Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, August 20, 2007

The much-anticipated Senate testimony of Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, regarding the situation on the ground in Iraq has now been scheduled for September 11th.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

MasterCheat

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Q That's really just because of the tight schedule and not because it's September 11th?

MR. JOHNDROE: That's right. Congress is not -- as of right now, based on the last we checked, Congress is not in session because of the Rosh Hashanah holiday, very much the week leading up to that Saturday, September 15th.

The propaganda from the White House is getting very old... Does Dubya actually think it is working for him?

more old news:>)


Kevin Barrett to Debate John Brown on 9/11! Tonight, Sat. 8/18/07, 6 pm CT, http://
republicbroadcasting.org

I finally found someone who doesn't think 9/11 was an inside job, and who has the guts to defend his opinions in a public debate! John Brown, a patriotic member of the Special Forces community who disagrees with my argument that 9/11 was an inside job, has become my first opponent with the guts to debate the issue on the air. This comes as a relief, since I have long been frustrated by the "silence of the cowards." I have offered to debate a long list of gutless wonders who have publicly insulted me but chickened out of debate proposals, including Wisconsin Rep. Steve Nass, Wisconsin governor Jim Doyle, Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green, Progressive publisher Matt Rothschild, NIST report quasi-supporter Dr. Frank Greening, vacillating free speech advocate Professor Donald Downs
mujca.com and boorish, clueless University of Wisconsin physicist Dr. Orwellian: www.mujca.com -- not to mention O'Reilly and Hannity, who snuck away from my FOX appearances licking their wounds and now refuse to return my phone calls ; )


John Brown is a smart, articulate, patriotic individual with connections in the special forces and intelligence communities--and a student of 9/11-- so this debate should make great radio! If you miss it live, the show will be archived at

www.republicbroadcasting.org

PS Don't miss my complete radio schedule at htp://mujca.com/airwaves.htm and lecture schedule at www.mujca.com

Is the Senate meeting at Ground Zero?
Will the WH hang a Mission Still Accomplishable banner behind Petraeous?

You know the report will be less than upbeat when the Bushies sink to stunts. Hopefully some Senator will ask him how the war in Iraq is helping to capture bin laden.

NG3...there are many missions in a battle and many battles in a campaign...retard

Judas: And Bush has accomplished how may since the Mission Accomplished banner went up?
And the Mission he claimed Accomplished back in 2003, was it?

NG3...how about this question...what mission was the banner talking about or in regards of????

NG3...many missions have been accomplished....and more will follow...maybe your politics are blind to what missions are....maybe thats why you make your stupid little political comments about mission accomplished

to you mission accomplished means progress in war...thats why you hate to hear that word and thats why you mock it

What a fitting day to address the WORLD on our progress and intentions. Make no mistake that's who it's intended for.

I, for one, could care less at this point what the anything anti - American left thinks.

You either want a society based on forgiveness or you don't.

Bin Ladin didn't name it a HOLY war in unbelief.

"Bush stated at the time that this was the end to major combat operations in Iraq. While this statement did coincide with an end to the conventional phase of the war, Bush's assertion -- and the sign -- became controversial after guerilla warfare in Iraq increased during the Iraqi insurgency. The vast majority of casualties, among both coalition and Iraqi combatants, and from Iraqi civilians, have occurred after the speech."

en.wikipedia.org

An end to major combat. Misleading at best...

Judas. Liberals see the Big Picture, it's the tree stupid ,it's the tree.

Sarcasm off.

Thought that was on of the best flight suit shots I have ever seen..LOL, LMAO, Blah Blah Blah, Wha wha wha...etc....

CHILL thats RIGHT...major combat...meaning we no longer were engaging.. tanks... jets ...artillary...navy ships...supply trucks..the command and control cease to exsist...what was left was a loose organise poorly equipt force...and thats why DR retorts look stupid in mocking MISSION ACCOMPLISHED...because it was

I wonder how many times the gen or the sos will invoke the "9/11 changed everything" excuse....lol


I believe that even many republicans understand that this testimony will change nothing and inform no one....mr. bush is playing "four corners" offense and succeeding because the democrats are to cowardly to cut funding for the war in Iraq and start impeachment proceedings...Hell cutting funding probably will not work because they have the money to continue in black opps accounts that have already be approved...

guerilla warfare is not major combat

I hope he remembers to mention that Bush STILL hasn't caught the man responsible while speaking on 9/11.....nor does Bush consider the man who killed 3000 civilian Americans a priority.

