because of that scum bag our news media will now be even more consolidated so that it will become even easier to propagandize the American public for purposes such as invading countries that never attacked us.

SKIZZIKS no one could ever have imagined that our invasion of Iraq would give Iran more power in the region....what?? oh wait.....oh, I see, many, many people did say that this is exactly what would happen but they were all America haters.

***** No winners?

Tell that to the Jews who didn't get gassed and the slaves who got to leave the plantation and the Frenchmen who aren't speaking German and the Englishmen who are not Spanish Catholics and the Mexicans who do not have a French emperor and the Americans who don't have an English king and the Canadians who are NOT part of the US and the Hawaiians who ARE part of the US and the Texans who are not Mexican and the Chinese who are NOT part of the Japanese Empire and ....oh, I'm tired...

Posted by jonryker *****

.......this war was not like those wars.......

.......it was totally unnecessary....without justification......and has done far more harm than good........

"***** No winners?"

We already agreed, the Iranians are the winners.
Congratulations Iran.
Nice going George W. Bush.

I would like to hear what Barry (the big O)would do if he were president.

Won't happen before the election.

Ryker,
Powell is a soldier and did what he was told...that's what soldiers do. He's also a great man because of how long and how he served. Unlike most cowards on the right.

No winners?

Tell that to the Jews who didn't get gassed and the slaves who got to leave the plantation and the Frenchmen who aren't speaking German and the Englishmen who are not Spanish Catholics and the Mexicans who do not have a French emperor and the Americans who don't have an English king and the Canadians who are NOT part of the US and the Hawaiians who ARE part of the US and the Texans who are not Mexican and the Chinese who are NOT part of the Japanese Empire and ....oh, I'm tired...

Bush invading Iraq did ALL that? Wow!

"Victory is simply an American-freindly, democratically stable country which will refuse safe haven to terrorists and allow a US military base so that we can put a stop-sign on Iran's ambitions. Perfectly doable. In fact, it's in progress"

American Friendly: Nope. Near Future? Nope. Long-term? Possibly, if America becomes an Islamic state.

Democratically stable: Not as long as its occupied.

Refuse safe haven to terrorists: Ours or theirs?

Allow a permanent US Base: we have one already in the world. It is called "AMERICA". Its all we need, if people only learn to take care of it, rather than worry about the blueprints for building another in someone else's backyard.

A Stop Sign on Iran's ambitions: Who stops at stop signs nowadays? Especially when the donut shops are full of fat cops. Plus, a good stop sign does not an idiotic green light foreign policy make.

Perfectly doable: "Time Travel is possible", said the noble idealogue as he threw his watch out the window...

In Progress: Something DEFINITELY is in progress, Jon. I agree with you there, but just because something is in progress doesn't mean it is MAKING progress.

No winners?

Tell that to the Jews who didn't get gassed...

Posted by jonryker at 2008-04-01 12:50 PM

I'm talking about this war, not all wars.

It's really a pretty simple concept here on the DR: read, comprehend, then comment.

"Ryker,
Powell is a soldier and did what he was told...that's what soldiers do. He's also a great man because of how long and how he served. Unlike most cowards on the right."

Powell's fundamental mistake is that he had political aspirations and that kept him in a position where he had to fall on his sword for an inferior.
If he hadn't, he could have simply resigned.
Sure a politician who was once a soldier is great, but a soldier who was never a politician is even better.

"Victory is simply an American-freindly, democratically stable country which will refuse safe haven to terrorists and allow a US military base so that we can put a stop-sign on Iran's ambitions. Perfectly doable. In fact, it's in progress"

Riiiight. Like McCain said....100 years.

He's also a great man because of how long and how he served. Unlike most cowards on the right.

Posted by evilpolock at 2008-04-01 01:07 PM

I'm starting to hear this more and more, and it doesn't seem like much more then a talking point since historically military voting patterns have favored the GOP over Democrats approximately 70% to 30%.

Most of the ex-military people I know here in SF are rethuglicans, and only a couple of democrats that I know served. Do you have a link that shows differently?

Success in Iraq isn't the only thing he can't discuss. He is ignorant on economics and admits as such and when if protection protected against HIV he didn't know. McBush is pathetic.

K-G,

I understand why you're confused. Can't tell terrorists from our guys. If that's a challenge, the rest is beyond you.

Leftcoastlawyer,

I just noticed that I missed the "this" in your post. I apologize.

Your assertion that THIS war is unwinnable is baseless and without merit. Somebody will win it. Either we do, and we get what we want, a stable, democratic, anti-terrorist haven with a lot of oil they'd love to sell us, or Iran gets what it wants...an unstable, terrorist-breeding, US-hating backwater with oil....Somebody will win this. It's a question of who has the staying power. The Dems don't. The Rep's do, or at least, most of them do.

"Either we do, and we get what we want, a stable, democratic, anti-terrorist haven with a lot of oil they'd love to sell us,"

At least the oil part is what we went there for. There were not terrorists there before we went there. The country was stable before we went there.
And since you want Iraq "democratic" then it WILL BE friendly to Iran because the vast majority are Shia as is Iran. The hightest religious leader in Iraq is....Iranian.

Danni,

Those are the victory conditions. I said nothing about how long it would take.

McCain didn't either, except that he was willing to stick it out as long as necessary. The 100 year thing was a military presence statement: another good idea if you wish to curtail Iran's geographic ambitions.

If Obama can't define victory conditions, how can he know it's unwinnable?

What has Powell done that warrants him the title of "Great Man"? He's a stoolie. No balls, and therefore, no glory.

Danni,

If all Shia thought alike and liked each other, they wouldn't have fought and died in such large numbers in the Iran/Iraq War and since. They'd have simply either politically joined with Iran or migrated to Iran. They have not.

I understand why you're confused. Can't tell terrorists from our guys. If that's a challenge, the rest is beyond you

Confused? possibly, though I don't think you would understand, even though you say you can. However, you won't catch me mouthing neoconservative platitudes on this site, so perhaps that is the fundamental disconnect I have with your form of reality.

I'll let you in on a little secret-- In my past have stood in front of strangers in a foreign land with a high powered rifle in my hand and stared at those who in turn stared back at me and it has gone through my head plenty of times the things I would perhaps see and the things I would perhaps think and the things I might believe if their eyes were in my head and my eyes were in theirs.

So don't you fucking get on my case about understanding, capisce?

The 100 year thing is a low ball estimate of how long it would take to create a Shiite country next door to Iran that is not also strongly influenced by them.
In all honestly, America can't afford to keep enough troops in Iraq to change their natural connection to Iranian Shia.

Jon-

I guess it depends, as Obama says, on what your definition of success is.

Not all wars have a winner...there was no clear cut winner of the Korean War, but the US and the South certainly have won the cease-fire. While there are no direct parallels, that is, IMHO, the closest that we could come to "success" in the Iraq debacle.

If what you describe as "winning" does ultimately happen, I will be the first one to concede that Bush et al., for all their missteps, deserve credit for creating that vision.

Unfortunately for everyone, I fear that will not happen.

Perhaps Obama would share his definition of success in Iraq with us?

~Krap P Thinkin'

Stop bleeding trillions of dollars (and thousands of lives) into a counter-productive war that only makes only the US a weaker, broker, more universally reviled country, one who's increasingly indebted to Chinese Communists who are only interested in turning the US into their bitch. Stop pissing off traditional allies. Stop empowering Iran. Stop empowering terrorists and inflaming the Islamic world. Invest again in US infrastructure.

That's the only successful plan of action at this point.

Are you even capable of rational thought Krap P?

"Didn't think so"

Be Well.

"Victory is simply an American-freindly, democratically stable country which will refuse safe haven to terrorists and allow a US military base so that we can put a stop-sign on Iran's ambitions."

When the hell are we going to realize that what we need to do is create the best non-threatening scenario we can and be happy with that? I would be very content if Iraq became another Saudi Arabia.

So what if McAint can't define success, it's better than Bush - Bush can't even SPELL success.

FYI,

Another Saudi Arabia won't do. Look at how many of them end up terrorists. It is the hopelessness that breeds the terrorists. The regime we leave must be a place that doesn't foster that mindset as Saudi Arabia does.

A democracy is perfectly reachable. We just need patience and sustained effort. Look how long it took us to put together a meaninful union even after we'd gotten done winning the military victory?

Leftcoast,

The Korean War had definite winners and losers. The North Korean Communists set out to obliterate the capitalist South. They even enlisted Chinese military help. They failed. North Korea stayed in the crapper. South Korea has exploded in a nice way. Winner: South Korea

If all Shia thought alike and liked each other, they wouldn't have fought and died in such large numbers in the Iran/Iraq War and since.


That was because Iraq was not fragmneted under Saddam as it is now.


They'd have simply either politically joined with Iran or migrated to Iran. They have not.

Posted by jonryker at 2008-04-01 01:32 PM


The shia in Iraq are more closely tied to Iran now than they were before the invasion. Why move to Iran when Bush gave you Iraq?

Darth,

Hmmm....that so? So, I guess they like that Iran is fostering murder and discontent for their own purposes, not those of Iraqi Shia?

"They'd have simply either politically joined with Iran or migrated to Iran. They have not."

