Bush not Kerry needs to apologize to the troops (1 Viewer)

[Demsmart]

It was not Kerry that placed them in harms way, It was not Kerry who allowed them to fight unprepared, It was not Kerry who misled the government into going into war and lying about it, it was not Kerry, who continues to claim all is well in Iraq. Kerry made a funny that everyone knew was a joke on Bush and not the soldiers. It was Bush who spun it around to make it seem like Kerry was making fun of Bush. Bush knew what Kerry said was right, it was Bush who knew that the war on terrorism was unwinnable, it was Bush who knew that it wasn't a country who attacked us on 9-11, it was Bush who knew that playing dirty politics was the way to run his government. It was Kerry who should have played hardball back in 2004, but didn't. IT IS BUSH WHO OWES THE TROOPS AN APOLOGY FOR SENDING THEM IN HARMS WAY AND LYING TO THEM....

 

[Tashah]

Moderator's Warning:

Moved - Did not satisfy criteria for *Breaking News*.

 

[aps]

It was not Kerry that placed them in harms way, It was not Kerry who allowed them to fight unprepared, It was not Kerry who misled the government into going into war and lying about it, it was not Kerry, who continues to claim all is well in Iraq. Kerry made a funny that everyone knew was a joke on Bush and not the soldiers. It was Bush who spun it around to make it seem like Kerry was making fun of Bush. Bush knew what Kerry said was right, it was Bush who knew that the war on terrorism was unwinnable, it was Bush who knew that it wasn't a country who attacked us on 9-11, it was Bush who knew that playing dirty politics was the way to run his government. It was Kerry who should have played hardball back in 2004, but didn't. IT IS BUSH WHO OWES THE TROOPS AN APOLOGY FOR SENDING THEM IN HARMS WAY AND LYING TO THEM....

I totally agree. I wonder how he sleeps at night?

Mike Barnacle made an excellent point the other night on Scarborough:

what I find most disturbing is, we‘re talking about John Kerry here tonight. It‘s a legitimate thing, and he‘s going to have to—he‘s going to have to explain it in the coming days. But on Monday, the president of the United States, campaigning in Georgia and Texas, said the following, “However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this. The terrorists win and America loses.”

What is the president saying there, that if people vote for a Democrat, that they‘re voting in favor of the terrorists, that they‘re not for America? What is he saying?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15514350/

George Bush is an a$$hole.

 

[Lord of Chaos]

Ask anyone who is currently serving in Iraq/Afghanistan and see if they found Kerry's 'joke' funny.

placed them in harms way,

They didn't volunteer to serve their country so that they would sit at home...

allowed them to fight unprepared,

Define unprepared.

misled the government into going into war and lying about it,

Prove it.

continues to claim all is well in Iraq.

Where is Bush claiming all is well?

Kerry made a funny that everyone knew was a joke on Bush and not the soldiers.

And how was that funny? I didn't know that it was a joke on Bush until the prewritten speech was publicized. Most other people didn't know it was supposed to be a joke on Bush. The way it turned out, Kerry basically said that people who don't try hard in school get sent to Iraq. Oops.

It was Bush who spun it around to make it seem like Kerry was making fun of Bush.

Wait... *looks at last quote* Didn't you just say that it was a joke on Bush in the first place? Bush didn't spin anything. Nice try though.

Bush knew what Kerry said was right, it was Bush who knew that the war on terrorism was unwinnable,

Prove it.

it was Bush who knew that it wasn't a country who attacked us on 9-11,

Debatable. I don't feel like getting into a mudsling over it.

it was Bush who knew that playing dirty politics was the way to run his government.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*gasps for air*

HAHAHAHA.

Wow. That was good.

Ever look at the Democrats and realize that both parties are pretty much equally deep in the smear campaign? American politics have gotten too partisan, where people care more about their own party's political status and not the country as a whole. Saying the other party smears more only proves my point.

It was Kerry who should have played hardball back in 2004, but didn't.

Bush is a nazi? Kerry flipflops more than IHOP? Please. If you think that both sides weren't playing hardball... I don't want to see what you think hardball is.

IT IS BUSH WHO OWES THE TROOPS AN APOLOGY FOR SENDING THEM IN HARMS WAY AND LYING TO THEM....

How did he lie? Quotes, or it didn't happen.