Bush voters, how does this make you feel?

I Hope he also remembers to mention that Saddam had nothing to do with 911.

Judas, we are still doing Major combat in Iraq it never really ended. SH told his troops to go to ground. It was always a guerilla war. After day 3 you did not see people wearing milt uniforms hence guerilla warfare from the get go. Name a major tank battle or any battle for that matter that had thousands of Iraqs in uniform......

but Iraq has everything to do with our war on terror....Iraq is a place that draw the extreemist to us...to fight extreemist on a battlefield...to bring our US arsenal to bear....look at a map...iraq is the perfect battle ground for our war on terror...its right smack in the middle of the ME...extreemist do not have to go far to attack us and they do not have to go far to die

CHILL...unless the insurgents have C130s or C5 and maybe a couple of jets and tanks....your statement is only political

Judas I was taking you seriously until you wrote that. Good bye.

CHILL...how can you call any battle that number only in hunreds without fire support ...MAJOR combat...what because you political theory says it is...hahahahahaha...you need to learn about warfare before you mouth off about it

good bye...learn some military history before you mouth off next time

So, Judy, the "mission" was to depose Saddam (check), secure his WMDs (check, err... okay, so he didn't have them...), install a pro-U.S. government (check, again, sorta...). So why are we there now?

Judas, your comment at 6:18 was out in left field. Your other one is worth debate. The 6:18 statement is more of a tin hat the government brought down the towers kind of talk....

It's always been guerilla warfare. SH flew what was left of his airforce to Iran. It was never major combat. The only thing that slowed us down was long supply routes and sand storms...

And Judas, so you're saying that the WMD thing was just a lie to "draw the extremists" to Iraq? Which was it, then? Did Saddam have WMDs, or was this a ploy? Or, was the "drawing them in" just a consequence of destalilizing the country?

good bye...learn some military history before you mouth off next time

Posted by judas

Like how to destroy your own country as you rape Iraq for "Democrazy" for $25 plus trillion in oil?


Iraq
sits atop the world's second-largest
oil reserve. The proven reserves are
112 billion barrels, with a probable
pool in excess of 400 billion barrels.

At (now 3 months old) current prices, that's about
$25 trillion worth of crude.

www.hightowerlowdown.org

Judas I know about milt history. Have your mother make you another tin hat and have her bring it down with your milk...

"but Iraq has everything to do with our war on terror....Iraq is a place that draw the extreemist to us...to fight extreemist on a battlefield...to bring our US arsenal to bear...."


LOL, LMAO, Blah Blah Blah, Wha wha wha...etc....

I needed that before my drive home. Thanks Judas!

EVA....why dont we install a pro-taliban government...would it make you happier than installing a government that is pro america..plus the iraqi people voted in their government....like we vote in our...you may not like thier government...but do you like ours??? doubt it....so why mock the direction of their government????because you do not like the direction that they are taking....well what about the direction we are taking

CHILL...good go home...i do not care...you do not even know what you are talking about...you think a bunch of guys with out a command and control and no fire support is major combat...you have no clue on what you are talking about...as for my 6:18 post you have all the chance to disprove that iraq is not a good place to fight extreemist

Judas I tell you what. Me and my friends will get good and shit faced and go you your house to fight. We'll break everything and rape your cat. I know you had nothing to do with it, but your house was in the perfect spot. Location, Location, Location! Tool....

as long as tanks...jets...helo...navy ships...command and control...and supply vehicles are left on the battleflield without being captured or destoryed...then our major combat would have not been over...but it was...so deal with it...MISSION WAS ACCOMPLISHED

Chill does cats??


Murphy

My point Judas is that there as never "major combat". SH went into guerilla mode almost right away.

www.hasbro.com

here yea go. Go play...

Murphy

Posted by MURPHY

Pussy cats that is. Keep up. Plus two marriges later cats are looking good....

CHILL...weapons proliferation is why we kicked down the door of iraq...we gave them the technology for WMDs...and now we want to take them back or destroy WMDs....whats the problem

"...MISSION WAS ACCOMPLISHED"

Now, now. mommy will be down with the ritalin soon. Bhawww!!!!

Your talking WMDs! Lord have mercy on this child... Sorry Judas I like the handle but I must go. Peace in the middle-east!

