Buehler says the surge is over in May, and then we get to see what Iraq looks like with just 130,000 American troops in it.

Just a hint for you when you stop yawning---It will look remarkably like it did six months ago.

What a stupid waste of time the alleged conservative movement has become. If you love your country as much as you care about how you fight your wars then for all practical purposes you are the Insurgency.

Might be time to examine the Manchurian Candidate theory of George Bush.

It has occured to some of us Bush couldn't have done much worse a job with Iraq if someone paid him to do so.

It has also occured to some of us that George Bush--who may or may not be on the enemy's payroll---has been hiding behind Petreus' skirts for the last eleven months.

It's interestingly feminine behavior for a man that really wants to rub "Commander-in-Chief" in someone's face.

"Might be worth a gander--"

If you're a scum sucking pervert who likes to eat shit, maybe so.

"I realize many folks hate Coulter.."

Just as Coulter hates many folks.

Makes the feeling mutual.

Hans

Does the leftreich have anything else?


Anybody?

Buehler?

Buehler?





Posted by mschokesondix-


Yawn!

Might be worth a gander--I realize many folks hate Coulter..

Murphy

Posted by MURPHY at 2007-09-13 07:07 PM








Always enjoy reading Coulter.


The closing paragraph hits the nail on the head.


"OK, they knew what Petraeus was going to say. But we knew what the Democrats were going to say. If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid."

I lost any interest in what Coulter had to say when I watched her on Chris Matthews show. She is just a fucking liar, it was obvious that she doesn't even try to be truthful, still contends as if it is a fact that Saddam was involved in 9-11.
She's just not worth bothering with.

You still playing with the "t" word, Incubus?

Hop into your WayBack Machine and set the dial for "Salem - 1692." Oh, and while you're at it, bone up on the term "spectral evidence." But make sure it's 1692, because even Cotton Mather eventually gave up on that one.

-only fallback argument

I guess it is true then that rwingers are genetically incapable of seeing anything other than black and white.

Shades of grey, where most truth lies, are invisible to them.

Patreous did the best he could to make gold out of dung, but the Right still laps it up no matter what it is, as long as they are told to do so.

So Robert Scheer is now a sage, the last I knew he was just a columnist at the LA Times, nothing more. Of course if any of you had lived in 1776 you would have picked the British in an easy and early victory.

"I ate Republican liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti. And they liked it!"

I still don't get the Repubes who look for a military victory when a political victory is what is needed.

That must be too complicated for them, even when people like Petreous say it.

""Of course if any of you had lived in 1776 you would have picked the British in an easy and early victory.""

Should we laugh or cry when we read stupidity like this????

There's no shortage of retired generals who will tell you we could have won in Vietnam if only we had sent more troops, or bombed the dikes in the North, or been willing to kill more than the 3.4 million Vietnamese who died along with 59,000 American soldiers. Instead, the politicians and public, led by that bleeding heart President Richard Nixon, lost the will to win.

I don't know where you all were then but...... it was Johnson's war, not Nixon's. How you libs mess with history. Nixon was a sway with the wind leader like Clinton.

Viet Nam was a place where we won just about every battle but lost the war. It was a political war and we did not fight to win just like in Korea under Truman.

Should we laugh or cry when we read stupidity like this????

Guffaw

it was Johnson's war, not Nixon's

Who invaded Cambodia?

Who kept up the bombing of North Vietnam?

How long did it take Nixon to get the troops out of Vietnam?

How many Americans died while Nixon was president?

"How many Americans died while Nixon was president?"

Even worse, how many Americans died in between the time Nixon was offered the eventual exit plan, and the time he took virtually the same terms four years later? Or how many had to die for Nixon and Kissinger's "plausable deniability".

Of course if any of you had lived in 1776 you would have picked the British in an easy and early victory.

The last thing I need is advice on picking winners from people who picked Bush.

""Nixon and Kissinger's""

War criminals.

