Bush: more sacrifice needed in war on terror (1 Viewer)

[scottyz]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
President George W. Bush on Thursday rejected critics of the
Iraq war who demand a U.S. pullout and cast the conflict as necessary to prevent Islamic militants from gaining a foothold for a sweeping empire.

"We will never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush said in a speech on Washington's war on terrorism.

Bush used new and more specific language in characterizing the opponents as part of an Islamic radical movement "with a clear and coherent ideology" and territorial ambitions, rather than dismissing them as the terrorist "evildoers" of his early speeches on the issue.

Bush sought to put the Iraq war in a global context, calling it a central front in the war on terrorism, and accusing al Qaeda militants and their supporters of seeking to overthrow moderate Arab governments and to attack U.S. targets.

He said the United States and its allies had disrupted 10 serious al Qaeda plots since the September 11, 2001, attacks, three inside the United States.

A CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll last month said only 32 percent of Americans approved of Bush's handling of the war, which he launched in 2003 citing the threat of weapons of mass destruction possessed by
Saddam Hussein's government.

Since such weapons were never found, and al Qaeda followers have spilled into Iraq to fight against the Americans, Bush now calls Iraq a central focus of the war on terrorism he launched after the September 11 attacks.

His remarks were aimed at an increasingly restive American public, which is weary of daily television images of bombings from Iraq and holding funerals for the more than 1,900 Americans killed in Iraq.

"Wars are not won without sacrifice, and this war will require more sacrifice, more time, and more resolve. The terrorists are as brutal an enemy as we have ever faced," he said.

"Instead, the president continued to falsely assert there is a link between the war in Iraq and the tragedy of September 11th, a link that did not and does not exist," he said.

Bush also gave an implicit warning to
Syria and
Iran, accusing them of supporting radical groups.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051006/pl_nm/iraq_bush_dc_4;_ylt=AgBqXrtEizALWDhv4U24r0JqP0AC;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Same old lines we've been hearing since this began. Sure seems like there still isn't any real plan in place and now the number of self-sufficient Iraqi battalions has dropped from 3 to just 1. Apparently it's not enough that we have sacrificed our economy and security.

 

[aps]

He is such an idiot. The only thing that appeases me is seeing how unpopular he is right now and how angry his base is with him for nominating Miers.

 

[Old and wise]

Why doesn't he just go over there and sacrifice himself? Very few people would miss him here.

Maybe he could make up for his deserter status when he was in the National Guard.

 

[Kandahar]

While he said that more sacrifice is needed, he doesn't get any points because he failed to explain exactly WHAT sacrifices America needed to make. He still didn't tell us to use less oil, which is the ONLY long-term solution to our woes in the Middle East.

 

[Navy Pride]

When are you lefties going to get it in your heads that this president is not going to cut and run like what happened in Nam........

The sooner you understand that the better off you will be.........

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

32% approval of the war in Iraq equals somewhere around 60% disapprove.....liberals consist of what, 20% of the population? Doesn't that mean that there are around twice as many non-lefties who disapprove? Assuming of course that every liberal disapproves.

 

[Navy Pride]

You can read anything you want into polls..........I can remember prior to the 2004 elections when the presidents approval rating was in the mid forties in the polls and all you libs were so full of glee because no president was ever re elected with and approval rating below 50%........Well we all know what happened don't we.......

So much for you left wing media polls.....:lol:

 

[UtahBill]

The only reason I voted for Bush is because the Democrats can't seem to come up with a viable moderate candidate. It is very likely that a lot of registered Republicans like myself would jump the fence in a heartbeat, if the Dems ever come up with someone who isn't a rich idiot who never had to get his hands dirty once in his life and/or is completely out of touch with the mainstream voter.
Oh wait, I think recent events indicate that George fits that description as well.
As Gilda Radner would say, "Nevermind".:2wave:

 

[cnredd]

32% approval of the war in Iraq equals somewhere around 60% disapprove.....liberals consist of what, 20% of the population? Doesn't that mean that there are around twice as many non-lefties who disapprove? Assuming of course that every liberal disapproves.

And unlike the last President, this one would rather be right and look bad than do wrong and look squeaky clean...

If I threw out a poll asking whether Joey Buttafuco should be shot, I'd predict we'd get a 90% approval rating...

That doesn't make it the right thing to do....

If we went by polls, Michael Jackson or O.J. Simpson would never breath fresh air again...That tells you how much polls mean...:roll:

 

[aps]

I love watching the republicans become so defensive anytime anything negative is said about their leader. People are sick and tired of the horse$hit coming out of Bush's mouth. I have yet to see that bozo level with us. Don't pretend that everything is going great, and stop bringing 9-11 into your speeches about Iraq. SEPTEMBER 11TH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IRAQ OR SADDAM HUSSEIN. However, I realize that those who worship him probably believe there is some connection. Whatever.

Anyway, it appears that things are not going well right now for a bunch of republicans. Awwwww, isn't that too bad? Bwahahahhahahhahahhaha

I'm reading All the President's Men by Bob Woodward right now. The timing of my reading this book is uncanny. Arrogance is a terrible quality for anyone to have. It makes one think that he/she is invincible.