CHILL... you are not hearing me...the Iraqis might not have fire a shot...but they did with their tanks....but the point is....IF YOU WANT TO END MAJOE COMBAT OPERATION IN IRAQ...YOU WILL HAVE TO CAPTURE OR DESTORY THE EQUIPMENT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO MAJOR COMBAT(tank..jets...navy ships...command and control and supply trucks) i can not put it any other way...it does not matter if Iraq uses this equipment or not....it only matters if it was destroyed and captured or not...DO YOU GET IT...probably not...continue your political ramble

Good Lord, is that fool Bush still trying to link his illegal pre-emptive war in Iraq with 9-11? Give it up, Bush, there's barely anyone in America with an IQ over 65 that still believes Saddam Hussein or Iraq had anything to do with 9-11 or the terrorists.

Let's all play the drinking game when Paterious delivers his White House-written report on September 11:

1 swig of booze for every time 9-11 is mentioned

2 swigs of booze for every time "al-Qaeda in Iraq" is mentioned

3 swigs of booze for every time "we gotta fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here" is mentioned

4 swigs of booze for every time "the entire mess in Iraq is all the fault of the Iranians" is mentioned

5 swigs of booze for "_____(fill in the blank)_____"

i just have a problem people calling skirmishes in iraq...with only a few hundred people without fire support...MAJOR COMBAT...you do not have a clue what MAJOR COMBAT is...and i explained my best to you what it is....anbd still you do not get it.....you have do definition...just political hack talk i hear all the time on this site...go get a clue...and come talk to me later once you have a defintion of what MAJOR COMBAT IS....not what you politcal talking points tells you

Chris, I'm in. It's a Tuesday so it will have to be beer and not my buddies Jim (Beam) and Mark (Makers that is)...

just have a problem people calling skirmishes in iraq...with only a few hundred people without fire support...MAJOR COMBAT...you do not have a clue what MAJOR COMBAT is...and i explained my best to you what it is....anbd still you do not get it.....you have do definition...just political hack talk i hear all the time on this site...go get a clue...and come talk to me later once you have a defintion of what MAJOR COMBAT IS....not what you politcal talking points tells you

Posted by judas


& we are there for the $25 trillion plus in oil as well spreading our version of democrazy/combat ~ as Judas loves to call it ~ too:>)

BANI...get rid of your car and buy a bike...if the oil being pumped in your car bother you so much (maybe the poeple who think like you really did bike it...maybe our oil prices might go down)...you know what they say a gallon of blood for a gallon of oil...wear reflectors when you are traveling the highway on a bike...good luck

BANI...get rid of your car and buy a bike...if the oil being pumped in your car bother you so much (maybe the poeple who think like you really did bike it...maybe our oil prices might go down)...you know what they say a gallon of blood for a gallon of oil...wear reflectors when you are traveling the highway on a bike...good luck

Posted by judas


Here's one a solution:>)

State makes big fuss over local couple's vegetable oil car fuel
Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility.
"They told me I am required to have a license and am obligated to pay a motor fuel tax," David Wetzel recalled. "Mr. May also told me the tax would be retroactive."

Since the initial visit by the agents on Jan. 4, the Wetzels have been involved in a struggle with the Illinois Department of Revenue. The couple, who live on a fixed budget, have been asked to post a $2,500 bond and threatened with felony charges.

I love it: these folks went "off the petroleum grid", so get hit for unpaid taxes by the State of Illinois! - M. R.


www.herald-review.com


here's another...

www.waterpoweredcar.com


Chris, I'm in. It's a Tuesday so it will have to be beer and not my buddies Jim (Beam) and Mark (Makers that is)...

Posted by Chill at 2007-08-20 06:51 PM | Reply


Deal.

BANI...my solution is better...if you bitch about oil, then ride a bike...i wonder who long the bitching will last after biking a few days in the rain... desert...snow and moutains

Who's suggest fighting in IRAq makes good combat sense?


I'll help you...It's good to have a base there to keep Russia & China in check:>)

I'm betting there are at least 29% of Americans that will belive this is not coincidence.

Wight Wobbie?

Hillary on Surge? 'It's Working'...

news.yahoo.com

LOL on the Hillary joke:>)

***** Petraeus Will Deliver Iraq Report on 9/11 *****

.........yup......Rove left it for him in the top drawer of his desk on his way out.........

9/11????