I love partisan politicians. They talk and talk about how they are going to seriously reform EVERYTHING and make the world a better place... Then they get elected and do nothing. Instead, they bicker and nitpick and give mild entertainment and scandalous drama with lots of going on about nothing to do with the issues at hand. Two to four years later, just about nothing is done except maybe a little nudge here and there in the system. Yay.

:roll:

 

[Demsmart]

Ask anyone who is currently serving in Iraq/Afghanistan and see if they found Kerry's 'joke' funny.



They didn't volunteer to serve their country so that they would sit at home...



Define unprepared.



Prove it.



Where is Bush claiming all is well?



And how was that funny? I didn't know that it was a joke on Bush until the prewritten speech was publicized. Most other people didn't know it was supposed to be a joke on Bush. The way it turned out, Kerry basically said that people who don't try hard in school get sent to Iraq. Oops.



Wait... *looks at last quote* Didn't you just say that it was a joke on Bush in the first place? Bush didn't spin anything. Nice try though.



Prove it.



Debatable. I don't feel like getting into a mudsling over it.



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*gasps for air*

HAHAHAHA.

Wow. That was good.

Ever look at the Democrats and realize that both parties are pretty much equally deep in the smear campaign? American politics have gotten too partisan, where people care more about their own party's political status and not the country as a whole. Saying the other party smears more only proves my point.



Bush is a nazi? Kerry flipflops more than IHOP? Please. If you think that both sides weren't playing hardball... I don't want to see what you think hardball is.



How did he lie? Quotes, or it didn't happen.

I love partisan politicians. They talk and talk about how they are going to seriously reform EVERYTHING and make the world a better place... Then they get elected and do nothing. Instead, they bicker and nitpick and give mild entertainment and scandalous drama with lots of going on about nothing to do with the issues at hand. Two to four years later, just about nothing is done except maybe a little nudge here and there in the system. Yay.

:roll:

Take your head out of your A$$. Maybe that will help you clear some of your false notions up..

 

[Lord of Chaos]

Answer my questions and I'll consider it.

Oh, and how are my opinions false?

 

[Demsmart]

Answer my questions and I'll consider it.

Oh, and how are my opinions false?

:doh

I don't beelee it. :monkey :stop: god bless :2canadian

 

[aps]

:doh

I don't beelee it. :monkey :stop: god bless :2canadian

If he wanted a legitmate debate, he wouldn't have been so obnoxious in his post. Good for you for ignoring him. He's not worth your time.

 

[brassmonkey621]

Wow. Okay demsmart, I think you really should take your head out of your a$$. Lord of Chaos has some points. First off, why is the war on terrorism "unwinnable". Or rather, would you rather have the terrorists just continue to attack us, harder and harder. I really think your line of thought is foolish. Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground? I dont even know why I am debating this... I doubt you will ever understand. If you think Kerry shouldn't apoligize (which he did in a round-about, unworthy way) for his comments (and most democrats did)- then theres no wonder why you give into all this unwinnable wars, dirty politics (as if we all dont know that all politicians are "dirty" in one way or another). Then you try to make it sound as if Kerry was trying to tell a joke on bush, and not bash soldiers. It was KERRY who spun his own quote to make it seem as if it were a joke on Bush. (see http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/02/D8L542784.html if you think Kerry doesnt have a history of bashing soldiers). Our military has faced FAR worse enemies, but the military's worst enemy of all is its own CITIZENS back home. The more you complain about your civil liberties and such, the less safe you become. You are out of line Demsmart, and need to take a dose of reality if you plan on doing anything productive. Get in line, you may have your opinions- but keep the propaganda to yourself.

 

[brassmonkey621]

If he wanted a legitmate debate, he wouldn't have been so obnoxious in his post. Good for you for ignoring him. He's not worth your time.

HOW WAS HIS RESPONCE NOT LEGIT. WOW.:rofl !!!!!!!!!! THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!! How on earth was he obnoxious?? The only obnoxious post was his little "god bless" "unbeleee" with the Canadian Flag. But why do I waste my time with people like yall...?

 

[aps]

HOW WAS HIS RESPONCE NOT LEGIT. WOW.:rofl !!!!!!!!!! THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!! How on earth was he obnoxious?? The only obnoxious post was his little "god bless" "unbeleee" with the Canadian Flag. But why do I waste my time with people like yall...?

I think this is obnoxious.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*gasps for air*

HAHAHAHA.

Wow. That was good.

When someone uses that kind of words in a post, I don't believe for a second that they want a legitimate debate. I agree he asked some valid questions, but he showed his true purpose in responding to the post with the above.