Er....it might have been a little difficult with the US military occupying the country.

The Korean War had definite winners and losers. The North Korean Communists set out to obliterate the capitalist South. They even enlisted Chinese military help. They failed. North Korea stayed in the crapper. South Korea has exploded in a nice way. Winner: South Korea

Posted by jonryker at 2008-04-01 01:58 PM |


I thought we were technically still at war with North Korea. Since the conflict is technically not over, there are no winners or losers.
The conflict needs to be over for the winners to be decided, otherwise you could claim that the Nazis won WWII because you choose to look at the situation in 1940 instead of 1945.
And how do you define winning? That is also the key and that is Obama's point.
America could reinstate the draft and drop an additional 100k troops in iraq to force a resolution in our favor at a ridiculous cost. Would this be winning? Is that how we won the cold war? Isn't that how we lost the Vietnam war?

Well we lost Vietnam, Granada, Kuwait, Haiti, Serbia, Somalia, Bosnia, Liberia and Afganistan. Who would even think we could win Iraq?

Funny, when I went to Grenada (spelling is sort of important, or else you'd end up in Spain) it seemed ok. The big statue of Clint Eastwood was a nice touch.

We do know how to "win" in Iraq. We just have to pay everyone to stop killing us.

Darth,

I just look at the results...not technicalities. South Korea's ahead so far...put it that way.

Obama's point can be made to himself. He's decided we've lost, but on what basis? He won't say...

I thought I very clearly defined winning above. I see nothing confusing about that position.

You can sustain wars with a volunteer army that you could not with a draft army, because all those people agreed to be there doing that. Certainly, we would not have lost Vietnam if we'd had an all-volunteer army. We also wouldn't have lost if we hadn't given up right after Tet, where we'd actually obliterated the VC.

"Certainly, we would not have lost Vietnam if we'd had an all-volunteer army."

We never could have raised the number of troops we had in Vietnam on a volunteer basis. BTW, if we had stayed in Vietnam what could we eventually have won????
Would it have been worth the deaths of a few thousand more Americans and untold thousands of Vietnamese to have "won" that??? Whatever "that" is anyway.

Victory is simply an American-freindly, democratically stable country which will refuse safe haven to terrorists and allow a US military base so that we can put a stop-sign on Iran's ambitions. Perfectly doable. In fact, it's in progress.

Obama's point can be made to himself. He's decided we've lost, but on what basis? He won't say...


No he hasn't, although thats what you want to pin on him because it is politically convenient to your political 'identity'.


I thought I very clearly defined winning above. I see nothing confusing about that position.


Your opinion of what constitutes victory is meaningless. You are not in a position to define victory when even John McSame won't.


You can sustain wars with a volunteer army that you could not with a draft army, because all those people agreed to be there doing that.


Apparently not. What are the generals saying now about the state of the armed forces?


Certainly, we would not have lost Vietnam if we'd had an all-volunteer army. We also wouldn't have lost if we hadn't given up right after Tet, where we'd actually obliterated the VC.

Posted by jonryker at 2008-04-01 02:18 PM |


Again, your speculation is unfounded. We lost Vietnam for the same reason we're losing Iraq: We failed to convince the average Vietnamese that living under a capitalist despot was better than living under a Communist regime.
Even the most novice student of military history can tell you occupations don't work without the submission, willing or not, of the occupied populace. And even then occupations don't last.

Jonryker

Vietnam had all the volunteers that wanted to go---plus a lot that didn't. To think we could have won in Viet Nam with only the people who wanted to go is ludicrous beyond all reason.
The reason we didn't win Viet Nam was that it was a limited war that could not be prosecuted to its fullest extent because of fear of starting WWIII with nuclear weapons being used. China and Russia were backing Viet Nam, and the war could have easily escalated to such proportion. A volunteer army was not a factor.

Sout Korea is different than Iraq in that North Korea had an army for us to fight. North Korea had someone who could negotiate a type of peace with us. North Korea is a country. None of this is a factor in Iraq. There is no army for us to fight in Iraq. There is no one who can negotiate a peace with us. There is no way to have a North Iraq and South Iraq. There is no winning in Iraq. Democracy will not help. As their last election showed, the people insist on a religious government filled with people who hate us. In addition--we shouldn't be trying to spread Democracy when we don't have a Democracy here. We should be trying to spread Representative Republics.

Jon-

Here is what I said:

there was no clear cut winner of the Korean War, but the US and the South certainly have won the cease-fire.

Since the "war" is still technically going on, no one has won or lost, just ask the soldiers still shooting at each other at the DMZ.

As you correctly note, the South "has exploded in a nice way", which is what I stated and that growth has taken place during the cease fire, imposed in no small part, by a 50 year US military presence. However, the North and South are still at war, which is why I made the analogy.

The main reason that I am disappointed with all of our so-called "leaders" is that no one has articulated a clear vision of how we even get Iraq to a position similar to South Korea. I don't care if it is McBush, Obama or Billary, someone needs a "Moment of Clarity" (with all due props to ROC) to tell us how they plan on wrapping up this mess. Until they do, its just Same Shit, Different Day.

Can't tell terrorists from our guys. If that's a challenge, the rest is beyond you.

MEK and the PPK are both Iraq-based terrorist groups we coddle.
About half the sunni Concerned Neighborhood Jihadists on our payroll are al queda in Iraq or have aided in attacks on/killed Americans, according to the Iraqi government Jon.

Get the point?

The Iraqi National Congress, which sucked millions out of our Treasury while suckering Bush and the neo-cons into taking out Saddam was an Iranian front group. Al maliki's Party, DAWA, is Iranian controlled, as is the badr militia, the ones we were just assisting in trying to get rid of sadr.

There are two statues in Useful Republican Idiot Square in Tehran-Reagan and Dubya. Dubya's is much much bigger.

Perhaps Obama would share his definition of success in Iraq with us?

~Krap P Thinkin'

Seeing as Obama has such vast military experience, the question seems vey applicable here. I know Obama is a wet dream to Spud and he takes offense to anyone with the nerve to question the boy wonder. Another mystery what Obama thinks?

I'm not sure if the "abandon Iraq now" movement is prepared to witness the consequences of such a policy. It will almost certainly become a humanitarian disaster of epic proportions. The majority of the violence in Iraq is not directed against US forces, but against ordinary Iraqi civilians of varying religious stripe. Does anyone honestly believe that such violence will decrease when the most powerful, neutral, and most disciplined military force within the nation abruptly vanishes? The tensions between the rival groups within Iraq have existed since 661 A.D. and have shown little sign of abating. It was Saddam's brutal assumption of autocratic power that managed to keep a lid on the cobbled nation, and I don't believe that the US can practically exercise similar power in today's age of media scrutiny (to say nothing that to do so would be an act of utter evil).

Negotiation with Iraq's neighbor's and their involvement in creating a stable government is necessary. But none of them will be able to take the place of the US as the guarantor (such as there is) of stability. Could you imagine the Sunni reaction to Iranian troops taking up peace keeping duties? Do you think that Sadr City will welcome Saudi troops with open arms? If we don't abandon Iraq, we'll be forced to retain significant troop levels there for the foreseeable future. You are all right that the Iraq war was unjustified for the reasons stated (and probably for any reason) and the reprucussions will cost the GOP the election this year, but the country has to adress what to do now, irrespective of who is responsible for the mess.

For people who are concerned about America's loss of prestige and world opinion, envision an Iraq in the throws of an open religious civil war, so violent that aid workers are unable to carry out their humanitarian mission and America standing by the side, washing her hands of the matter? Do you honestly think that anyone would approve of our decision to leave, when that results?

"Negotiation with Iraq's neighbor's and their involvement in creating a stable government is necessary."

Gee, that sounds reasonable, I wonder which candidate says that is what he intends to do???

Dubya's is much more bigger.

Instead of investing in your people, manufacturing base and infrastructure - pour half the GPD into the Military and its contractors

drive good jobs out of the country with unfair trade agreements, turn the lower middle class into near poverty. then raise the income for the Army and throw in some govt benefits and wallah

That has forced poor men who cant afford insurance or to feed their families to sign up for military service to fight these pre-emptive wars, nevermind the fact that its tears the families apart if they dont die or lose limb. Its is an acceptable outcome for the new American Dream.

Seeing as Obama has such vast military experience, the question seems vey applicable here.

Posted by crispee_oc at 2008-04-01 02:43 PM |


Well in order to have more military 'experience' than McSame he needs to avoid being shot down in his first (or was it second?) mission out and spend the rest of the war in captivity actively denouncing America.
That shouldn't be so hard.

Well in order to have more military 'experience' than McSame he needs to avoid being shot down in his first (or was it second?) mission out and spend the rest of the war in captivity actively denouncing America.
That shouldn't be so hard.

Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2008-04-01 02:49 PM | Reply


Dear Stupid,
How many years did McCain spend in the military? Take away the time he was a POW, now how many? What was his rank when he got out?
How many years did Obama spend in our nations military. What rank did he achieve?
Sincerely,
A Republican that dislikes McCain but realizes he's going to wipe the floor with Obama

Well in order to have more military 'experience' than McSame he needs to avoid being shot down in his first (or was it second?) mission out and spend the rest of the war in captivity actively denouncing America.
That shouldn't be so hard.

Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2008-04-01 02:49 PM


Like Obama you don't have an answer? Maybe you can point out his vast Senatorial experience? How about his foreign policy knowledge? Other than breaking the 30 year old policy we have with Iran.

Well we lost Vietnam, Granada, Kuwait, Haiti, Serbia, Somalia, Bosnia, Liberia and Afganistan. Who would even think we could win Iraq?

Posted by shirtsbyeric

You left out Korea.

With all thoes losses, how can anyone think we are a super power? We are nothing more than a mouse that roared.

It isn't because of our military, they are capable. It is because of our policitians, they are not.

Of course McCain can't define success in Iraq. That's why he said the U.S. might have to be there for 100 years. Mission Accomplished - in 2108.

John McCain's exalted military career was spent as a military pilot, which is something to be very proud of but not really relevant to the presidency. His time in the Senate is more relevant and he does have considerable time there. It is sad but true that all that time may be his downfall in the presidential race because he seems too old and his ideas seem out of step with the twenty first century. He's talking of a presence in Iraq for 100 years even while the economy is on the verge of melt down. The reality is America is a superpower but really can't afford to be a superpower. AT some point we will have to start pulling troops back from all over the world and reducing the amount of money going to defense.

Posted by danni at 2008-04-01 03:01 PM | Reply

I agree with about 98% of that post.
I would like to pull troops out of a lot of locations, there by spending less on defense, but don't believe in spending less in regards to research and development.

"I agree with about 98% of that post."

That would have to be a record.

"A democracy is perfectly reachable. We just need patience and sustained effort."

Jonryker,
False. It does not fit with their mindset and no amount of hope is going to make it so. We need to see reality and react to it. What you keep saying is the same stuff stated by the architects of the war. Then reality whacked them upside the head with a 2 x 4. Now it is time to wake up.

A Republican that dislikes McCain but realizes he's going to wipe the floor with Obama

Posted by 101Chairborne

Chair,
I've got $100 that says, if nominated, Obama is the clear winner in their debates. Whaddya think?
I don't know how exactly that would be decided but I'm sure we can think of some fair and intelligent way.

"A democracy is perfectly reachable."

Possibly but a democracy that elects leaders freindly to the United States????? Or Iran????

Which do you think the Shia majority would elect???

Chair,
I've got $100 that says, if nominated, Obama is the clear winner in their debates. Whaddya think?
I don't know how exactly that would be decided but I'm sure we can think of some fair and intelligent way.

Posted by evilpolock at 2008-04-01 03:19 PM | Reply


I was talking election, not debate.
And there's no way I'm going to bet any cash on a debate! Too subjective. Not to mention that silver tongued devil will orate the silver haired devil under the table. Substance wise I don't like much of what either of them have to say.

You want to do $20 on the election I'm in (pick a charity).

**** If all Shia thought alike and liked each other, they wouldn't have fought and died in such large numbers in the Iran/Iraq War and since. They'd have simply either politically joined with Iran or migrated to Iran. They have not.

Posted by jonryker *****

.......except that Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, was then in charge of Iraq........

......and he started & prosecuted the Iraq-Iran war at the behest of his then masters.......drum roll please.....the USA........

OK, I'll take that. Mine's the PVA...Paralyzed Veterans of America.

Danni,

Interesting question and a good one. We would, of course, have to allow them to elect who they wish.

However, you overestimate their love if Iran.

You also have a simplistic notion that all Shia love each other and think alike.

You also underestimate their fear of Iran. They need with a military presence there to prevent Iran from rolling over them and taking their oil and everything else. This doesn't take 130,000 men, but merely 30,000 or so. Point is, if Iran comes in, they'd be attacking us directly. They won't do that.

FYI,

Democracy is a better fit for human nature, and given proper exposure, humans will choose it over time. 230 years ago, there was ONE democratic republic: US. Now, I don't know how many there are, but there are a lot more of them. The tide is in our favor. Bringing back Islamic Caliphates has been tried before and always ultimately fails because humans don't really like living under those conditions in the long haul.

EP,
Good deal. We'll exchange info when it gets closer to the election.

I hope I don't end up donating to them because telling them I'm making the donation in the name of "Evil Polock" may be embarrassing!

Corky and I had a bet over the Dallas v Buffalo game. I won, but my wife insisted I still donate the money to the local SPCA. Corky donated to his local SPCA as well.

He just wants to throw in the towel and leave.

16 months after 6 years is hardly throwing in the towel. McBush's definition of victory is not leaving while a GOPper is in office. Same as Dubya's.

KIA and cost is irrelevant to that.

For all McBush's supposed military experience, he certainly was every bit as clueless as to the realities in Iraq back in 2003. I guess, like Dubya, he didn't bother reading what George1 had said.

***** 230 years ago, there was ONE democratic republic: US. Jonryker ****

......democracy is a Greek concept.....they practiced it 3,000 years ago.......

.......a variety of states including ancient Rome had forms of it dating back thousands of years.....

......but you were close......

Skizziks,

True, but they were not nation-states...merely city-states. Not quite the same beast, and they certainly did not have a Constitution remotely resembling ours in principle or practice. Therefore, the notion fell prey to the first empire strong enough to slap them around: the Persians. In defeating the Persians in the long haul, the Greeks scrapped their protodemocracies in favor of empire, didn't look back at it until sometime this century. I must confess I'm not up on current Greek politics, but that's the basic trajectory.

My point remains unchanged.

yes ancient greece and the roman empire and thier influences are still all around us today
BUT what happened to those empires? could some of their demist be blamed on raging liberalsim..

BUT TO THE SUBJECT.
what a beautifull thread.

FOR THE MOST part...libs are getting all worked up over the defeat of the USA and the right is wanting us to keep fighting and get another country in that region...along with israel......that is more than an american hating islamic terrorist breeding ground and dont even try and tell me its that now because while they are there....find a list of important members of alqaida and other terrorists groups that are NOW DEAD or captured because we are there.
this thread should be posted for all to see at every election site.

I think that those who think we need to stay in Iraq (McCain) should give us an estimate of the number of lives they are willing to sacrifice and an estimate of the costs. In the end if the sacrifice or the cost becomes to high we will leave anyway so it seems more humane to both America and Iraq to give us an estimate of what you are realistically willing to accept as cost and sacrifice.
We SHOULD NOT just have an open ended occupation with no idea what the total cost will be or the total number of casualties.

BTW, we should have demanded those estimates before the invasion. I believe some did and were given bull shit answers by people who should be held accountable today. They should not get cushy jobs at the NYT, or be allowed anywhere near government.

In any of our other long term occupations of other nations did we demand Profit Sharing Agreements over their resources???
Perhaps the Iraqis aren't as dumb as we would like to believe.

I think that those who think we need to stay in Iraq (McCain) should give us an estimate of the number of lives they are willing to sacrifice and an estimate of the costs. In the end if the sacrifice or the cost becomes to high we will leave anyway so it seems more humane to both America and Iraq to give us an estimate of what you are realistically willing to accept as cost and sacrifice.
We SHOULD NOT just have an open ended occupation with no idea what the total cost will be or the total number of casualties.

Posted by danni at 2008-


DAMMIT TO HELL DANNI.....
I HATE IT WHEN YOU DO THIS>........

you ask some good questions....go back to your nonsensical liberal crap. its easier to tell you how wrong you are....and YES this is a compliment but I couldnt just come out and say that.

but we are still in japan.....are you aware that japan pays for 75% of the cost of us being there? I would say that was using thier rescources.

In defeating the Persians in the long haul, the Greeks scrapped their protodemocracies in favor of empire, didn't look back at it until sometime this century. I must confess I'm not up on current Greek politics, but that's the basic trajectory.

My point remains unchanged.

Posted by jonryker at 2008-04-01 03:55 PM


Actually, the only Greeks to have a democracy were the Athenians. The Macedonians were a quasi-greek kingdom that came to dominate Greece and the lands of the Persian Achaemenid empire.

Chair,
Fair enuff...we can exchange particulars later.

jonryker, your grasp of language is frightening.

Is this winning?

Occupy Iraq forever.

Set up puppet government; call it "democracy"

Invade Iran and install another puppet regime.

Is this winning?

Occupy Iraq forever.

Set up puppet government; call it "democracy"

Invade Iran and install another puppet regime.


Posted by The_Favorite a



er..uh...yes it is very possibly success and a success to last for years and years to come. not like the success after all those peace awards to carter and arafat. by your total that would be three of the major countries in that region that might just get along with israel and not have their terrorists fly planes into buildings.

so this was a puppet regime that just went after sadr's thugs...without any initial help from us?

oh, I'm tired...

Posted by jonryker


...and really stupid. We started this war and deposed a ruler who was keeping the balance between shia and sunni and NOT allowing any islamic radical group to contaminate his country. When we went in with our "shock and awe" we screwed up that balance nad handed the country to Iran on a silver platter. We will never have an ally that will have a democratic government or allow us to place our bases there. You are delusional at best.

"three of the major countries in that region that might just get along with israel and not have their terrorists fly planes into buildings."