Make it stop please , make it stop!!

Now that Hillary is admitting the surge is working, who will you libs vote for?

What she really said:
"""It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics," she said. "We can't ever let that happen again. We can't be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."

We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."
Posted by danni

IRAN?

Wishful thinking on your part WISGOD.
I think she just means that bringing in the surge now is probably too little too late. We needed the additional troops at the beginning when we would have had a large portion of Iraqis on our side but when we could not protect them from the terrorists and insurgents they will be difficult to make them believe we are making them safer.

Danni, the funny thing is when Bush and the Generals proposed the surge, the Democrats were against it. Now that it appears to be working, it's too late. The bottom line is that nothing Bush would have done would have been or will do is going to be identified as a success. The next step may be a reduction in troops, and the Dems will chastise him for that, now that the surge is showing promise.

I hope he remembers to mention that Bush STILL hasn't caught the man responsible while speaking on 9/11.....nor does Bush consider the man who killed 3000 civilian Americans a priority.

Bush voters, how does this make you feel?

I Hope he also remembers to mention that Saddam had nothing to do with 911.

Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2007-08-20


well it pisses me off but then I also remember that we have caught the #2 man and have captured and killed any number of the people who were involved...and just as in 9/11 itself the left wants to forget all of that.....

and 9/11 did change everything,,,,,maybe someday the left will come to realize that before too many of us are dead if they get the white house back.

but no matter how many are dead.......at least those god damned islamic radicals got thier rights..........

ANNOUNCEMENT




dear right wing conspiracy, trailor park, red neck, cousin marrying, 2nd grade education, tobacco chewing, country hick, bros of mine.....

IT DOESN MATTER WHAT YOU SAY OR WHAT PROOF IS GIVEN OR WHO SAYS WHAT OR WHAT EVIDENCE IS GIVEN OR WHO IS GIVING IT..........



THIS REPORT WILL BE MET WITH DISTAIN AND ATTACKS FROM THE LEFT.....FROM WHERE IT IS GIVEN AND WHEN AND BY WHO AND EVEN IF THEY DONT LIKE THE LOOK ON PRETRAEUS'S FACE OR HIS UNIFORM.,

IT SIMPLY DOESNT MATTER....

THEY WILL NOT BELIEVE IT ANYWAY.

and why.....because ANYTHING positive makes them look bad and that is simply not allowed......they are incapable of believing that the report could say anything good even if the bad is evened out in the report.....they just dont want to hear of any success........

so dont get too upset when they try to make you feel like a retarded half breed from arkansas.....they just cant help it.......good news is not in the talking points from soros!!!!

Where Is OSAMA ?

Didn't Bush Say He Was Going To Get Before He Said He Doesn't Think Much About Him?

Quotes "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our Number one priority and we will not rest until we find him!"

- President Bush, September 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

- President Bush, March 13, 2002



Flip-Flop !!

-Sarge

okay....so you are right....he flipped his flop

so just what does that mean in the grand scheme of things?

do we stop and declare we lost because we dont have him.......we didnt capture hitler or any of the others we fought did we?

and sure they took care of themselves, but was there no one who called for the capture of hitler and then said......well since we have devastated germany and captured and killed so many......we dont need to get him and ava from the bunker....I mean who really knows?


but as I said.....it pisses me off.....and if he is in pakistan......do we pull an obama and bomb them or what???????

Judas,

You're a moron. Do you actually think people on this site are going to believe that Shrub intended that lame banner to ONLY mean MAJOR military operations? He and his idiot cabinet thought we'd be welcomed with flowers and candy and that was clearly NEVER the case.

You said "IF YOU WANT TO END MAJOE COMBAT OPERATION IN IRAQ...YOU WILL HAVE TO CAPTURE OR DESTORY THE EQUIPMENT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO MAJOR COMBAT". Well, Rummy and Cheney made the stupid decision to disband the Iraqi army, and suddenly you had thousands of bored, angry, military trained insurgents attacking us in plain clothes, using weapons we failed to secure after Saddam's fall.

Call me silly, but I consider insurgents destroying our tanks, strikers, humvees, and supply trucks with EFP's and IED's major military operations. Let's not forget the RPG's, mortars, and rocket artillery they're lobbing into the Emerald City on a daily basis.

You're trying to make the argument that Bushco wasn't incorrect in displaying the banner because the enemy isn't attacking us with tanks, jets, and ships of their own, yet the weapons they are using are working just as well.