 

[cnredd]

I love watching the republicans become so defensive anytime anything negative is said about their leader. People are sick and tired of the horse$hit coming out of Bush's mouth. I have yet to see that bozo level with us. Don't pretend that everything is going great, and stop bringing 9-11 into your speeches about Iraq. SEPTEMBER 11TH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IRAQ OR SADDAM HUSSEIN. However, I realize that those who worship him probably believe there is some connection. Whatever.

Anyway, it appears that things are not going well right now for a bunch of republicans. Awwwww, isn't that too bad? Bwahahahhahahhahahhaha

I'm reading All the President's Men by Bob Woodward right now. The timing of my reading this book is uncanny. Arrogance is a terrible quality for anyone to have. It makes one think that he/she is invincible.

Let's all read the first two sentences and see if we talk out of both sides of the angry lips at the same time...

1)I love watching the republicans become so defensive anytime anything negative is said about their leader.

2)People are sick and tired of the horse$hit coming out of Bush's mouth.

Uhhhhh...If it was horse$hit....no one would defend him...

You defend from horse$hit attacks...Welcome to Debate Politics!:2wave:

In fact, no one would've voted for him...

Curses!...Foiled again!....

 

[aps]

Let's all read the first two sentences and see if we talk out of both sides of the angry lips at the same time...

1)I love watching the republicans become so defensive anytime anything negative is said about their leader.

2)People are sick and tired of the horse$hit coming out of Bush's mouth.

Uhhhhh...If it was horse$hit....no one would defend him...

You defend from horse$hit attacks...Welcome to Debate Politics!:2wave:

In fact, no one would've voted for him...

Curses!...Foiled again!....

I should have started a new paragraph with the second sentence. My first sentence is about how defensive republicans are regarding attacks on Bush (heck, I felt the same way when Clinton was under attack and when Kerry was under attack). The second sentence is about people like me who are tired of hearing Bush's horse$hit regarding this war and explaining why there are many of us who are attacking Bush for this reason. Thus, there is no talking out both sides of my "angry lips."

Cnredd, let's not pretend that the majority of American support this war anymore because they don't.

 

[cnredd]

I should have started a new paragraph with the second sentence. My first sentence is about how defensive republicans are regarding attacks on Bush (heck, I felt the same way when Clinton was under attack and when Kerry was under attack). The second sentence is about people like me who are tired of hearing Bush's horse$hit regarding this war and explaining why there are many of us who are attacking Bush for this reason. Thus, there is no talking out both sides of my "angry lips."

Cnredd, let's not pretend that the majority of American support this war anymore because they don't.

First off...my name isn't capitalized...:2wave:

Now...I don't think we should pretend that the Bush-haters were saying "I don't like the war, but the majority of Americans approved of it when it started, so it should be done"...Don't ya just hate two-way streets?...

Question...If the war support gets to 51% again, does this bickering become null & void and cease to exist?...Didn't think so...:roll:

I say you take a poll...Do you think Bill Gates should have 5 billion dollars taken from him and given to the top 50,000 poorest families in the country...

According to you, if it's a majority opinion, it must happen...

Get back to me on that...

 

[aps]

First off...my name isn't capitalized...:2wave:

Now...I don't think we should pretend that the Bush-haters were saying "I don't like the war, but the majority of Americans approved of it when it started, so it should be done"...Don't ya just hate two-way streets?...

Question...If the war support gets to 51% again, does this bickering become null & void and cease to exist?...Didn't think so...:roll:

I say you take a poll...Do you think Bill Gates should have 5 billion dollars taken from him and given to the top 50,000 poorest families in the country...

According to you, if it's a majority opinion, it must happen...

Get back to me on that...

You know, it's a habit for me to capitalize the first letter of a name. But what's so funny about that is I hate the way Aps looks, which is why I use aps. I will not make that boo boo again, cnredd.

I wasn't saying that if a majority of Americans feel a certain way, that it should happen. I was addressing the fact that those of us who now do not support the war really don't like hearing Bush pretend that everything is okay and that we are going to succeed in Iraq. Yes, he needs to attempt to be optomistic, but he also needs to be realistic. First we go in there because Iraq has WMDs. Oh, no WMDs? We're in there for regime change. Oh, now we're in there to honor those who have died in this war. Oh, now we're in there so we can fight the war there instead of here (nevermind that the insurgents did not enter Iraq until we invaded).

My point is that there are reasons why Bush and the war in Iraq are so unpopular right now. That is all.

 

[Kandahar]

And unlike the last President, this one would rather be right and look bad than do wrong and look squeaky clean...

If I threw out a poll asking whether Joey Buttafuco should be shot, I'd predict we'd get a 90% approval rating...

That doesn't make it the right thing to do....

If we went by polls, Michael Jackson or O.J. Simpson would never breath fresh air again...That tells you how much polls mean...:roll:

What is right is not always popular, and what is popular is not always right. But at the same time, what is UNPOPULAR isn't necessarily right either.