So when are you going to advocate invading Saudi Arabia?

McCain:

"We can't leave because of violence"

McCain:

"We can't leave because violence is down"

"and if it was
then we won already
saddam is dead"

Yeah for that particular battle which was mostly a grudge match between the Bush clan versus the Hussein clan.
But we also have the geo political power play going on between the US and Iran and their respective client states. And like it or not, its importang because in this case it has to do with our energy supplies.

And then there's the additional religious dimension of this war also going on between the Iranian Shia and the Saudi Sunni Wahhabi and their client states. And finally there's the battle between the hard core Jihadists/Islamists ie Hamas, Hezbollah, al Queda and a dozen other radical Islamist organizations that all have the potential to deliver a small nuke into NYC against the forces of moderation.

There are so many different dimensions of this battle. Its unrealistic to minimize how complex its become.

"Obama: McCain Can't Define Success in Iraq"

Ease up on the man. At his age he can't even remember what he had for breakfast.

so this was a puppet regime that just went after sadr's thugs...without any initial help from us?

BLT.

Short answer? Yes.

Longer answer?...

Malarkey is widely ackowledged by the Iraqi people as being an American meat puppet just like most of the other "political parties" who cower in the Green Zone.

The only two parties with any grass-roots cred at all in Iraq are the SIC (Supreme Islamic Council) who are tied to Iranian control and Al Sadr who also has Iranian ties but remains more popular ewith Shia population of Iraq and some Sunni groups and is who's Mahdi Army is more of a Nationalist group than the SIC. Both the SIC and Sadr want essentially the same thing a semi-autonomous Federal souther Shia state with some ties to Iran and they will prolly get that at some point.

This attack from Malarkey's forces on Sadr's forces and other Shia groups has proven to be a very bad move for Malarkey. It reinforces his unpopularity and the perception of him being a tool of America foreign policy who's sold out his own people.

Al Sadr is the big winner here because he gets to keep most of his pieces on the board for the end game and still gains cred.

Gen David Petraeous himself states there can be no military victory in Iraq and a political victory just aint gonna happen.

McCain can't define success?

Spud's amazed the guy can even tie his own shoes.

McCain can't define success because he wants to play the "It's All Good" game poerfected by his buddy Bush. Violence is up? We can't leave NOW?!" Violence is down? Surgerrificness! Mission Accomplished! It's all bullshit.

Don't fergit John McInsane is the moron who stated that Sunni AQ were being trained in Shia Iraq before Joe "AIPAC's BITCH" Loserman corrected him.

Th only way for Iraq to stabilise is for American forces to pull out and to clearly state before hand that that is the intent and when it is to occur.

Exactly the opposite of BushCo's plan?

Yes, Spud knows that.

It Bush bets red. You should bet black.

08ama '08.

Be Well.

I agree that the war was a great strategic mistake. The way I see it, Saddam Hussein was a secular leader and therefore a huge stumbling block to the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East. Yes, he was an evil person and he was our enemy (since Gulf War I) but he was also an enemy of Bin Laden and the Shia extremists etc. If he did have WMDs, he would have used them for regional influence. He never would have given them up to terrorists or risked provoking the US by using them against us. Now, with Saddam gone we have a vaccum that can only be filled by Shia extremists who are more of a terrorist threat than Saddam.

So I agree that coming here was a big mistake for those reasons and others. As far as things on the ground, the outlook isn't much better. In my opinion, what everyone fails to realize is that this is not a counterinsurgency. If we wanted to stay in Iraq, then it would be a counterinsurgency. But it is clear that our goal is to turn over power and pull out. So, in building our strategic endstate, it's pointless to set goals that relate to our presence in Iraq. If the "insurgency" is a function of our being there, then it is not an insurgency in terms of our endstate. For example, if one of our goals is to stop IED attacks on US forces, that is pointless. When we leave, there will be no more IED attacks on us forces. So our endstate needs to be different. We need to ask "if we left tomorrow, what would happen in Iraq?" and from there, we need to determine which of those anticipated results are unacceptable to us. Then we must aim our efforts on making sure those unacceptable results do not occur.

When I look at the problem that way, it becomes almost impossible to find a purpose in what we do. Regardless of what we do, the Shia are going to take control. They have completely infiltrated all the security forces. The only kind of leader who could keep them in check was a tyrant like Saddam. And when the Shia take control, as soon as we leave, they are going to be as brutal as they like against the Sunni and there will be little we can do about it. That is what will happen whether we leave tomorrow or in ten years. As far as the foreign fighters, they will leave Iraq when we do. So what are we trying to accomplish here? Train the Iraqi forces? History shows that training forces in the Middle East can backfire. Any training we offer these people will find its way to our terrorist enemies.

Things are heating up as well. The Shia are getting more aggressive. We lost a man the other day and another was seriously wounded a week or so later. We're facing a high risk with very little potential payoff. We are able to make a difference at the local level. Some of the people are very kind and appreciate our help. That is the only positive thing I can see coming out of this.

Very Respectfully
Junior Officer XXXX

Just remember this is the clown who graduated 5th from LAST in his Annapolis class. Word has it he only graduated because daddy was an Admiral. Sound familiar? He probably also got his ass shot down in Vietnam due to recklessness and incompetence and not so much the talents of the enemy. We don't need another bottomfeeder as president.

Iraq - easy solution.

Step 1: As president, Obama goes to the United Nations to give a little speech. He's good at that.

Step 2: What does he say to the United Nations? We're leaving Iraq.

Step 3: Are we giving up? Oh, no. Obama tells the UN that we think the UN should send a peace keeping force. The US is always part of the force, so we'll have some host there.

Step 4: Wait for the vote. But, understand this. If there is no UN force to stay in Iraq for the peace and tranquility of the Middle East, the US is out-of-there.

Step 5: No. There is no responsibility to the US to stay. That's a lot of BS. Saddam was a POS and needed to go. The world were a bunch of pansies when Iraq invaded Kuwait. How much money and energy was wasted on Saddam to change his ways? How much cheating were other countries doing that we discovered in Iraq? That's why they didn't want to commit - they were dirty dealing.

Step 6: Our boys and gals are home. BTW - we're leaving Germany and Japan and a host of other countries. With the US economy tanking, we need our people home, our money home, etc.

Well in order to have more military 'experience' than McSame he needs to avoid being shot down in his first (or was it second?) mission out and spend the rest of the war in captivity actively denouncing America.
That shouldn't be so hard.

Posted by DARTHCHENEY at 2008-04-01 02:49 PM

and
Just remember this is the clown who graduated 5th from LAST in his Annapolis class. Word has it he only graduated because daddy was an Admiral. Sound familiar? He probably also got his ass shot down in Vietnam due to recklessness and incompetence and not so much the talents of the enemy. We don't need another bottomfeeder as president.

Posted by furio at 2008-04-01 08:30 PM

Interesting that you both brought that Kos talking point up...Actually, it was his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam, when his A-4E Skyhawk was shot down by a missile over Hanoi. He was refused medical treatment for his injuries (crushed shoulder, fractured both arms and a leg, bayoneted in the side, water inhalation) instead beating and interrogating him to get information. Only when the North Vietnamese discovered that his father was a top admiral did they give him medical care and announced his capture.

In March 1968, McCain was put into solitary confinement, where he would remain for two years. In July 1968, McCain's father was named commander of all U.S. forces in the Vietnam theater. McCain was immediately offered early release. The North Vietnamese wanted a worldwide propaganda coup by appearing merciful, and also wanted to show other POWs that elites like McCain were willing to be treated preferentially. McCain turned down the offer of repatriation; he would only accept the offer if every man taken in before him was released as well.

Infuriated that McCain didn't accept their offer, in August of 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain,(which left him unable to lift his arms over his head to this day) during which he made a "confession" along with many other POWs. After that initial "confession" he subsequently received two to three beatings per week because of his continued refusal to sign additional statements. He also refused to meet with various anti-war groups seeking peace in Hanoi, not wanting to give either them or the North Vietnamese a propaganda victory.

Once he was released, he rehabbed, got ultimately promoted to Captain, did his 20 years and retired with a Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and the Prisoner of War Medal.

He also went on to serve in the House and the Senate.

Yeah, that bottomfeeder.

I will wait for you to tell me all about Barry's military experience.

Yeah, that bottomfeeder.


Precisely.

The Democrats/Left are frickin' idiots if they want to swiftboat his service.

His story is remarkable.


Have at it, lefties. Go ahead and mock his service.

Go ahead and mock his service.

It will be easier having seen how it's done.

Jeff-

"The Democrats/Left are frickin' idiots" pretty much needs no additional clarification.

" Go ahead and mock his service."


That's what they said 4 years ago about Kerry. How did that turn out?

Success in Iraq ends in 150 mpg equivalent on electric cars and trucks. New technology seems to rule in the usa.

So when are you going to advocate invading Saudi Arabia?

Posted by Jomama at 2008-04


thats easy...when there isnt enough gas for me to get to the golf course........thats meant to be a joke.

That's what they said 4 years ago about Kerry. How did that turn out?

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-04-01 09:43 PM

C'mon Bill, do you seriously think that there is a comparison between the service records of Kerry on the one hand and McCain on the other?