Early paragraph in coulters article that proves reading the rest of it is a waste of time:

Democrats yearn for America to be defeated on the battlefield and oppose any use of the military -- except when they can find individual malcontents in the military willing to denounce the war and call for a humiliating retreat.

Really? I thought Rush said dems couldn't wait to get into Darfur for the American negro vote?

I guess Clinton and all of those dems who were pro Bosnia were really just republicans, and comparisons to that war being Vietnam by republicans at the time means they were really democrats.

Ann Coulter is a sick joke. Anyone who takes her writing for something other than partisan bomb throwing is clinically stupid.

What a stupid waste of time the alleged conservative movement has become


well zed......we are in the process of doing something about that and it looks to be fred thompson.....

and I agree in a lot of ways......conservative republicans have become pussies and mamma's boys to the point of people not voting......and there you see the REAL reason why dems are in majority..NOT THE WAR.......but republican voters staying at home or .......GASP.......voting for dems in protest....

WONT HAPPEN AGAIN......well...



The last thing I need is advice on picking winners from people who picked Bush.

Posted by BlueInBushland at 2007-09-14 09


hey blue......I like the 6 horse in the 7th race today at fairplex in california???????

What a stupid waste of time the alleged conservative movement has become


well zed......we are in the process of doing something about that and it looks to be fred thompson.....

and I agree in a lot of ways......conservative republicans have become pussies and mamma's boys to the point of people not voting......and there you see the REAL reason why dems are in majority..NOT THE WAR.......but republican voters staying at home or .......GASP.......voting for dems in protest....

WONT HAPPEN AGAIN......well...



The last thing I need is advice on picking winners from people who picked Bush.

Posted by BlueInBushland at 2007-09-14 09


hey blue......I like the 6 horse in the 7th race today at fairplex in california???????

Doc, you slay me. How much truth was there to the Tonkin Gulf incident which was the big escalation of the war? Do you remember? "Hay,hay LBJ, how many troops did you kill today?" Do you remember 'Jane' going to North Viet Nam for a little friendly visit and how she turned in some of the prisoners she saw in the camps when they tried to give her their personal information for their families? Tell me how Kerry went up the river at Christmas time. Do you realy remember doc? Come on, tell me about South East Asia in the 60s doc.

ff 4 BLT2

www.anncoulter.com

Might be worth a gander--I realize many folks hate Coulter..

I bit the bullet and read it. It's an attack piece on Democrats which is fine if you like that sort of thing but her mistake was using Iraq to make her point. Not a good choice considering that a Republican President decided to destroy that country, devastate its population with death, injury and disease, cause a massive refugee problem and wipe out its infrastructure. And in doing so cost this country an immense amount in death, injury and treasure while alienating all our natural allies and strengthening Al Qaeda.

Oh, and her article has that signature snideness one associates with right wing bloviators too.

tried reading manculter's article

stopped reading here

This week makes it six years since a major al-Qaida attack. I guess we weren't distracted. But it looks like al-Qaida has been.


at the cost of 100,000 to 650,000 iraqis,

some distraction.

the idiot.

This week makes it six years since a major al-Qaida attack.

That's not true. al-Qaeda has been attacking all over the world since 9/11 -- much of their resources directed into Iraq (where they are now losing) and Afghanistan (where they are resurgent at the pakistani border)

CNN poll:

What do you think of the plan to cut the number of troops in Iraq by 5,700 by the end of the year?
About right 20% 13426
Too few 71% 46916
Too many 9% 6031
Total Votes: 66373

hey blue......I like the 6 horse in the 7th race today at fairplex in california???????

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-09-14 10:12 AM

FF. Who says rightnuts have no sense of humor?

I looked up yesterday's result at Fairplex:

7th Race

4 Threeatonce
8 Bargain Basket
1 Lord Macho

I'm expecting the same absence of the 6 horse today based on your record of picking winners politically. Thanks anyway.

I don't know where you all were then but...... it was Johnson's war, not Nixon's. How you libs mess with history. Nixon was a sway with the wind leader like Clinton.

Viet Nam was a place where we won just about every battle but lost the war. It was a political war and we did not fight to win just like in Korea under Truman.

Posted by Sniper


Nice simplification of history, snippy. I especially like how you just discard complexity and nuance (oh ... Cambodia and the Chinese "invasion" of Korea come to mind). Yup, the answer is always so simple for you guys - we just didn't kill and destroy enough, otherwise we would have won.

Too bad you guys don't apply this same "victory at all costs" philosphy to say, health care or education.

BOWA - thank you for the link to that article, it was fascinating reading and contained a lot of information which has not been reported on here.

They better or retire.

Of course if any of you had lived in 1776 you would have picked the British in an easy and early victory.

Posted by Burt


Interesting comparison...a very large superpower is in a battle with a bunch of ragtag insurgents and eventually loses and is embaressed in front of the world all the while their king is oblivious to the reality at hand.

And Midiman, we never learn what the great prize would have been had we won. What was in Vietnam that was worth 58,000 American lives??? What would be different today if we had won???

much of their resources directed into Iraq

You special knowledge about this, your certainty about the nature, extent, and allocation of Al Qaeda resources is based on what, Bowa? Are you on the Shura Council? The Military Committee? The Money/Business Committee? More likely, the Law Committee that futzes around with fatwahs and the like? Perhaps the Media Committee? Or would it be As-Sahab, Al Qaeda's media production outfit?

America and its Iraqi allies can't be defeated in Iraq. But defeat could be manufactured in Washington, where part of the U.S. elite seeks it in order to win in the domestic political war.

Posted by Bowa

You are absolutely right!! We can keep this going forever without being "defeated". We can just throw more money and more troops but when is it enough? We are close to 4000 dead soldiers, who knows how many Iraqi civillians and 600 billion. After 10 years, even the Russians gave up the fight in Afghanistan and this was at a time when there was no discourse or anti-war activism within their society. Oh, and BTW, what allies are you talking about? We've already lost them all because of this war. The few we had had supplied nominal manpower and zero financial. Even third world nations are thumbing their noses at us.

Do you realy remember doc?...
Posted by Sniper

Sure I do, Sniper. You said, "it was Johnson's war, not Nixon's." And I replied: Who invaded Cambodia? Who kept up the bombing of North Vietnam? How long did it take Nixon to get the troops out of Vietnam? How many Americans died while Nixon was president? That war had lots of fingerprints on it. LBJ's, obviously. But about half the Americans killed in Vietnam died on Nixon's watch. That's what I call shared responsibility.

I don't know why the left doesn't just get on board with Killing them all, They don't seem to mind when Jews are killed or Chrisitian performing missionary or charity work, I didn't hear any outrage towrds the Taliban when they kidnapped and killed several South Koreans who were performing Medical services. SO what is wrong with killing as many Mooselams as you have to to get to the bad ones. And I suppose Generals do lie. But this guy is so happy worshipping his selected politicians, Like somehow they take undo blame for all the diplomatic disasters. Which is why Lefties and politicans hate the military, we are a constant reminder of their failures

Mid, what I was saying we did not go in with the objective of beating the enemy. In Korea we got hung up at the DMZ. No shit, isn't that the same line they drew in Viet Nam.

We went into WWII to win. We steam rolled everything we could and we won the war.

We went into Korea to hold the advance of communism. In a war you either win or loose, you don,t sit at a line in the sand and glare at each other. We went into Korea in the early 50s and we are still there over 55 years later. Still glaring at the North Koreans.

I'm still not sure what Viet Nam was about, stop the advance of communism again I guess. We fought that battle with one hand tied behind their back with all the restrictions that were put on us. The war was run by that ex Ford CEO and his whiz kids that worked for LBJ. What the hell was his name? Aw hell you all remember.

Doc, it was Johnson's war, there is no two ways about it. To say it any other way is lying to yourself. Hell, you libs are good at that. What's the matter with me?

""America and its Iraqi allies can't be defeated in Iraq.""

Iraqi allies. What a sad joke. How often have we read about our "allies" turning on us and killing Americans or even their own people.
Iraqi allies. Closer to Iran than the US.
I can hardly wait til we need to call our "ally" in time of need, I am sure they will come through for us.

2/3 of iraqi school age children DO NOT attend school.

what does that bode for the future of iraq?

Can any of you war hawks explain how our presence in Iraq is preventing Baghdad AQ teams from just driving over the border, getting on a plane, and coming to the US to blow stuff up?

I didn't think so. The only people in Iraq who can't leave are our troops.

We may be stuck in Iraq, but they aren't. Even of all Bush's pipe dreams come to pass, they can still walk away, trumpeting how they made us squander everything that made our country great and weakened us in the eyes of the world. And then drive over the border, get on a plane, and come here to blow stuff up.

If this really is part of the GWOT, it's a crap strategy.

Argh

So you think the good thing to do is run away? You know the old Monty Python strategy "run away, run away" yes that will certainly cement the entire world's opinion as to the supreme dominance of the United States in the world, forever known as "The United States, hold out long enough and kill more than 3,000 soldiers and they will run away, guarantee it."

Actually, I think we should walk away.

I don't think "fight harder and longer" is a substitute for "fighting smarter". Alienating our allies doesn't help us to win. Borrowing money from China in order to fight doesn't help us to win. Streching our armed forces doesn't help us to win. Burning up equipment without budgeting for it's replacement doesn't help us to win. Most importantly, fighting a war with no clearly defined and achievable objective doesn't help us to win.

Invading Iraq played right into OBL's strategy, staying there and bleeding just helps AQ along. It was a mistake. I suspect that if we can extract ourselves quickly, the world will probably think we finally came to our senses. As it is, they see us pursuing a stupid, self-defeating strategy, and they think morons are in charge of our policy. They probably think we're unreliable allies, who are already overcomitted in Iraq and can't offer meaningful support, and who are more likely to threaten them than engage in diplomacy. They're probably a little concerned about getting dragged into this mess with us if this is the best we can do. And they probably already think this.

Viet Nam was a place where we won just about every battle but lost the war. It was a political war and we did not fight to win just like in Korea under Truman.

Posted by Sniper

Both Korea and Vietnam were civil wars. Both were situations where unless someone was in a uniform you couldn't tell friend from foe. Unfortunately, Bush isn't much of a reader or he'd have seen the multiple reports Iraq would turn into a civil war if we invaded we'd be in another Vietnam. Cheney knew it too yet failed to tell Bush the same thing.

But, when you didn't know the difference between Sunni and Shiite on the day you sent America to war, what could you expect? Success?

"Do you remember 'Jane' going to North Viet Nam for a little friendly visit and how she turned in some of the prisoners she saw in the camps when they tried to give her their personal information for their families?"

"sniper"


Your don't remember it either because it never happened. Just mindless right wing propaganda.

prozacboi

Hi, Gnubsy!

How's it hanging?

Still "into" Rush and the bathhouse crowd?

How's rehab going these days?

Glory Hallelujah!

Doc,

prozacboi is NOT Gnubsy. Read his posts...MUCH too much intelligence for closetcase.

In 1967 General Westmoreland's testimony to Congress was very similar. "We're close to victory. To pull out now will lead to a disaster of massive proportions".

Hmmm So, we made the Vietnam Veterans Memorial twice as long as it would have been - and with the same eventual outcome in Vietnam.

prozacboi

Hi, Gnubsy!

How's it hanging?

Still "into" Rush and the bathhouse crowd?

How's rehab going these days?

Glory Hallelujah!

Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2007-09-14 10:59 PM


Listen to DAN Doc, I'm not Gnubsy nor do I have any idea who or what a Gnubsy is.

PB,

Don't blame Doc...we've been overrun with trolls lately. After so many, we all get trigger-happy.

Welcome to the DR.

Thanks DAN and no problem with Doc either.

Been stopping by here for the articles for awhile, just recently started reading the comments and finally had to sign up. I'm not a big poster thou.