If your lame assertion is true that Bush invaded Iraq to pick a fight with Al Qaeda, "so we don't have to fight them over here..." then he deserves to swing from a rope, because he could have pursued OBL into Pakistan and done it without killing/wounding 20,000 american troops, and possible hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

Judas,

Here's a tidbit for you to consider. It's a video of our forces taking out a mobile anti-aircraft gun that insurgents were firing on our troops. I'd say that's pretty MAJOR.

www.militarytimes.com

Wow, I was reading Judas's writings above. Sometimes I can't tell if some of you people are making fun of the republicans or if that is really your views. What an idiot!!!

This conversation should be very easy. Does anyone here believe the Petreous speech being set for 9/11 isn't a cheap political ploy in the line of many cheap political moves this President has fed us? If not, why?

but as I said.....it pisses me off.....and if he is in pakistan......do we pull an obama and bomb them or what???????

Excuse Me,Excuse Me... Tony Snow Already Said They Would:

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. would consider military force if necessary to stem Al Qaeda's growing ability to use its hideout in Pakistan to launch terrorist attacks, a White House aide said Sunday. The Senate's top Democrat endorsed that approach.

The president's homeland security adviser, Fran Townsend, said the U.S. was committed first and foremost to working with Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, in his efforts to control militants in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. But she indicated the U.S. was ready to take additional measures.

"Just because we don't speak about things publicly doesn't mean we're not doing things you talk about," Townsend said, when asked in a broadcast interview why the U.S. does not conduct special operations and other measures to cripple Al Qaeda.

www.foxnews.com

Fox News We Report You Decide !

My Decision:

Bush Is A Full Of Shit Flip-Flopper !!

-Sarge

What she really said:
"""It's working. We're just years too late in changing our tactics,(ever hear, better late than never? How do you we really know they'd have done better? Can't be proven, finger pointing is easy)" she said. "We can't ever let that happen again. We can't be fighting the last war. We have to keep preparing to fight the new war."(ooops she's already advancing war, not good if she wants to stay on the good side of pacifist communists)


Posted by danni at 2007-08-21 09:24 AM |

No way this WOMAN will ever be elected. I don't know one woman that supports her. But then again I don't hang out with bulldykes.

Wow, Incubus, you've succeeded in making yourself look like a living colostomy bag. Good job...

DD....your the idiot...do you really think that a loose organised force with AK47...RPK...RPG and some EFPs (suppied by iran)....is MAJOR COMBAT...then i wonder what a division of tanks and a squadron of jet and a fleet of ships slugging it out means to you...you can not possibly compare a trained army with full fire support the same as a loose organised force with some booby trap bombs...you are past military thinking and are knee deep into political hacks...if you ever want to go toe to toe on military tactics and warfare look me up im always around...maybe i can teach you a think or two about the military...because like many here you have no clue on what you are talking about

DD...i notice by you post you continue to attack the POTUS but you really have no input on the subject or my post...your post show that you political hate will blind you on most facts...go ahead walk your path in the blind but the fact still remains...after all MAJOR COMBAT was over in IRAQ...we never had to worry about tanks...jets.. helo...command and control and supply trucks mobilizing to attck us

if you ever want to go toe to toe on military tactics and warfare look me up im always around...maybe i can teach you a think or two about the military...because like many here you have no clue on what you are talking about

Judas - living proof that you can be a military expert and an idiot at the same time.

1 truck with 2/20mm cannon = MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS

hahahahahhhahaahahahhaha


somilia has technicals (trucks with machineguns)= a division of LAVs

SIT...all im saying is prove me wrong...i prove you guys wrong about the military all the time...its not my fault you guys have no clue about the military....thats why you guys always politically spin military threads....hell i do not know much about politics...thats why you do not see me in political threads......

"...maybe i can teach you a think or two about the military..."
Posted by judas

Anything like what you've taught us about your glorious military career in the past?

"...i was a general in the army..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-23 11:32 PM

"...i was a MARINE..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-24 02:52 AM

"...the only way i can go fight is the draft..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-24 01:15 AM

DAN...nice post taken out of context...why dont you publish the whole thread so poeple can see where im coming from...do you even know what those post were about...i doubt it

DAN....what do you want to go toe to toe...or are you gonna be a pussy and run away....lets go...you first

here let me help you out on what the context of these post were

was a general in the army..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-23 11:32 PM

making fun of ALLAMERICAN being a COL.