Just because the public hates what Bush is doing doesn't make him some kind of martyr.

 

[Iriemon]

The only reason I voted for Bush is because the Democrats can't seem to come up with a viable moderate candidate. It is very likely that a lot of registered Republicans like myself would jump the fence in a heartbeat, if the Dems ever come up with someone who isn't a rich idiot who never had to get his hands dirty once in his life and/or is completely out of touch with the mainstream voter.
Oh wait, I think recent events indicate that George fits that description as well.
As Gilda Radner would say, "Nevermind".:2wave:

How does the bolded portion not apply to Bush? You could be describing him to a "T".

 

[Iriemon]

And unlike the last President, this one would rather be right and look bad than do wrong and look squeaky clean...

In my personal opinion, taking a budget that was forecast to generate trillions in surplus to pay down the public debt, and turning that into an additional $2.3 trillion in debt (and rapidly counting) is not "right."

And committing the country to a long term civil war based on (a best) a huge error in the use of intellegence is not "right."

If those things are "right", I'll take the "wrong".

 

[AK_Conservative]

I should have started a new paragraph with the second sentence. My first sentence is about how defensive republicans are regarding attacks on Bush (heck, I felt the same way when Clinton was under attack and when Kerry was under attack). The second sentence is about people like me who are tired of hearing Bush's horse$hit regarding this war and explaining why there are many of us who are attacking Bush for this reason. Thus, there is no talking out both sides of my "angry lips."

Cnredd, let's not pretend that the majority of American support this war anymore because they don't.

Have you ever stepped back and considered why republicans get aggitated? It is becuase of your false accusations and rhetoric that has no value to american society! The majority of the people do, in fact, support the war! BUT, they do not agree how it is being handled! You need to stop your rhetoric and false statements and breath air from the real world!

 

[Navy Pride]

Have you ever stepped back and considered why republicans get aggitated? It is becuase of your false accusations and rhetoric that has no value to american society! The majority of the people do, in fact, support the war! BUT, they do not agree how it is being handled! You need to stop your rhetoric and false statements and breath air from the real world!

When it comes to the left it has very little to do with Iraq........Its about their all consuming hatred for president Bush.....Nothing more, nothing less.......

 

[AK_Conservative]

When it comes to the left it has very little to do with Iraq........Its about their all consuming hatred for president Bush.....Nothing more, nothing less.......

That is also very true. You never heard a peep out of them when Clinton bombed bahgdad!

 

[robin]

When it comes to the left it has very little to do with Iraq........Its about their all consuming hatred for president Bush.....Nothing more, nothing less.......

This is a classic syndrome from a party political animal... usually right of centre.
It's a variant of 'You are an America hater.' Or 'a liberal' or 'a leftie'.
This time effectively when all the facts point towards there being real reasons to doubt the validity of the war in Iraq as a 'War on terror', you say the reason anyone thinks that is the case, is becuase they are 'A Bush hater'

So you think people can only possibly be anti the Iraq war, because they hate Bush & it's not becuase the 911 terrorists didn't come from Iraq & no other terrorist attacks have come from there meaning it's a pretty dumb place to fight a war on terror ?
There's no need to even bring Bush, or politics for that matter, into the equation.

 

[Navy Pride]

This is a classic syndrome from a party political animal... usually right of centre.
It's a variant of 'You are an America hater.' Or 'a liberal' or 'a leftie'.
This time effectively when all the facts point towards there being valid reasons to doubt the validity of the war in Iraq as a 'War on terror', you say the reason anyone thinks that is the case, is becuase they are 'A Bush hater'

So you think the reason people doubt are anti the war is because they hate Bush & not becuase the 911 terrorists didn't come from Iraq & no other terrorist attacks have come from there, so it seems like a pretty dumb place to fight a war on terror. No need to even bring Bush, or politics even, into the equation.

Its all of the above but it has very little to do with Iraq or any political issues........You Liberal hate the president........All you do is whine and complain............you have no answers, no solutions.......just your incessant bitching.........

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Have you ever stepped back and considered why republicans get aggitated? It is becuase of your false accusations and rhetoric that has no value to american society! The majority of the people do, in fact, support the war! BUT, they do not agree how it is being handled! You need to stop your rhetoric and false statements and breath air from the real world!

Actually 60% of Americans believe that going into Iraq in the first place was a mistake. If a solid majority believe that going into Iraq was a mistake, then I cannot see how one could reasonably infer that the majority of Americans support the war but just don't like how it is being run.

 

[robin]

Its all of the above but it has very little to do with Iraq or any political issues........You Liberal hate the president........All you do is whine and complain............you have no answers, no solutions.......just your incessant bitching.........

....there we have it.. more of the same... QED

 

[Navy Pride]

Actually 60% of Americans believe that going into Iraq in the first place was a mistake. If a solid majority believe that going into Iraq was a mistake, then I cannot see how one could reasonably infer that the majority of Americans support the war but just don't like how it is being run.

You can make anything you want out of polls and you know it....It really depends on who you poll