You won't hurt my feelings if you don't waste your time with me. LOL

 

[Demsmart]

Wow. Okay demsmart, I think you really should take your head out of your a$$. Lord of Chaos has some points. First off, why is the war on terrorism "unwinnable". Or rather, would you rather have the terrorists just continue to attack us, harder and harder. I really think your line of thought is foolish. Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground? I dont even know why I am debating this... I doubt you will ever understand. If you think Kerry shouldn't apoligize (which he did in a round-about, unworthy way) for his comments (and most democrats did)- then theres no wonder why you give into all this unwinnable wars, dirty politics (as if we all dont know that all politicians are "dirty" in one way or another). Then you try to make it sound as if Kerry was trying to tell a joke on bush, and not bash soldiers. It was KERRY who spun his own quote to make it seem as if it were a joke on Bush. (see http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/02/D8L542784.html if you think Kerry doesnt have a history of bashing soldiers). Our military has faced FAR worse enemies, but the military's worst enemy of all is its own CITIZENS back home. The more you complain about your civil liberties and such, the less safe you become. You are out of line Demsmart, and need to take a dose of reality if you plan on doing anything productive. Get in line, you may have your opinions- but keep the propaganda to yourself.

Wow. Okay demsmart, I think you really should take your head out of your a$$. Lord of Chaos has some points. First off, why is the war on terrorism "unwinnable". Or rather, would you rather have the terrorists just continue to attack us, harder and harder. I really think your line of thought is foolish. Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground? I dont even know why I am debating this... I doubt you will ever understand. If you think Kerry shouldn't apoligize (which he did in a round-about, unworthy way) for his comments (and most democrats did)- then theres no wonder why you give into all this unwinnable wars, dirty politics (as if we all dont know that all politicians are "dirty" in one way or another). Then you try to make it sound as if Kerry was trying to tell a joke on bush, and not bash soldiers. It was KERRY who spun his own quote to make it seem as if it were a joke on Bush. (see http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/02/D8L542784.html if you think Kerry doesnt have a history of bashing soldiers). Our military has faced FAR worse enemies, but the military's worst enemy of all is its own CITIZENS back home. The more you complain about your civil liberties and such, the less safe you become. You are out of line Demsmart, and need to take a dose of reality if you plan on doing anything productive. Get in line, you may have your opinions- but keep the propaganda to yourself.[/QUOTE]

quote
“First off, why is the war on terrorism "unwinnable". Or rather, would you rather have the terrorists just continue to attack us, harder and harder.”

Okay, first off, when has a foreign terrorist attacked the US before 9-11. I know we had an attack back in the early 90’s at the Trade Center, but even before and after that, please tell me when. Also, when has terrorism been a threat to our security here in the U.S. It seems we should be afraid of our own homegrown terrorist.

When has Iraq been an imminent threat to US security?

Quote
Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground?

Huh, I don’t even understand what you mean here.

With regards to the rest of your post, I think you have to look a little deeper and ask yourself what has the president done that has the Iraq policy succeeding as he suggested. You have got to admit that the Iraqi policy is a failure.

 

[brassmonkey621]

i do appreciate demsmart's valid responce to my comments. however, i see a theme with aps to not answer anything and just call peoples responce obnoxious...

in regaurds to Demsmart. your post is quite confusing, but i think i got it. I cannot say, off the top of my head, how many terrorist attacks on US citizens has occured before the first WTC bombing, however i will say that its arab terrorists goal to bring the whole world to Islamic fassism and they will continue to attack democracy's around the world until this happens (which- it cannot- never has the whole world been conquered, but they will still try). So the War on Terror is to topple the terrorists will and a key componet of that is to instill stability. obviously, the middle east is far from being "stable", but it is my belief that if we can make Iraq stable and free, then we are one step closer to a more stable mid east. And yes, we should be weary of our "homegrown" terrorists- which was being monitored until the NSA wiretapping program was revealed by our so patriotic press.

When i asked you "Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground?" i ment do you want terrorists to continue to attack us in the States...

And no i will not admit... at this point- that bush and congress' Iraq policy is a failure. I will admit this- however- if we prematurely pull out of Iraq, allowing insurgent control of the country. This possiblity- which is very real if demo's control congress- will be the end of any chance of stability in Iraq. We started the job, now lets finish it for the good.

 

[brassmonkey621]

i do appreciate demsmart's valid responce to my comments. however, i see a theme with aps to not answer anything and just call peoples responce obnoxious...

in regaurds to Demsmart. your post is quite confusing, but i think i got it. I cannot say, off the top of my head, how many terrorist attacks on US citizens has occured before the first WTC bombing, however i will say that its arab terrorists goal to bring the whole world to Islamic fascism and they will continue to attack democracy's around the world until this happens (which- it cannot- never has the whole world been conquered, but they will still try). So the War on Terror is to topple the terrorists will and a key componet of that is to instill stability. obviously, the middle east is far from being "stable", but it is my belief that if we can make Iraq stable and free, then we are one step closer to a more stable mid east. And yes, we should be weary of our "homegrown" terrorists- which was being monitored until the NSA wiretapping program was revealed by our so patriotic press.

When i asked you "Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground?" i ment do you want terrorists to continue to attack us in the States...

And no i will not admit... at this point- that bush and congress' Iraq policy is a failure. I will admit this- however- if we prematurely pull out of Iraq, allowing insurgent control of the country. This possiblity- which is very real if demo's control congress- will be the end of any chance of stability in Iraq. We started the job, now lets finish it for the good.

 

[Demsmart]

i do appreciate demsmart's valid responce to my comments. however, i see a theme with aps to not answer anything and just call peoples responce obnoxious...

in regaurds to Demsmart. your post is quite confusing, but i think i got it. I cannot say, off the top of my head, how many terrorist attacks on US citizens has occured before the first WTC bombing, however i will say that its arab terrorists goal to bring the whole world to Islamic fassism and they will continue to attack democracy's around the world until this happens (which- it cannot- never has the whole world been conquered, but they will still try). So the War on Terror is to topple the terrorists will and a key componet of that is to instill stability. obviously, the middle east is far from being "stable", but it is my belief that if we can make Iraq stable and free, then we are one step closer to a more stable mid east. And yes, we should be weary of our "homegrown" terrorists- which was being monitored until the NSA wiretapping program was revealed by our so patriotic press.

When i asked you "Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground?" i ment do you want terrorists to continue to attack us in the States...

And no i will not admit... at this point- that bush and congress' Iraq policy is a failure. I will admit this- however- if we prematurely pull out of Iraq, allowing insurgent control of the country. This possiblity- which is very real if demo's control congress- will be the end of any chance of stability in Iraq. We started the job, now lets finish it for the good.

YOU STATED:

"When i asked you "Do you prefer American citizens dying on American ground?" i ment do you want terrorists to continue to attack us in the States"...

Again, since 9-11 when has terrorist continued attacking us in the states. To my knowledge there has been no reports of any renewed or continued attacks of terrorism in the states besides homegrown threats.

YOU STATED:

"And no i will not admit... at this point- that bush and congress' Iraq policy is a failure. I will admit this- however- if we prematurely pull out of Iraq, allowing insurgent control of the country. This possiblity- which is very real if demo's control congress- will be the end of any chance of stability in Iraq. We started the job, now lets finish it for the good.[/QUOTE]"


Dude, insurgent only became a problem when the US fu**** it up. Right now Iraqi is spiralling out of control with more US soldier deaths (Republican controlled congress). What's going to change if they continue in power? Exactly, nothing. Starting a job is one thing, but not knowing how to finish is another. We need change now...

 

[brassmonkey621]

Again, since 9-11 when has terrorist continued attacking us in the states. To my knowledge there has been no reports of any renewed or continued attacks of terrorism in the states besides homegrown threats.

Indeed, there have been no terrorist attacks in the states since 9/11. So lets explore the possible reasons for that.
1.Constant pressure on the terrorists by US policies has decentralized Al-Queda infrastructure, crippling them and making them incapable of performing another attack.
2.They are simply planning another attack as we debate the very topic.
3.Terrorists have given up.

Okay, so we know that 3 is not true. WE KNOW that they were planning a multi-plane hijacking which was foiled by British intelligence. We know they bombed busses in England, We know they bombed trains in Spain. They havnt given up, so... are they planning another right now, or has the constant pressure applied thwarted any attempts against US citizens.
I'm going to argue that it is a mixture of 1 and 2. AQ was planning another attack on planes which would have carried American citizens. However, they have become so decentralized that they have not been able to plan another attack on direct US soil. Any plan like that is automatically elevated to another level- and would be extremely difficult to carry out (however not impossible).

Iraqi is spiralling out of control with more US soldier deaths (Republican controlled congress). What's going to change if they continue in power? Exactly, nothing. Starting a job is one thing, but not knowing how to finish is another. We need change now...

Iraq is not spiralling out of control. The only thing that is spiralling out of control is the backing of the war. Each second that any war goes on, public support will drop. The images of US combatants who have recently died does not make the US public more willing to fight. So, as you state, if republicans stay in control of the house, nothing will happen. However that is far from the truth. Here is what will happen if Republicans stay in control and keep their "balls"- as i put it.
Death toll in Iraq rises.
Iraq's boarders become more and more secure
Iraq builds up their own democracy, army, and police units.
Iraqi's begin to fight the war in conjunction with American units (which is already happening but it will increase)
Iraq takes control of their own country.
American Forces leave Iraq.

The democrats are running a campaign on the premise that the Iraq war and war on terror are unwinnable. However I have yet to hear any firm plan of action of what they will do if they gain control of congress. Will they pull out immediately (terrible mistake, 2500+ lives dead for no cause), pull out with a time table (not smart, just allows insurgents to wait it out), or will they stay the course (lol, yea right)? I fear a Democrat controlled congress, because I want the mission in Iraq to succeed, not the opposite.

 

[Demsmart]

Indeed, there have been no terrorist attacks in the states since 9/11. So lets explore the possible reasons for that.
1.Constant pressure on the terrorists by US policies has decentralized Al-Queda infrastructure, crippling them and making them incapable of performing another attack.
2.They are simply planning another attack as we debate the very topic.
3.Terrorists have given up.

Okay, so we know that 3 is not true. WE KNOW that they were planning a multi-plane hijacking which was foiled by British intelligence. We know they bombed busses in England, We know they bombed trains in Spain. They havnt given up, so... are they planning another right now, or has the constant pressure applied thwarted any attempts against US citizens.
I'm going to argue that it is a mixture of 1 and 2. AQ was planning another attack on planes which would have carried American citizens. However, they have become so decentralized that they have not been able to plan another attack on direct US soil. Any plan like that is automatically elevated to another level- and would be extremely difficult to carry out (however not impossible).



Iraq is not spiralling out of control. The only thing that is spiralling out of control is the backing of the war. Each second that any war goes on, public support will drop. The images of US combatants who have recently died does not make the US public more willing to fight. So, as you state, if republicans stay in control of the house, nothing will happen. However that is far from the truth. Here is what will happen if Republicans stay in control and keep their "balls"- as i put it.
Death toll in Iraq rises.
Iraq's boarders become more and more secure
Iraq builds up their own democracy, army, and police units.
Iraqi's begin to fight the war in conjunction with American units (which is already happening but it will increase)
Iraq takes control of their own country.
American Forces leave Iraq.

The democrats are running a campaign on the premise that the Iraq war and war on terror are unwinnable. However I have yet to hear any firm plan of action of what they will do if they gain control of congress. Will they pull out immediately (terrible mistake, 2500+ lives dead for no cause), pull out with a time table (not smart, just allows insurgents to wait it out), or will they stay the course (lol, yea right)? I fear a Democrat controlled congress, because I want the mission in Iraq to succeed, not the opposite.

How can you possible sit there behind your computer and say Iraq is not spiralling out of control. October was one of the deadlies for US soldier deaths. Whose really in control? Its not us or the Iraqi government. The republicans have done nothing since taking control of Iraq. The war is unwinnable. It will never be won its just a simple fact. Terrorism will thrive no matter what. Bush already said what's in Iraq (Troops) is enough. The dems will either pull out slowly or drastically increase deployment to make Iraiq stable. Now why can't the republicans agree to send more troops?

 

[brassmonkey621]

1. I'm actually sitting in front of my computer
2. You say the dems will either slowly pull out of Iraq or drastically increase the troop count. These are opposites, and I guarantee you there has been no talk among washington democrats about increase the amount of troops in Iraq.
3. You claim the war is "unwinnable" and then you claim that dems (with control of congress) may increase troop count in Iraq to make it stable. So my question to you is... if a stable Iraq is not a product of a war won... then what should i be looking for should we "win" the war in Iraq.
4. Wars are violent. A monthly death toll will fluctuate based on many conditions, and one of the reason October was so high is because of Ramadan. Sectarian violence has increased during this Muslim holiday, so of course our death toll will rise. If America pulls out of every situation where their soldiers are in harms way- then nothing productive would be accomplished. I look forward to your response, but I will not be able to counter it until maybe late tonight or tomorrow. lol