"...i was a MARINE..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-24 02:52 AM

i was in the military


"...the only way i can go fight is the draft..."
Posted by judas at 2007-07-24 01:15 AM

explaining why my criminal record prevents me from joining the military and the only way in for me was the draft

DAN....i understand why you do not want to talk....its ok to be scared....well do not worry...im not going to be your boogyman...goodnight

Judy,

I've love to see your military credentials. Please provide them if you're so willing to prove how superior your knowledge of the military and it's tactics are.

I'd love to go toe to with you on military tactics, although I'm sure all you'll discuss is what constitutes MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS. Question for you though, do you think anyone who is downrange of that 20 MM cannon really cares what that thing is mounted on? It's a fucking 20 MM cannon. Whether it's attached to an air defense unit, a gun truck, or a tank, a 20 MM round will still turn you inside-out. It will still penetrate a Humvee, and it will still fly right through low flying helicopters. For that matter, a mortar can be attached to a vehicle, or be carried a mortar team. Does it matter where it's mounted, or who's firing it as long as they can put rounds on target? Same thing with RPG's. Does it matter is the EFP is on the end of an anti-tank missle, or sitting in a pile of debris beside the road? Does it matter if the 500 lb bomb is dropped by an airplane, or if it's buried next to the road as part of an IED? Does it matter whether our soldiers and marines are dying at the hands of insurgents, or Republican Guard? A dead solder is still a dead soldier, and I doubt his comrades would try to reduce the impact of his death by saying "atleast he didn't die in MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS".

As far as disagreeing with POTUS and not coming up with any other ideas, that's not my job. It's not your job, and it's not POTUS' job. It's up to the generals that POTUS keeps replacing.

You MAY have been a Marine. That has yet to be determined. Being a Marine doesn't mean you know more about weapon systems, about how to deploy troops, and about how those troops are weapon systems are best utilized.

DD...excellent post...thank you for making a point...and a good one at that...yes you are right what does it matter if the delivery systems sre destoryed...if the ammo can be used in a non-conventional combat....damn i was wondering if anybody could figure that one out...but you failed to mention was that MAJOR COMBAT also consist of organisation and communtication....even though ammo can be used in a non-conventional way....does not mean it is effective enough to over turn a battle...the casualties in these skirmishes are fairly light and the battles fought are usually onesided....thats hardly called MAJOR COMBAT....if you tire of this conversation feel free to switch the subject at anytime

BTW....insurgents are using hit and run tactics...so the battles fought usually go on for a few hours and maybe a few days (not weeks and months)....that is not consistant with major combat....but is consistant with heavy fighting

DD...thank you for actually making a point...not many people on this site know how to make one....usually they bash people or are way off topic...maybe for once in a long....long time i can have a disscusion

Bin Ladin didn't name it a HOLY war in unbelief.

Posted by Incubus_Con at 2007-08-20 05:58 PM

Bin Ladin is a common criminal with a billion dollars at his disposal. Bush made him a hero and a lightening rod to the radical Muslims.

Bush is the best thing that ever happened to OBL.

Petraeus is only giving this report personally because there was an uproar when they said the White House was writing the report. It will still be written by the White House much like Collin Powell's famous Anthrax speech before the UN Paetraeus will now have to make the decision to support the LIE or tell the truth.

Will the soldier do his duty and put Honor and Country above being a whore for Bush?

Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Semper Fi

It will still be written by the White House much like Collin Powell's famous Anthrax speech before the UN Paetraeus will now have to make the decision to support the LIE or tell the truth.

Ah another Colon Powell moment awaits us.

Will the soldier do his duty and put Honor and Country above being a whore for Bush?

Real patriots don't join the military anymore.

"well it pisses me off but then I also remember that we have caught the #2 man:

BushLoverTwo

Zawahiri (#2 man in Al Qaeda), an Egyptian doctor, and member of Egypt's terrorist organization 'The Muslim Brotherhood,' is still alive and well and making videos from Pakistan.

The result will be a very different Iraq from the one envisioned by the war's planners. "One of the ironies of George Bush's administration is that he has reversed 500 years of Iraqi politics," says Riedel, the former CIA officer. "Five hundred years ago the Ottoman Turks took Iraq, and they put the Sunnis on top. He's reversed that, and in the process he has re-created the Persian Safavid Empire, which lost Baghdad to the Ottomans in 1516. I don't think he had a clue that that's what he was doing in 2003."