You're smarter then that.

I will wait for you to tell me all about Barry's military experience.

Posted by Rightocenter


not too soon.......RTC.........this is an issue that will come out big time later and the plan is to.......SSSSHHHHHHH DONT LET THE LIBS KNOW>...the plan is to talk about obama and military in much the same way as clinton and bush although of course the background of nam will make it harder, but I hear from reliable scources that there are many parts of barry's chraracter that will be coming out soon and it will blow his candidatcy out of the water....SSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHH

book coming out from a career general who happens to be black. it seems that obama is not the saint as he is protrayed by the media.

"C'mon Bill, do you seriously think that there is a comparison between the service records of Kerry on the one hand and McCain on the other?"


Sure. McCain was a lousy pilot and managed to get captured.

what a sorry thing to say. another example that the stereotype of compassionate and caring and supporter of the military liberal is just not correct.
but when libs can get on a site and openly talk about dancing in the streets when a VP of the usa is dead......well you come to get what you expect which "aint" much.

do you seriously think that there is a comparison between the service records of Kerry on the one hand and McCain on the other?

None at all.

McInsane was a shitty cadet who finished 4th from the bottom of his class of 800.

Because of his Admiral Pappy and Admiral Grandpappy he got a chance to fly jets rather than peel potatoes (which he was more suited for).

He crashed 3 of them.

Third time, as they say, was a charm and he ended up sitting out the war as a POW.

Face it, McCain was a military legacy brat who did nothing but fuck up big time and now he's a bitter old cynical fuck who wants to have a re-do of Vietnam in Iraq.

Compared to McCain Kerry looks like a hero.

Just cos the Swiftboat liars were pissed at Kerry's attempts to expose uncomfortable truths about the senseless, unwinnable war doesn't mean that Kerry's service wasn't honorable.

Far from it.

It's the swiftboat liars who are the real cowards who can't face up to the fact that Americans commited atrocities in that war and that the war was unjustifiable.

And just like those deluded political tools, McAncient refuses to face up to the hard truths about the Iraqi conflict. Mostly because he is a hopeless shill fer the MIC and his policies, if enacted, would only lead to more insanity and useless deaths and debts.

Be Well.

First blood in the Presidential campaign could be very, very costly.

I will wait for you to tell me all about Barry's military experience

It was more honorable than that of the cum drunk coke fiend and pisstank George AWOL Bushling.

He crashed exactly three jets less than McTaint and never let the enemy capture him.

He also never "confessed" after a wee little bit of torture like that pussy Johnny "The Manchurian Candidate" McCain.

He also had 5 less deferments than Cheney.

Yer just pissed that you can't swiftboat him aren't you?

Be Well.

C'mon Bill, do you seriously think that there is a comparison between the service records of Kerry on the one hand and McCain on the other?

Yep. Kerry served 2 tours of Vietnam in combat. McCain was a POW after 5 months.

At least Kerry didn't advocate 100 years of war in Iraq.

Both Kerry and McCain served in combat.

Notice how that sentence ended? (In a period)

Within the military there's respect for someone who served under fire, regardless of the venue, but I also have little regard for those who see it as a qualification. Every military service member knows they may be given an order that will endanger their life, even in peacetime. Some see it as a suicide pact (Ray) but really it's just a matter of accepting your own mortality and doing your duty.

Naturally I also have the ultimate contempt for that Coward from Canuckistan who never served and probably would have been limited to latrine duty in the Royal Faggoons. But staying close to mum was more important. What other woman would give him a nipple?

Null--

McCain is NOT advocating 100 years of war in Iraq--get it right--unlike Obama--who knows nothing about what he is talking about.

And Kerry was quite frankly--not quite a phoney--but very close.

McCain is a hero--like many many other Vietnam Vets. Not Kerry though. IMHO....

Kerry did go to Vietnam--but the rest is BS.

McCain is talking about US in Iraq like we are in Japan and S. Korea and Germany--admit that Obama is distorting McCain's statement--the very thing he condemns.

But Obama is the invisible man and a phoney --he is mainly a liar--

Everything is going to come out and he will lose the general election--if he is the nominee--worse than McGovern. Again IMHO...

Murphy

El Jefe: Go ahead and mock his service.

Nullifidian: It will be easier having seen how it's done.

Also the fact that he's a gold digger will be a lot easier to make fun of now that we saw how they did that against Kerry and in terms of his whoring around on his wife well we can just borrow the Clinton Bashing playbook from the right can't we?

Too bad neither Clinton nor Kerry was married to a pill popping thief.

Might hafta come up with some new material there.

Still, the basic fact that McLame never figured out why Vietnam was wrong and apparently will go to his grave thinking that Iraq was a pretty good idear should be enuff to sink his leaky boat.

Assuming his old ticker even makes it to November that is.

Don't tell Johnny boyo that Spud sed all this though that PTSD case case a wicked temper and has had it since he was a kid.

Remember Righty Tighties that stuff is just the cherry on the top of his policies which are, in a word, dangerous.

War Eternal. (TM)
Decreased regulation.
Decreased corporate taxes.
Increased Corporate welfare.
Make BushCo tax cuts permanent.
Voted FOR torture despite being a victim of it.
Healthcare policy written for the HMOs and Insurers

There is simply nothing right about the man.

He's an insane POS who flip flops, panders, lies, and has increasing numbers of senior moments.

Absolutely nothing to reccomend him.

Zip, zero, nada!

Okay, maybe one thing... he's not named Geroge W Bush.

His term would effectively be a third term fer BushCo's policies but he technically does have a different name.

Woo Hoo!

Good luck with all that FAIL in November.

Be Well.

/Obama will slaughter him in the debates.

That's incorrect, Murphy. McCain wants 100 years of war in Iraq. That's why they call him John "1000 Years of War" McBush.

"Nullifidian: It will be easier having seen how it's done."


Actually it was Yav who deserves credit for that excellent point.

"If we're not winning it, who is?"

It doesn't take a genius to figure that out simpleton. Don't read the papers? Iraq now has a government that is very tight with Iran and for good measure, so are its leading opponents.

John Kerry served two tours in Vietnam. Since when. He served a total of three months in country. Then he went back to Yale and wrote a "How I spent my Summer Vacation" paper for his remedial writing class

Krispbraincells write:
"Fact: We went in and we own it. AKA it's our baby! "

This is such a stupid comment on so many levels.

TIMBCILE:

You're not even fit to shine his shoes, much less criticize Kerry. When were you in Vietnam?

Jonryker,

I don't disagree with your belief in democracy. However, it took the period of "enlightenment" before Western European nations _slowly_ grasped and accepted democracy. To reiterate, that mindset does not exist in Iraq and forcing it down their throats won't work (ask Russia). Iraqies want stability. They want to lead lives in which they are comfortable. They want to believe in the things they think are right. In other words, the issue is that you can wish and hope all you want, and it's to be encouraged, but if you don't incorporate reality, you are doomed to failure. It's a lesson the architects of the war in Iraq continue to ignore and we continue to pay for it with every day that ignorance continues. Theories, wishes, hopes, etc. belong in theory, in academia, in think-tanks. I expect reality in my leaders.

"Define Success in Iraq"

Saddam Hussein executed, he and his regime out of power.

There's one definition of success.

Wow, looks like this thread got Pommes des Mort's manties in a big ol' knot...

Let's review-

McInsane was a shitty cadet who finished 4th from the bottom of his class of 800.

So what if he broke more then a few rules, you are going to hold that against him? He made it into and graduated from Canoe U and was offered a commission. Isn't that the point?

Because of his Admiral Pappy and Admiral Grandpappy he got a chance to fly jets rather than peel potatoes (which he was more suited for).

Sorry to dash your fantasies about being "peeled" by a Navy Ensign, but KP duty is only done while the Midshipmen are resident at Shipwreck Tech. The important point is that he was accepted to Pensacola (at that time, most ringknockers didn't want to be pilots), graduated and flew well enough to get assigned to attack jets. Just so you know, only the top 10% of flight school graduates get jets, the rest get ASW, Radar or Transport billets.


He crashed 3 of them.

Third time, as they say, was a charm and he ended up sitting out the war as a POW.

Ever fly a fighter/bomber? Ever been in one with mechanical failure? Didn't think so. A-1's were so prone to hydralic failure that the Navy replaced them with the A-4 Skyhawk, which is what McCain was flying when he was shot down by a Soviet AA missile on his 23rd mission over Hanoi. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for "distinguishing himself in combat in support of operations through heroism and extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight."

Face it, McCain was a military legacy brat who did nothing but fuck up big time and now he's a bitter old cynical fuck who wants to have a re-do of Vietnam in Iraq.

His family had a long Naval History, but you don't get 20 years in, get promoted to Captain (he didn't make the next step to Admiral because he never recovered from his injuries enough to command a ship, which is required for flag rank) get assigned the largest land-based command in the Navy and then get assigned as Senate Liason and get the DFC, Siver Star and Bronze Star if you are a fuck-up.

Compared to McCain Kerry looks like a hero.

Really? Let's compare medals:

Kerry: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart.

McCain: Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and the Prisoner of War Medal.

Both of them are Heroes, McCain just took better care of his military legacy then McCain did.

Just cos the Swiftboat liars were pissed at Kerry's attempts to expose uncomfortable truths about the senseless, unwinnable war doesn't mean that Kerry's service wasn't honorable.

Far from it.

Agreed.

Cont.

Cont.

Also the fact that he's a gold digger will be a lot easier to make fun of now that we saw how they did that against Kerry and in terms of his whoring around on his wife well we can just borrow the Clinton Bashing playbook from the right can't we?

Too bad neither Clinton nor Kerry was married to a pill popping thief.

Ever seen Theresa when she has been over-medicated? And let's not bring up the Rose Firm/Whitewater allegations again.

Might hafta come up with some new material there.

I think that new material is in order for most, if not all of your tired schtick.

Still, the basic fact that McLame never figured out why Vietnam was wrong and apparently will go to his grave thinking that Iraq was a pretty good idear should be enuff to sink his leaky boat.

McCain probably doesn't think Vietnam was a very good idea (at least from his personal perspective) but as for Iraq, he has and still supports the administration. I don't think that will sink him, since Barry doesn't have a plan either.

Assuming his old ticker even makes it to November that is.

I think if he wins, he is one and done regardless of how good or bad he is at the job.

mccain is no hero

"You're not even fit to shine his shoes, much less criticize Kerry. When were you in Vietnam?

Posted by SamBarber"


I have never served in the military. I have many family members who have.

Some I respect an awful lot. There's a few who served honorably, but since they left the service, they have been nothing but dishonorable.

There is a problem if you criticize someone's honorable service. But, just because they were in the service, doesn't put them upon a pedestal.

My brother-in-law is a firefighter. He honorably performs that role. Should he be considered a greater person than the garbage collector because his service is different and more dangerous?

I will not vote for you because of your military record or aginst you because of your police record.

Your past is a part of you. But, it ain't all there is to consider.

Posted by Rightocenter at 2008-04-02 01:44 PM
Posted by Rightocenter at 2008-04-02 01:45 PM


All in all, that was quite a smackdown.

There's a reason that this thread died a quiet death.

I don't know if the sum of those 2 posts necessarily earns the 'Moment of Clarity Award' (tm) for the day; but they deserve honorable mention.

A recitation of McBush's military record is hardly a "smack down." None of that is really of any relevance to the presidency. McCain's opportunity for a "moment of clarity" came and went with the authorization of force in Iraq. He obviously chose the wrong path, his continued stubbornness is not a trait that makes him appear presidential to me. We used to have the Powell Doctrine, we need a president who will restore that and who will actually abide by it. Irresponsibly continuation of a war we cannot afford and that will eventually end in a pull-out anyway just demonstrates short sightedness. The truely courageous course now would be for him to FINALLY break ranks with the lunatic in chief and tell the truth about Iraq for a change.

Danni,


McCain's opportunity for a "moment of clarity" came and went with the authorization of force in Iraq. He obviously chose the wrong path, his continued stubbornness is not a trait that makes him appear presidential to me.

That is a legitimate criticism and is worthy of debate.

However, that is NOT what some of your leftist bretheren were talking about, and you know it. They were bashing his service and were doing so with severe factual inaccuracy - and you know it.

Jeff J

ROC smacked down no one. His retort was pure bullshit and needed no response. The facts are clear. McCain was at the bottom of his class and would never have made it through without his family history in the navy. I wouldn't want a surgeon operating on me who had McCains class rank--how about you?

It takes no great skill or great courage to be a POW for years on end.

McCain has absolutely no qualifications to be President. Zero--none. He has no leadership skills and has shown he will bend over for any power structure. He has not the moral fiber to go against the grain. He would be another puppet Preident in a long line of republican puppets. You can almost see the strings on W.

Give the elderly a chance. Mcain probably can't pee or have a "Nooner" without Viagra. Hell at his age just standing up and looking alive is a plus.

We have suffered for nearly 8 years with a fool. Now if what many fear comes to pass. It seems that a career politician(sorry) and an elderly man will accede tp the Presidency. His biggest asset in comparison with Crotch Fur is that he seems to be able to speak in public without screwing everything up.

The anti-politicians(sorry) prayer-

Dear ______(add your favorite deity) Please keep any career politician(sorry) out of the District of Columbia and away from any public service above that of third assistant dog catcher Bumfuck Egypt. amen

Jeff-

Thanks, but sometimes idiots like Spewd need to be called on their BS. I know that it angers the DrudgeNanny, but oh well. Which leads me to...

Boob-

His retort was pure bullshit and needed no response.

Show me any part of my post that is factually incorrect. Oh, that's right, you can't.

The facts are clear.

Which is what I posted. What is also clear is that you don't like those facts.

McCain was at the bottom of his class and would never have made it through without his family history in the navy.

He was at the bottom of his class, someone has to be. He was acknowledged as a rebel, but Canoe U has no compunctions about flunking Admiral's sons, they seem to get a perverse joy out of it, actually. As for his service, once he is commissioned, he is treated like everyone else, and it is sink or swim. In McCain's case, he became a jet pilot, flew over 20 bombing missions in Vietnam, was tortured as a POW for 5+ years, attained the rank of Captain and commanded the largest Navy base in the US. His father had long retired by the time that he had finished rehabbing from his injuries, so his family history had nothing to do with any of that or his medals.

It takes no great skill or great courage to be a POW for years on end.

I would guess that staying alive through constant beatings could be counted as a "skill", but it certainly takes courage.

McCain has absolutely no qualifications to be President. Zero--none.

Since he has been in the House and then Senate longer then Barry and Billary combined, what does that say about them?

He has no leadership skills and has shown he will bend over for any power structure.

I guess graduating with honors from the National War College and then being the Commanding Officer of the largest training base in the US Navy refutes that baseless assertion.

He has not the moral fiber to go against the grain. He would be another puppet Preident in a long line of republican puppets.

He was a rebel at the USNA, so I guess he can go against the grain, and has pissed off the GOP powers that be so many times that the far right doesn't trust him.

Anything else?

Remember, McTaint is the same senile fuck who said that he's proud to have served a country that has never lost a war.

He seems to have forgotten the very war that he was in.

That's forgivable though, we'll just chalk it up to senility.

All in all, that was quite a smackdown.

There's a reason that this thread died a quiet death.

I don't know if the sum of those 2 posts necessarily earns the 'Moment of Clarity Award' (tm) for the day; but they deserve honorable mention.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-04-02 05:45 PM

I agree, and sometimes get the visual of a cat playing with a small bird when ROC dissembles a post like that.

As for the Moment of Clarity Award, I am not sure if ROC can award that to himself.

Commonsense-

Don't forget, most career military consider Vietnam to have been a tie, at worst.

McDumbass cant define where he stands on most issues. Why is this such a suprise?

Bush defined success years ago.... "Mission Acc."
"Last Throws"
OH.... Wait a minute...
"stay the course"
"we don't need more troops"
No wait a minute
"we need more Troops"

oh, my bad... did I say "mission accomplished"??
I didn't mean that
What I meant was that we need to stay the course.
No one worry.... the oil will pay for this....

emphasis added

lfthnd-

Until Obama and Hillary are done bashing each other, what motivation does McBush have in doing so?

None.

truth about Iraq for a change.

Posted by danni at 2008-04-02 06:11 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Aint gonna happen.

This asshole is sucking ass with W., the AWOL looser that cant account for his own time in svc. The very looser who attacked his svc time in '99 and 2000..

Until Obama and Hillary are done bashing each other, what motivation does McBush have in doing so?

None.

Posted by leftcoastlawyer


Precisely!

Damn! It has to pain you greatly to watch your party try and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

As a Republican, this primary has been an absolute blast to witness.

Until Obama and Hillary are done bashing each other, what motivation does McBush have in doing so?

None.

Posted by leftcoastlawyer at 2008-04-02 09:30 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

You are absolutly right...
McCain's disadvantage is this...... He doesn't know who to attack...
All he is doing is talking and honestly, he is looking like a circus clown with his ass on fire.

LCL,


I am considering paying Hans to archive RoC's posts on this thread.

McCain is flawed, but RoC utterly destroyed the banal BS talking points against him.

Your cat toying with the ball of twine metaphor was perfect.

It's a shame, really. Given Republican "leadership" over the last 8 years, you guys shouldn't need to resort to this bullshit. '08 should be a slam-dunk but it's becoming more and more uncertain for the Democratic party.

Utterly amazing.

ROC smacked down no one.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-02 06:29 PM

I beg to differ, and it looks like he did it again at 9:04 pm.

Word of advice-keep your head down.

Jeff-

I agree, and I sit here in SF and watch the Hillarians and Obamaites bite each other's heads off on an hourly basis.

This is an election that we should never lose, but are slowly moving in that direction. To paraphrase PJ O'Rourke, it's like watching the Mexican Air Force crash land into a Pemex refinery in slow motion.

When all is said and done, I really don't think that my party can coalesce around the eventual nominee in the two months before Nov. 4, which will result in a lot of no-shows or Nader votes.

It's really pretty sad, but there isn't anything that can be done about it.

I will wait for you to tell me all about Barry's military experience.

Posted by Rightocenter at 2008-04-01 09:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

This coming from someone who attacked John Kerry and then defended Bush's service?

You've got SHIT to stand on.

NEXT!

Fact: We went in and we own it. AKA it's our baby!

Fact: You own nothing.

Americans don't even own their own government anymore.

The American populace is largely the Government's biatch fit only for fucking and fleecing.

In other word Krap P Thinkin' you ARE OWNED!

You do owe, however.

For this war in Iraq.

You and yer kids and their kids after them will paying for this debacle for years to come.

American blood and treasure are the costs of this war.

The only people profitting from it are the MIC, BushCo's crooked cronies and the ChiComs.

Nice attempts to spin way from Spud's truths about McInsane their RoC. You weren't successful at all but Spud sez Nice Try, nonetheless.

Spud is generous cos he feels bad fer yer lack of logic and basic humanity.

I beg to differ

~Lefty Louie.

Beg all you like.

Facts is facts and Spud is still concentrating his righteous wrath on ClintCo.

Another Fact? Have you checked the record turnout for this primary season?

Fer the Dems that is.

When Novemeber rolls around the GOPhers may well end up on the endangered species list.

Yer party is in dissaray and despite yer tendencies to lockstep in goosestepping formation nothing can change the fact that the GOPhers are hopelessly dispirited, divided and feeding on themselves.

Once the Dem nom is secured fer Obama, Spud will turn turn his laser light on uncomfortable truths onto John McInsane and then watching him FAIL so completely and embarrassingly will make the effort all worthwhile.

Till then y'all can spin yer wheels and go around in circles blowing smoke in the air and making horrific noises but at the end of the day it will be all sound and fury.

A tale told by madmen.

Signifying NOTHING.

That's a fact too!

^_^

The Age of Stupid is rapidly coming to a close.

Be Well.

This coming from someone who attacked John Kerry and then defended Bush's service?

You've got SHIT to stand on.

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2008-04-02 10:03 PM

When did I ever do that?

As a matter of fact, this is what I said in my 1:44pm post

Compared to McCain Kerry looks like a hero.

Really? Let's compare medals:

Kerry: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart.

McCain: Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and the Prisoner of War Medal.

Both of them are Heroes, McCain just took better care of his military legacy then McCain did.

Just cos the Swiftboat liars were pissed at Kerry's attempts to expose uncomfortable truths about the senseless, unwinnable war doesn't mean that Kerry's service wasn't honorable.

Far from it.

Agreed.

Spewd-

~Lefty Louie.

Beg all you like.
...

When Novemeber rolls around the GOPhers may well end up on the endangered species list.

Yer party is in dissaray and despite yer tendencies to lockstep in goosestepping formation

Ummm, LCL is a Dem, in case you hadn't noticed.

Once the Dem nom is secured fer Obama, Spud will turn turn his laser light on uncomfortable truths onto John McInsane and then watching him FAIL so completely and embarrassingly will make the effort all worthwhile.

Like you miserably failed at earlier? Good luck with that, glowstick.

ROC

McCain commanded a training squadron - which would have been 6-20 planes max at that time.

He didn't command "The largest Naval base".

Anyway, I don't slight the guys military service in the least. He wasn't the best pilot, but he put up with a lot when he was offered a ticket home by the No. Vietnamese when they learned his father was commanding our forces in Vietnam.

I respect him for that. I also used to admire him for the maverick he used to be in the Senate. If only he'd stuck to that instead of hugging Bush and walking in lock step the last few years he'd probably be a cinch, but he's too closely aligned now with Bush and Co.

He lost me when he abandoned all his former positions. I still respect the man he used to be though.

Spud: McInsane was a shitty cadet who finished 4th from the bottom of his class of 800.

RoCksferbrainZ: So what if he broke more then a few rules, you are going to hold that against him? He made it into and graduated from Canoe U and was offered a commission. Isn't that the point?

No the point is that he's almost as stupid as Dumbya and this was back before he got tortured and became senile.

Spud: Because of his Admiral Pappy and Admiral Grandpappy he got a chance to fly jets rather than peel potatoes (which he was more suited for).

Sorry to dash your fantasies about being "peeled" by a Navy Ensign, but KP duty is only done while the Midshipmen are resident at Shipwreck Tech. The important point is that he was accepted to Pensacola (at that time, most ringknockers didn't want to be pilots), graduated and flew well enough to get assigned to attack jets. Just so you know, only the top 10% of flight school graduates get jets, the rest get ASW, Radar or Transport billets.

He's a legacy brat who got preferential treatment because of who his family was. Period. That's the important point yer trying to deflect from pathetically and failing at.

Spud: He crashed 3 of them.

Third time, as they say, was a charm and he ended up sitting out the war as a POW.

Ever fly a fighter/bomber? Ever been in one with mechanical failure? Didn't think so. A-1's were so prone to hydralic failure that the Navy replaced them with the A-4 Skyhawk, which is what McCain was flying when he was shot down by a Soviet AA missile on his 23rd mission over Hanoi. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for "distinguishing himself in combat in support of operations through heroism and extraordinary achievement while participating in an aerial flight."

Maybe he got hit by a missile and maybe he's just a shitty pilot. The preponderance of evidence points to incompetence not mechanical failure or missiles.

TBC

Be Well.

Spud to RoC cont...

Spud: Face it, McCain was a military legacy brat who did nothing but fuck up big time and now he's a bitter old cynical fuck who wants to have a re-do of Vietnam in Iraq.

RoC: His family had a long Naval History, but you don't get 20 years in, get promoted to Captain (he didn't make the next step to Admiral because he never recovered from his injuries enough to command a ship, which is required for flag rank) get assigned the largest land-based command in the Navy and then get assigned as Senate Liason and get the DFC, Siver Star and Bronze Star if you are a fuck-up.

He didn't get promoted cos he's a fuck up and the Navy knew it. If yer trying to insist that there's no legacy mindset in the Navy yer not convincing Spud.

Spud: Compared to McCain Kerry looks like a hero.

Really? Let's compare medals:

Kerry: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Purple Heart.

McCain: Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, Purple Heart and the Prisoner of War Medal.

Both of them are Heroes, McCain just took better care of his military legacy then McCain did.

Kerry didn't get a Distinguished Flying Cross? Wonder why that was? Narf! The POW medal? No, Kerry never got caught. That supposed to be a plus in yer book? Odd books you read.

Spud: Just cos the Swiftboat liars were pissed at Kerry's attempts to expose uncomfortable truths about the senseless, unwinnable war doesn't mean that Kerry's service wasn't honorable.

Far from it.

RoC: Agreed.

Agreed? Where were you when yer RT bretheren were making fun of Kerry's purple heart with them bandaids? Face it. Kerry's service was more honorable in that he recognised early on what was wrong with America being in Vietnam and came back to the States and spoke truth to power to try and end it in which he was eventually successful. That part of Kerry's service to his country is far more honorable than McInsane contention that the media and the anti-War movemen lost the war. That just belies an inability to face the truth. Not a good trait in a CiC especially after the disasterous BushCo reign of errors.

You Fail!

Be Well.

/McCain just announced that he is once again putting off making his medical records available until "some time in May"
//McCain = Not Fit For Duty. Mentally or Physically.

Where were you when yer RT bretheren were making fun of Kerry's purple heart with them bandaids?

Crying like a pussy because Kerry got attacked is so like you spud. What is worse is that you now come on and attack McCain's service just the say.

frigging hypocrite.

say = same.

AU-

McCain was Commanding Officer of NAS Cecil Field as well as Commanding Officer of the NAS-43 Training Squadron at Cecil. Cecil Field was over 19,000 acres, was the largest Naval Air Station and was McCain's last command.

As for his sudden "buddy" act with Bush (who according to people in the Beltway despise each other), that's what the GOP nominee is supposed to do.

Crying like a pussy because Kerry got attacked is so like you spud. What is worse is that you now come on and attack McCain's service just the say.

frigging hypocrite

Spud don't cry like no pussy, Eberly Bro.

Pointing out the hypocrisy of RT asswipes who insist that McCain's service be respected by the same folks who spent so much time and effort disrespecting Kerry's service is not hypocrisy.

Where did you find that pic, spud? Gingham!

AHHHH!

Navy pilot John Sidney McCain III should have never been allowed to graduate from the U.S. Navy flight school. He was a below average student and a lousy pilot. Had his father and grandfather not been famous four star U.S. Navy admirals, McCain III would have never been allowed in the cockpit of a military aircraft.

His father John S. "Junior" McCain was commander of U.S. forces in Europe later becoming commander of American forces in Vietnam while McCain III was being held prisoner of war. McCain III's grandfather John S. McCain, Sr. commanded naval aviation at the Battle of Okinawa in 1945.

During his relative short stunt on flight status, McCain III lost five U.S. Navy aircraft, four in accidents and one in combat.

Robert Timberg, author of The Nightingale's Song, a book about Annapolis graduates and their tours in Vietnam, wrote that McCain "learned to fly at Pensacola, though his performance was below par, at best good enough to get by. He liked flying, but didn't love it."

McCain III lost jet number one in 1958 when he plunged into Corpus Christi Bay while practicing landings. He was knocked unconscious by the impact coming to as the plane settled to the bottom.

McCain's second crash occurred while he was deployed in the Mediterranean. "Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula," Timberg wrote, "he took out some power lines [reminiscent of the 1998 incident in which a Marine Corps jet sliced through the cables of a gondola at an Italian ski resort, killing 20] which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the son of an admiral."

McCain's third crash three occurred when he was returning from flying a Navy trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game.

Timberg reported that McCain radioed, "I've got a flameout" and went through standard relight procedures three times before ejecting at one thousand feet. McCain landed on a deserted beach moments before the plane slammed into a clump of trees.

McCain's fourth aircraft loss occurred July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk pilot. While seated in the cockpit of his aircraft waiting his turn for takeoff, an accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain's plane. He escaped from the burning aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft, and threatened to sink the ship.

McCain's fifth loss happened during his 23rd mission over North Vietnam on Oct. 26, 1967, when McCain's A-4 Skyhawk was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. McCain ejected from the plane breaking both arms and a leg in the process and subsequently parachuted into Truc Bach Lake near Hanoi.

After being drug from the lake, a mob gathered around McCain, spit on him, kicked him and stripped him of his clothing. He was bayoneted in his left foot and his shoulder crushed by a rifle butt. He was then transported to the Hoa Lo Prison, also known as the Hanoi Hilton.

After being periodically slapped around for "three or four days" by his captors who wanted military information, McCain called for an officer on his fourth day of captivity. He told the officer, "O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital." -U.S. News and World Report, May 14, 1973 article written by former POW John McCain

Spewd-

Got to give you credit for attempting a comeback.

Obviously you don't know much about the USN, but a few points are in order.

McCain got in to Annapolis because he was an Admiral's son, but that didn't keep him from being bounced out. First or 894th, he graduated and got his commission.

As for his flying, surviving 23 missions over Hanoi is no small feat, and he got a DFC for his flying (not for getting shot down).

He got promoted to Captain, the fuckups don't get that far, they are lucky to get to Lt. Commander before they are deadended at a desk at the Pentagon or some other admin job. He didn't get promoted to Admiral because he was medically unable to command a ship, which is required for elevation to Flag rank.

I have never bashed Kerry for his service, and thought that the Swiftys were idiots. They don't hand out Bronze and Silver Stars for nothing, notwithstanding the lies spread about his service. Read my response, I said "Both of them are Heroes".

"McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least nine trips on Keating's airplanes, and three of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."

You RT morons still haven't figured it out yet.

Spud is still countering the enormous ClintCo machine.

Spud has barely spared a thought fer McCain beyond dismissing him as being unelectable.

Once Spud can focus soley on tearing down the Myth of John McCain the "Hero" and "Moderate" it will be childsplay.

Ever watch The Princess Bride?

Remember the part where the man in black tells Inigo Montoya:

"I'm not left handed either"

Sommat like that ^_^

Till then.

Be Well.

/08ama '08! GOBAMA!!

Spewd-

Love it when you cut and paste something without the link...really shows how credible the information is.

Once Spud can focus soley on tearing down the Myth of John McCain the "Hero" and "Moderate" it will be childsplay.

Ever watch The Princess Bride?

Yes, and you remind me of Vizzini:

Man in Black: All right. Where is the poison? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both drink, and find out who is right... and who is dead.
Vizzini: But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the poison into his own goblet or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You've made your decision then?
Vizzini: Not remotely. Because iocane comes from Australia, as everyone knows, and Australia is entirely peopled with criminals, and criminals are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you.
Man in Black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Vizzini: Wait til I get going! Now, where was I?
Man in Black: Australia.
Vizzini: Yes, Australia. And you must have suspected I would have known the powder's origin, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You're just stalling now.
Vizzini: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? You've beaten my giant, which means you're exceptionally strong, so you could've put the poison in your own goblet, trusting on your strength to save you, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But, you've also bested my Spaniard, which means you must have studied, and in studying you must have learned that man is mortal, so you would have put the poison as far from yourself as possible, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.
Man in Black: You're trying to trick me into giving away something. It won't work.
Vizzini: IT HAS WORKED! YOU'VE GIVEN EVERYTHING AWAY! I KNOW WHERE THE POISON IS!
Man in Black: Then make your choice.
Vizzini: I will, and I choose - What in the world can that be?
Vizzini: [Vizzini gestures up and away from the table. Roberts looks. Vizzini swaps the goblets]
Man in Black: What? Where? I don't see anything.
Vizzini: Well, I- I could have sworn I saw something. No matter.First, let's drink. Me from my glass, and you from yours.
Man in Black, Vizzini: [they drink ]
Man in Black: You guessed wrong.
Vizzini: You only think I guessed wrong! That's what's so funny! I switched glasses when your back was turned! Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...
Vizzini: [Vizzini stops suddenly, and falls dead to the right]
Buttercup: And to think, all that time it was your cup that was poisoned.
Man in Black: They were both poisoned. I spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder.

Spewd-

Your 11:46 amounts to nothing more then a canadian version of "I know you are but what am I!" Truly lame.

Sorry, but henceforth you shall be known as Vizzini.

As for his sudden "buddy" act with Bush (who according to people in the Beltway despise each other), that's what the GOP nominee is supposed to do.

Posted by Rightocenter

Perhaps so. But, as terribly unpopular as Bush and his policies are not the smartest thing to do if you're running for President.

Usually an election after a 2 term president is a change election. Especially so after Bush.

Yeah, that bottomfeeder.


Precisely.

The Democrats/Left are frickin' idiots if they want to swiftboat his service.

His story is remarkable.


Have at it, lefties. Go ahead and mock his service.

Posted by JeffJ

I use to be a left sympathizer due to bush's incompetence, but now these guys don't deserve to lick McCain's bag..

The McCain bashers here can go play obama skin flute .

obama "aint" change.. he is more of the same..

As a Republican, this primary has been an absolute blast to witness.

Posted by JeffJ

it has been a hoot to watch.. I cant wait until some crack whore from obamas past shows or some of his reefer smoking brethren talking about his favorite bong in college and his best nights of nailing strange come to light

Oh thats right hillary and obama are not through savaging each other.

I thought it was funny that hillary challenged him to bowl and give him 2 frames and he replied with I will tear up the bowling alley and put in a b-ball court.. NOT

Fuck those pussy assed Rethugs and their crocodile tears sez Spud.

Fuck 'em with a stick!

Be Well.

Posted by dethspud

it would behoove you to focus more intently on your own countries fucked up politics. It is like a sick obsession with you to continually stalk obama and comment on AMERICAN politics especially when you dont live , work or VOTE here.

Sad and strange.

Sorry, but henceforth you shall be known as Vizzini.

Posted by Rightocenter at 2008-04-02 11:50 PM

Sorry Spud, but that is oddly appropriate.

"Someone always wins wars...."

Well, that's just not true.

Spud,


You are bright and very well-read.

That said, Rightocenter kicked the living shit out of you on this thread.

You need proof?

You're honest, leftocenter bretheren corroborate it on this thread!

Zed,

For example?

President Amandapajamas can:

While Maliki has been left weakened, Iran has emerged strengthened, as it reportedly brokered the weekend truce at a meeting of Shia parties in the Iranian city of Qom, that excluded the Iraqi government.

Why hasn't McCain signed on to the new GI bill?

60 other Senators have already.

Oh, ya. Most GI's don't have the luxury of leaving their wives for wealthy heiresses

"Someone always wins wars...."

Iraq vs. Iran -- somebody won?

"Someone always wins wars...."

Actually, that statement is predicated on the idea that one side attacks the other, so either the attack was successful, and they won, or it wasn't, and they lost. Wars are immensely more complicated than that.

But, as terribly unpopular as Bush and his policies are not the smartest thing to do if you're running for President.

Usually an election after a 2 term president is a change election. Especially so after Bush.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-04-03 12:08 AM

It may not be the smartest thing to do, but it was done early enough to gain the imprimatur from Bush to mollify the 31%.

It should be a change election, but the Dumbocrats are certainly living up to that particular nickname with the infighting over Barry/Billary.

"Vizzini"

That still cracks me up.

ROC

Five months to go. An eternity in politics
Lots of primary seasons have gone on even longer than this one. Bill Clinton didn't sew it up until late June in 1992.

I'd drop the 'dumbocrats'. I think if you choose to use that that makes the GOP look like Downs Syndrome patients. No one has fucked things up more in my lifetime than the most recent bunch.

The US has, really, no clue why it is in Iraq: Witness all the changing rationales for the war. It has no plan for short-term, medium term or long-term success. It has no definition of victory. The US cannot separate Al Qaida, from Shia, from Sunni from local gun-slinger politics. We have no way to make Iraq a successful nation, given the total lack of co-operation form the key players: the Iraqis. We have no idea what it will cost, or why.

All we know is when it comes to job training or insurance for children, or needed infrastructure inprovements, we can't afford them. They come after we pay for our Iraq war.

Oh ,yes, it's going to last for 100 years, but no one has told us why yet either.

And we really don't know why. Do we?

China & Russia know why...why not you ~ Johnny?