One of the ironies of George Bush's administration is that he has reversed 500 years of Iraqi politics

"Their (The Left's) critique can be summarized in the aphorism that democracy cannot be imposed by force...In point of fact, before the 1958 pro-Soviet military coup detat that established a leftist dictatorship, Iraq did have its modest but nevertheless significant share of democratic history, culture, and tradition. The country came into being through a popular referendum held in 1921. A constitutional monarchy modeled on the United Kingdom, it had a bicameral parliament, several political parties (including the Baath and the Communists), and periodic elections that led to changes of policy and government. At the time, Iraq also enjoyed the freest press in the Arab world, plus the widest space for debate and dissent in the Muslim Middle East...What all of this demonstrates is that, contrary to received opinion, Operation Iraqi Freedom was not an attempt to impose democracy by force. Rather, it was an effort to use force to remove impediments to democratization, primarily by deposing a tyrant who had utterly suppressed a well-established aspect of the countrys identity. "
www.benadorassociates.com

Their (the Right's) critique of "the Left" can be summarized by a voodoo doll made of Silly-Putty which can be fashioned into all sorts of crazy shapes, depending on the needs of whatever sociopathic tweener is writing the nonsense that "the Right" reads.

Pooper says:

Their (the Left's) critique of "the Right" can be summarized by a voodoo doll made of Silly-Putty which can be fashioned into all sorts of crazy shapes, depending on the needs of whatever sociopathic tweener is writing the nonsense that "the Left" reads.




That is some spot-on shit, pooper (pun intended).


Thank you for gracing this thread with your rapier wit.

JeffJ-
Thank you for your gesture of friendship. If you would care to defend the statement that "Their (The Left's) critique can be summarized in the aphorism that democracy cannot be imposed by force..", I would be glad to clash rapiers.

"That is some spot-on shit, pooper (pun intended)."

That's clever. Are the denizens of the Drudge Retort all so sharp? (I'm sorry for the delay, but I'm really not used to the welcome committee that this site provides)

Coop,


Please forgive my hostile demeanor.

Unless you've been here under a different username you are a newbie - and are subject to a bit of hazing.


Now that we've gotten the pleasantries out of the way, name the topic and I'll gladly cross swords (but no 'mano y mano' swordfighting, if you know what I mean) and hopefully in the process I can successfully dispel some of the negative attitude you seem to have toward those espousing a Conservative viewpoint.

Are the denizens of the Drudge Retort all so sharp?


Of course!

That is if you consider a butter-knife to be sharp.

Cooper,


All joking aside - this site has a nice mix of opposing viewpoints.

Yes, it's ostensibly a liberal blog. However, Conservatives (such as assholes like me) are always welcome to spew their bullshit. The site proprieter (Rogers Cadenhead) really does strive to create an environment of open and honest debate.


Again, my initial offer stands...

Name the topic and drop the gloves! (Yes, I am employing a little hockey lingo)

JeffJ-
I see that you have taken it upon yourself to be the hazer. Must be quite a burden, but if you would defend the statement I was responding to...

CRIPPLE FIGHT!!!!

Oh...I get it. You are the local bully.

Nice to meet you.

Pooper

I could be wrong (although I seriously doubt it) but Cooper bears a striking resemblance to 'Boyd.'


IF that's true, let's review all of Boyd's handles....


Boyd
Barney
Will
Badweek
F_ing_liberal_scum
Kazak
Cooper


Whatever.


It's all good though - if your new handle (assuming my sleuthiness is correct) encourages you to step out of your comfort zone and actually espouse your personal thoughts and opinions; in lieu of just badgering those with whom you disagree with incessant questions; then a new handle is definitely welcome.

NO WAY MAN!!!

JEFF.... AGREED!!!

Kind of sad really. All the people I think are newcomers are the same old people with new names. It seems like it is the same 20-30 people everyday for the last few years.

Damn.

I just asked you to defend this:

"Their (The Left's) critique can be summarized in the aphorism that democracy cannot be imposed by force.."

But I'll be the boogey man if you want, or "boyd". I must admit that this is a strange little playground with a lot of petty tyrants, but it's fun all the same.

Have fun.

who on earth would choose to be a slave???

Cooper asks:

I just asked you to defend this:

"Their (The Left's) critique can be summarized in the aphorism that democracy cannot be imposed by force.."



Clearly the point of my comment sailed over your head.


Your initial post (that I slightly doctored in my response) was nothing more than Leftist, talking-point generalities. Defending the statement is irrelevant since the statement itself is bullshit.


I satirized your original comment because it was nothing more than a sweeping generalizion aimed at discrediting ALL (Conservatives) with whom you disagree.

well it pisses me off but then I also remember that we have caught the #2 man and have captured and killed any number of the people who were involved...and just as in 9/11 itself the left wants to forget all of that.....
......................

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-08-21 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

The left wants to forget? Who is it that forgot what he said concerning Bin Laden from atop the heap of rubble that was the WTC?

It wasn't a member of the left. Bush wanted him "dead or alive" and then couldn't care less about him because there was oil to be had.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Failure to end the Iraq war has so divided Democrats it could jeopardize their chances of consolidating power in U.S. elections in November 2008, analysts said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Nearly a year since the party parlayed discontent over the unpopular war into a majority in Congress, liberal Democrats, prodded by influential Internet bloggers, are pressing harder than ever for action to bring U.S. troops home.

Centrists, concerned about alienating conservative voters in swing districts, are wary of moving too precipitously, the analysts say.

The bottom line for Democrats was that they won a majority by picking up seats in marginal or nominally Republican districts, said Ethan Siegal, an analyst for The Washington Exchange, which monitors Congress for institutional investors.

"If the Democrats want to keep control of the House in the 2008 elections, they can't force those members to take certain Iraq votes, he said.

Democratic divisions may grow after Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, reports to Congress in September on the results of President George W. Bush's policy of building up troops as a way to stabilize Iraq.

Even a positive report is unlikely to sway the anti-war liberal Democrats, but it will make it difficult for centrist Democrats from more conservative districts to support pulling out troops, the analysts said.

Democrats who had hesitated to vote for timetables and various withdrawal schemes "are going to be even more hesitant now," Siegal said.

"It will be the Democratic left, which is probably immune to any news of success in Iraq, against the middle-of-the-road America," said Matthew Woessner, a political expert at Pennsylvania State University.

NIGHTMARE SCENARIO

"A nightmare scenario for any party is when the pressure, the sum total of the pressures from their constituency groups, are out of step with mainstream America. That's a prescription for electoral disaster," he added.

And liberal Democrats, who felt marginalized by President Bill Clinton and his centrist supporters in the 1990s, don't seem inclined to let up. They have gained substantial influence in the party over the past decade with a well-organized network of bloggers, fund-raisers and activists linked through the Internet.

Successful bloggers, like Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, regularly use the Internet to debate ideas, editorialize and criticize Democrats who compromise liberal principles. Fund-raising sites like ActBlue.com have collected tens of millions of dollars for Democratic candidates.

"The explosion of the success of the left-wing blogosphere has placed the Democrats under even more pressure from their left," Woessner said.

Democrats know they can tap into online activists for resources, money and time.

But the electoral map limits how far the party can move to the left if Democrats hope to retain power in Congress and build their majority, Siegal said.

"The Democrats can't control the House and the Senate unless they elect centrists also," he said. "And they can't elect their centrists by having a totally liberal agenda."

The success of liberal Democrats in prodding the party to the left has begun to draw expressions of concern from centrists.

"Some liberals are so confident about Democratic prospects that they contend the centrism that vaulted Democrats to victory in the 1990s no longer matters," former Rep. Harold Ford Jr. of Tennessee, the head of centrist Democratic Leadership Council, and Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley wrote in The Washington Post.

so success in iraq is defeat for dems in 08?

so success in iraq is defeat for dems in 08?

yes and since they dont have the help of republicans screwing up because they were 'dirty', this time they will have to make up some more shit to go after.....hey I think dan rather is available......

actually success in iraq would be devastating for the dems which is why they will never agree to any definition of success but thier own.

BL2,

The Republican definition of success seems to be whatever Bush is willing to put in your dog bowl.

Dems are leery of any of Bush's success stories because in hindsight there's always a caveat. Bush this past month tried to say troop deaths were down, a sign that the surge is working, but compared to months past, and years past, it was way up.

Dems and Republicans never agree on what success is because Republicans are willing to settle for so much less, because it helps your party line.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable