As long as we are discussing Bush

STEVEJ · 09-03-2005, 03:01 PM

So how did we get into this mess? I know, blame Clinton, never mind that our military is being lead by some career political hack!

CIA Comander: U.S. Let bin Laden Slip Away - Newsweek - Article - 2005-08-15

In his book titled "Jawbreaker" - the decorated career CIA officer criticizes Donald Rumsfeld's Defense Department for not providing enough support to the CIA and the Pentagon's own Special Forces teams in the final hours of Tora Bora, says Berntsen's lawyer, Roy Krieger. (Berntsen would not divulge the book's specifics, saying he's awaiting CIA clearance.) That backs up other recent accounts, including that of military author Sean Naylor, who calls Tora Bora a "strategic disaster" because the Pentagon refused to deploy a cordon of conventional forces to cut off escaping Qaeda and Taliban members. Maj. Todd Vician, a Defense Department spokesman, says the problem at Tora Bora "was not necessarily just the number of troops."
Ironically, he has sued the agency over what he calls unacceptable delays in approving his book..."They're just holding the book," which is scheduled for October release, he says. "CIA officers, Special Forces and U.S. air power drove the Taliban out in 70 days. The CIA has taken roughly 80 days to clear my book."

Criton · 09-03-2005, 03:53 PM

Can you give it a rest, for at least a few days please? This garbage going on here on this forum in the last few days makes me sick.

STEVEJ · 09-03-2005, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Criton

Can you give it a rest, for at least a few days please? This garbage going on here on this forum in the last few days makes me sick.

Solutions for your ailment

1. Don't click on "Off Topic"

2. Don't click on this thread

BTW when was the last time you told "Jimbo" to give it a rest?

cpal_747 · 09-03-2005, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Criton

Can you give it a rest, for at least a few days please? This garbage going on here on this forum in the last few days makes me sick.

Is it the way Bush handles things that is making you sick?

N2272V · 09-06-2005, 02:51 PM

I think it's more the absurd nonsense being spewed out by America hating, terrorist loving looney Liberals like you and Steve.

But of course if you want to discuss how well Liberals handle things, I would be more than happy to.

To suggest that ANY military campaign is without risk and mistake, that ANY business enterprise is without risk and mistake, that ANY government policy making is without risk or mistake, is not only absurd, but not even remotely based on reality.

Now you can rant and rail about Bush's policies, the fact remains that America is the light of freedom to the world and an economic growth engine second to none. You can spin it any way you want, the FACTS are clear and they don't support your America hateing, terrorists loving, Conservative bashing rhetoric.

Dismissed looney tune!

N2272V · 09-06-2005, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

.... BTW when was the last time you told "Jimbo" to give it a rest?

I'll make a deal with you Steve. When you and your Liberal looney tunes stop posting your absurd nonsense, I will stop responding to it by pointing out the looney nonsense that it is. Deal?

Nah I didn't think so. You see Steve, I am only responding to the nonsense you and your looney tune buddies started posting. Review how all this started Steve. I am sure you would love to live in a world where YOUR opinion was the only one that mattered, but that isn't the REAL world.

My promise to you is that I will refrain from politics on this forum, when you and your looney Liberals refrain from posting your absurdities.

Carry on!

STEVEJ · 09-06-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

I think it's more the absurd nonsense being spewed out by America hating, terrorist loving looney Liberals like you and Steve.

But of course if you want to discuss how well Liberals handle things, I would be more than happy to.

To suggest that ANY military campaign is without risk and mistake, that ANY business enterprise is without risk and mistake, that ANY government policy making is without risk or mistake, is not only absurd, but not even remotely based on reality.

Now you can rant and rail about Bush's policies, the fact remains that America is the light of freedom to the world and an economic growth engine second to none. You can spin it any way you want, the FACTS are clear and they don't support your America hateing, terrorists loving, Conservative bashing rhetoric.

Dismissed looney tune!

Anyone see a fact here? plenty of rant and spin but a fact, no!

STEVEJ · 09-06-2005, 03:41 PM

Some more Bush numbers, facts Jimbo, this what the numbers are.

When it comes to numbers, there’s also that pesky “War on Terror.” The number “six” is important. Before the invasion of Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claimed the fighting “could last six days, six weeks, I doubt six months.” It’s now been more than two and a half-years, and the Commander-in-Chief now tells us, “Our efforts in Iraq and the broader Middle East will require more time, more sacrifice and continued resolve.” There’s $4–5 billion a month to sustain the war. There are 150,000 troops in Iraq, with about 40 percent of them National Guard and Reserve. However, pay increases for soldiers who have given up their families and hometown jobs to serve in a war zone for at least a year is not in the Bush philosophy. A proposal for a $75 a month increase in “imminent danger” pay (to $150) and a $150 a month “family separation allowance” increase (to $250) was opposed by the Pentagon which claimed the budget couldn’t handle a $300 million temporary addition; ironically, $300 million is almost as much as the Bush re-election campaign spent. There’s also the $1.7 billion no-bid contracts awarded to Halliburton, where Vice-President **** Cheney resided as CEO for five years, and accepted a $13.6 million “retirement” package. But, there’s an even more important set of numbers. Almost 2,000 American soldiers have died in Iraq; about 15,000 have been wounded, several hundred permanently disabled. The number “92” is also important. That’s the percent of those killed since their Commander-in-Chief declared on May 1, 2003, that major combat operations were over. That number, 92, is likely to get very close to 100 before American troops leave Iraq.

Shortly after 9/11, Bush declared he was going after the terrorists who caused 9/11—“We will smoke them out of their holes. We’ll get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.” As to Osama bin Laden, he vowed he’d get him “dead or alive.” About six months after 9/11, Bush said, “I truly am not that concerned about him.” So, let’s look at the number “O,” as in the number of times the world’s most wanted enemy has been captured

N2272V · 09-06-2005, 05:00 PM

Here are a few FACTS for you to choke down. We, the American people and their representatives, made a decision to go into Iraq to enforce the resolutions this thug thumbed his nose at for over ten years. Let us not forget that this thug invaded a soveriegn MUSLIM nation whom we, with our allies, defeated.

The military, the finest in the world I might add, destroyed Saddams entire military in less than a month. The fact that the terrorists would like to destroy any chance for Democracy in Iraq should bring OUR nation and the nations of the world together to fight back the reign of ignorance and terror. But alas, morons like you and the Liberal media will do anything and everything to make America look bad and more than willingly hand the terrorists the victory they need to prove that America is weak kneed and not able to put it's money where it's mouth is.

The fact is, all the bitching and moaning in the world isn't going to change those facts Steve. So I suggest that you stop hating America, stop supporting terrorism and either get on board to make the world a better place or STFU.

YOUR Democratic party lost TWO elections. Your Democratic party sufferred losses in the house and senate for the last ten years. YOUR Democratic party continues to sit on the sidelines and sneer at every GOOD effort, including the disaster relief in New Orleans, while it continues to promote an environment of divisive rhetoric and hate.

It's time for you and your merry band of retards to get your heads out of your asses, and join the human race. Get a clue or do everyone a favor and do what Liberals do so well, NOTHING and, of course, STFU.

In addition, I want you to spend some time looking at all your posts, put some SERIOUS thought to it, and tell yourself, and people like me, what you are hoping to accomplish by denigrating the President, and our efforts in Iraq, as well as New Orleans. I'd really like to know what the prurpose is Steve. Because other than being negative, hateful and divisive, it really serves no useful purpose. Don't be a coward Steve. Take a serious look at what you stand for, and get back to me and tell me what you seriously hope it will accomplish.

Dismissed!

N2272V · 09-06-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

Anyone see a fact here? plenty of rant and spin but a fact, no!

As usual, you denegrate the message, but offer nothing to show how anything posted is not factual.

Dismissed.

STEVEJ · 09-09-2005, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

I'd really like to know what the prurpose is Steve.

Dismissed!

The purpose is to counter your never ending right wing rant, lies, BS and partyline spin. But alas, this is all un-necessary, as with time this administration consistanly shoots itself in the foot and has to resort to lies and spin to redirect the seeminly never series of screw ups back on someone else.

Now that we know the qualifications of Bush's choice to head up FEMA and the now not so surprising results we have suddenly stumbled across a great role for the A-380,( let FRANCE foot the bill) for we will need an aircraft this size to fly all the "suddenly concerned" Republicans down to MSY for their photo-ops. Now that I think about it, we may need two or three.

BTW, I saw Cheney down there today, sizing up the next no-bid award to Haliburton to rebuild the entire area.

N2272V · 09-09-2005, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

The purpose is to counter your never ending right wing rant, lies, BS and partyline spin. But alas, this is all un-necessary, as with time this administration consistanly shoots itself in the foot and has to resort to lies and spin to redirect the seeminly never series of screw ups back on someone else.

I see Steve. So you see yourself as some kind of SUPERLiberal to counter the evil postings of the Right Wing Conspiracy. Too funny.

If you had half a brain, which you don't, you would see that MOST of my postings were to counter the lies, false rhetoric, the distortions, the ranting about stolen elections, incompetent soldiers and how the administration has ruined the economy by you and your looney toon pals from Canada.

If you, and your retarded buddies, just stopped posting the inane, absurd nonsense you get off those loonie websites, I would just go away. Suffice it to say, you're probably too stupid to figure it out.

Dismissed loonie tune!

Criton · 09-09-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

The number “92” is also important. That’s the percent of those killed since their Commander-in-Chief declared on May 1, 2003, that major combat operations were over. That number, 92, is likely to get very close to 100 before American troops leave Iraq.

Ah yes, but of course you realize that it will approach 100 asypmtotically.

DeltaFlot · 09-10-2005, 08:16 AM

meow meow meow

Hapag-Lloyd · 09-10-2005, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

If you had half a brain, which you don't, you would see that MOST of my postings were to counter the lies, false rhetoric, the distortions, the ranting about stolen elections, incompetent soldiers and how the administration has ruined the economy by you and your looney toon pals from Canada.

Jim, you seem to mistake "counter" for "perpetuate" here.

By the way, just to be sure, is "America-hating" synonymous with "terrorist-loving"? and, does it go vice versa, too? If I am a terrorist-hater (in fact, I am), does that make me an "America-lover"? If I love America, can I still love other countries, like my own? What if I love only the blue states? Or, as some seem to, only the red states? Are they "partial-America-haters", making them "partial-terrorist-lovers" (like, Doc Offal would reeeeeally get off on those with the long beards; the beards remind him of his teddy bear)?

nutsXplanes · 09-10-2005, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapag-Lloyd

Jim, you seem to mistake "counter" for "perpetuate" here.

By the way, just to be sure, is "America-hating" synonymous with "terrorist-loving"? and, does it go vice versa, too? If I am a terrorist-hater (in fact, I am), does that make me an "America-lover"? If I love America, can I still love other countries, like my own? What if I love only the blue states? Or, as some seem to, only the red states? Are they "partial-America-haters", making them "partial-terrorist-lovers" (like, Doc Offal would reeeeeally get off on those with the long beards; the beards remind him of his teddy bear)?

you post is a bit complicate. I got lost after the Today 04:58 PM part. Could you use a drawing/scheme and examples please? Something like, "I work with oranges, does that make me an apple hater"?

Yo'all have a great day.

N2272V · 09-10-2005, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hapag-Lloyd

Jim, you seem to mistake "counter" for "perpetuate" here.

By the way, just to be sure, is "America-hating" synonymous with "terrorist-loving"? and, does it go vice versa, too? If I am a terrorist-hater (in fact, I am), does that make me an "America-lover"? If I love America, can I still love other countries, like my own? What if I love only the blue states? Or, as some seem to, only the red states? Are they "partial-America-haters", making them "partial-terrorist-lovers" (like, Doc Offal would reeeeeally get off on those with the long beards; the beards remind him of his teddy bear)?

Hapag, I have no answers for you. Obviously you are coming to the realization that you are confused and illogical. The fact that you would think that any of these terms cannot exist without the other illustrates how absurd and illogical your thinking is.

Don't expect me to be able to help clarify for you that which makes no sense.

Carry on looney tune!

ARIUS · 09-10-2005, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N2272V

Hapag, I have no answers for you. Obviously you are coming to the realization that you are confused and illogical. The fact that you would think that any of these terms cannot exist without the other illustrates how absurd and illogical your thinking is.

Don't expect me to be able to help clarify for you that which makes no sense.

Carry on looney tune!

You didn't answer his questions which is a cop-out.

Two-seven Victor, it is evident from your posts that you see things as either black or white. You do not seem to acknowledge that there is any grey areas in this world.

You have stated/implied, and I am paraphrasing, anyone who disagrees with the US war on Iraq must also hate the US and loves the terrorists, who ever they are. If this is what you truly believe, then you must live in an isolated, simplistic world.

You can follow Hapag's questions, so answer them!

N2272V · 09-10-2005, 07:40 PM

Arius, it is obvious from your posts that YOU see everything as "grey" when in fact they might actually be Black and white.

I did answer Hapag's question. I stated that I have no answer. That is considered an answer is it not?

What cop-out? Let me help you because obviously you are suffering from what I am going to call Liberal Indistinguishable Reality Syndrome, or LIRS (pronounced lairs).

Hapag's attempt was to try to tie the words America Hating with Terrorist Loving. The two are separate. Thay are not connected. However, when I use the term America hating, Terrorist loving to describe C-Pal, those terms may be independant BUT they describe the exact positions C-Pal takes politically.

Now lets take this one step further. It is ILLOGICAL, to say that you think Saddam was a bad person, and that you are for the Iraqi people, while taking the position that the US should pull out unilaterally while terrorist thugs attempt to destroy Democracy. It is equally absurd to say that the ONLY reason the COALITION went into Iraq was because we THOUGHT they had WMD's. If that were the ONLY reason, then we could use that logic to invade any country. This would not be LOGICAL would it not?

I have posted on NUMEROUS occasions the exact document on why the COALITION went into Iraq. I have also stated that this action was to enforce agreements Saddam made after losing the first Gulf war and which he so often thumbed his nose at. Let's not forget the oil-for-food program which was rife with corruption within the UN. These sanctions were placed on a tyrannical regime who invaded TWO soveriegn countries without cause and was defeated. People like you suffering from LIRS have difficulty distinguishing this case from the Iranian and Korean case.

So now that we are in Iraq, the constant diatribe about how evil Bush and the US are and how we illegally invaded Iraq are just more examples of liberals suffering from LIRS. Some politicians suffering from LIRS actually are the same ones who voted FOR the action.

It is also clear that the Liberal Looney Left wing in MY country is attempting to use this divisive rhetoric to divide the nation in two due to LIRS syndrome. The truth is, people suffering from LIRS hope that America fails because if Bush's policies fail, they see this as an opportunity to take back the power they used to have and so desperately desire. More so than their own countries reputation and success. This is illogical, but nonetheless, their strategy. So far it has worked against them and given the Republicans a greater majority. Let's hope this trend continues because people suffering from LIRS syndrome only wish ill on America and right now, this is not what most Americans wish to see.

I hope this was CLEAR enough for you. I tried to type this S L O W L Y so that you and your inane comrads could follow the LOGIC.

Carry on LimaIndiaRomeoSierra!

STEVEJ · 09-10-2005, 09:29 PM

As long as we are discussing the real resons for the invasion of Iraq, this was written by a retired Air Force Lt Col (name withheld) served staff officer Secretary of Defense .

A High-Ranking Military Officer Reveals how Defense Department Extremists Suppressed Information and Twisted the Truth to Drive the Country to War

"War is generally crafted and pursued for political reasons, but the reasons given to the Congress and to the American people for this one were inaccurate and so misleading as to be false. Moreover, they were false by design. Certainly, the neoconservatives never bothered to sell the rest of the country on the real reasons for occupation of Iraq -- more bases from which to flex U.S. muscle with Syria and Iran, and better positioning for the inevitable fall of the regional ruling sheikdoms. Maintaining OPEC on a dollar track and not a euro and fulfilling a half-baked imperial vision also played a role. These more accurate reasons for invading and occupying could have been argued on their merits -- an angry and aggressive U.S. population might indeed have supported the war and occupation for those reasons. But Americans didn't get the chance for an honest debate"

.
BTW Jimbo, read all your rants this eve, a little to much coffee today maybe?

N2272V · 09-10-2005, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEVEJ

As long as we are discussing the real resons for the invasion of Iraq, this was written by a retired Air Force Lt Col (name withheld) served staff officer Secretary of Defense .

Gotta love them "unnamed sources" eh Steve? I think I will throw some baileys in that coffee.

Dismissed LimaIndiaRomeoSierra!

09-03-2005, 03:01 PM	#1
STEVEJ Insane Collector Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Stony Brook, N.Y. Age: 100 Posts: 1,648	As long as we are discussing Bush So how did we get into this mess? I know, blame Clinton, never mind that our military is being lead by some career political hack! CIA Comander: U.S. Let bin Laden Slip Away - Newsweek - Article - 2005-08-15 In his book titled "Jawbreaker" - the decorated career CIA officer criticizes Donald Rumsfeld's Defense Department for not providing enough support to the CIA and the Pentagon's own Special Forces teams in the final hours of Tora Bora, says Berntsen's lawyer, Roy Krieger. (Berntsen would not divulge the book's specifics, saying he's awaiting CIA clearance.) That backs up other recent accounts, including that of military author Sean Naylor, who calls Tora Bora a "strategic disaster" because the Pentagon refused to deploy a cordon of conventional forces to cut off escaping Qaeda and Taliban members. Maj. Todd Vician, a Defense Department spokesman, says the problem at Tora Bora "was not necessarily just the number of troops." Ironically, he has sued the agency over what he calls unacceptable delays in approving his book..."They're just holding the book," which is scheduled for October release, he says. "CIA officers, Special Forces and U.S. air power drove the Taliban out in 70 days. The CIA has taken roughly 80 days to clear my book."

09-06-2005, 02:51 PM	#5
N2272V Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ventura Age: 54 Posts: 2,110	Duh I think it's more the absurd nonsense being spewed out by America hating, terrorist loving looney Liberals like you and Steve. But of course if you want to discuss how well Liberals handle things, I would be more than happy to. To suggest that ANY military campaign is without risk and mistake, that ANY business enterprise is without risk and mistake, that ANY government policy making is without risk or mistake, is not only absurd, but not even remotely based on reality. Now you can rant and rail about Bush's policies, the fact remains that America is the light of freedom to the world and an economic growth engine second to none. You can spin it any way you want, the FACTS are clear and they don't support your America hateing, terrorists loving, Conservative bashing rhetoric. Dismissed looney tune!

09-06-2005, 05:00 PM	#9
N2272V Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ventura Age: 54 Posts: 2,110	Duh Here are a few FACTS for you to choke down. We, the American people and their representatives, made a decision to go into Iraq to enforce the resolutions this thug thumbed his nose at for over ten years. Let us not forget that this thug invaded a soveriegn MUSLIM nation whom we, with our allies, defeated. The military, the finest in the world I might add, destroyed Saddams entire military in less than a month. The fact that the terrorists would like to destroy any chance for Democracy in Iraq should bring OUR nation and the nations of the world together to fight back the reign of ignorance and terror. But alas, morons like you and the Liberal media will do anything and everything to make America look bad and more than willingly hand the terrorists the victory they need to prove that America is weak kneed and not able to put it's money where it's mouth is. The fact is, all the bitching and moaning in the world isn't going to change those facts Steve. So I suggest that you stop hating America, stop supporting terrorism and either get on board to make the world a better place or STFU. YOUR Democratic party lost TWO elections. Your Democratic party sufferred losses in the house and senate for the last ten years. YOUR Democratic party continues to sit on the sidelines and sneer at every GOOD effort, including the disaster relief in New Orleans, while it continues to promote an environment of divisive rhetoric and hate. It's time for you and your merry band of retards to get your heads out of your asses, and join the human race. Get a clue or do everyone a favor and do what Liberals do so well, NOTHING and, of course, STFU. In addition, I want you to spend some time looking at all your posts, put some SERIOUS thought to it, and tell yourself, and people like me, what you are hoping to accomplish by denigrating the President, and our efforts in Iraq, as well as New Orleans. I'd really like to know what the prurpose is Steve. Because other than being negative, hateful and divisive, it really serves no useful purpose. Don't be a coward Steve. Take a serious look at what you stand for, and get back to me and tell me what you seriously hope it will accomplish. Dismissed! Last edited by N2272V; 09-06-2005 at 05:01 PM.

09-10-2005, 08:16 AM	#14
DeltaFlot The Patriot Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Laurel, MD Age: 36 Posts: 3,228	meow meow meow __________________ Febuary 15, 1898 December 7, 1941 June 8, 1967 September 11, 2001 Never Forget, Never Forgive If you kick the Tiger in the arse, you better be able to deal with the Tiger's teeth.

09-10-2005, 07:40 PM	#19
N2272V Insane Collector Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ventura Age: 54 Posts: 2,110	Dear Arius Arius, it is obvious from your posts that YOU see everything as "grey" when in fact they might actually be Black and white. I did answer Hapag's question. I stated that I have no answer. That is considered an answer is it not? What cop-out? Let me help you because obviously you are suffering from what I am going to call Liberal Indistinguishable Reality Syndrome, or LIRS (pronounced lairs). Hapag's attempt was to try to tie the words America Hating with Terrorist Loving. The two are separate. Thay are not connected. However, when I use the term America hating, Terrorist loving to describe C-Pal, those terms may be independant BUT they describe the exact positions C-Pal takes politically. Now lets take this one step further. It is ILLOGICAL, to say that you think Saddam was a bad person, and that you are for the Iraqi people, while taking the position that the US should pull out unilaterally while terrorist thugs attempt to destroy Democracy. It is equally absurd to say that the ONLY reason the COALITION went into Iraq was because we THOUGHT they had WMD's. If that were the ONLY reason, then we could use that logic to invade any country. This would not be LOGICAL would it not? I have posted on NUMEROUS occasions the exact document on why the COALITION went into Iraq. I have also stated that this action was to enforce agreements Saddam made after losing the first Gulf war and which he so often thumbed his nose at. Let's not forget the oil-for-food program which was rife with corruption within the UN. These sanctions were placed on a tyrannical regime who invaded TWO soveriegn countries without cause and was defeated. People like you suffering from LIRS have difficulty distinguishing this case from the Iranian and Korean case. So now that we are in Iraq, the constant diatribe about how evil Bush and the US are and how we illegally invaded Iraq are just more examples of liberals suffering from LIRS. Some politicians suffering from LIRS actually are the same ones who voted FOR the action. It is also clear that the Liberal Looney Left wing in MY country is attempting to use this divisive rhetoric to divide the nation in two due to LIRS syndrome. The truth is, people suffering from LIRS hope that America fails because if Bush's policies fail, they see this as an opportunity to take back the power they used to have and so desperately desire. More so than their own countries reputation and success. This is illogical, but nonetheless, their strategy. So far it has worked against them and given the Republicans a greater majority. Let's hope this trend continues because people suffering from LIRS syndrome only wish ill on America and right now, this is not what most Americans wish to see. I hope this was CLEAR enough for you. I tried to type this S L O W L Y so that you and your inane comrads could follow the LOGIC. Carry on LimaIndiaRomeoSierra! Last edited by N2272V; 09-10-2005 at 07:44 PM.

09-03-2005, 03:53 PM	#2
Criton Master Collector Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: Silver Spring, MD USA Posts: 756	Can you give it a rest, for at least a few days please? This garbage going on here on this forum in the last few days makes me sick.

09-06-2005, 03:41 PM	#8
STEVEJ Insane Collector Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Stony Brook, N.Y. Age: 100 Posts: 1,648	Some more Bush numbers, facts Jimbo, this what the numbers are. When it comes to numbers, there’s also that pesky “War on Terror.” The number “six” is important. Before the invasion of Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claimed the fighting “could last six days, six weeks, I doubt six months.” It’s now been more than two and a half-years, and the Commander-in-Chief now tells us, “Our efforts in Iraq and the broader Middle East will require more time, more sacrifice and continued resolve.” There’s $4–5 billion a month to sustain the war. There are 150,000 troops in Iraq, with about 40 percent of them National Guard and Reserve. However, pay increases for soldiers who have given up their families and hometown jobs to serve in a war zone for at least a year is not in the Bush philosophy. A proposal for a $75 a month increase in “imminent danger” pay (to $150) and a $150 a month “family separation allowance” increase (to $250) was opposed by the Pentagon which claimed the budget couldn’t handle a $300 million temporary addition; ironically, $300 million is almost as much as the Bush re-election campaign spent. There’s also the $1.7 billion no-bid contracts awarded to Halliburton, where Vice-President **** Cheney resided as CEO for five years, and accepted a $13.6 million “retirement” package. But, there’s an even more important set of numbers. Almost 2,000 American soldiers have died in Iraq; about 15,000 have been wounded, several hundred permanently disabled. The number “92” is also important. That’s the percent of those killed since their Commander-in-Chief declared on May 1, 2003, that major combat operations were over. That number, 92, is likely to get very close to 100 before American troops leave Iraq. Shortly after 9/11, Bush declared he was going after the terrorists who caused 9/11—“We will smoke them out of their holes. We’ll get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.” As to Osama bin Laden, he vowed he’d get him “dead or alive.” About six months after 9/11, Bush said, “I truly am not that concerned about him.” So, let’s look at the number “O,” as in the number of times the world’s most wanted enemy has been captured

09-10-2005, 09:29 PM	#20
STEVEJ Insane Collector Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Stony Brook, N.Y. Age: 100 Posts: 1,648	As long as we are discussing the real resons for the invasion of Iraq, this was written by a retired Air Force Lt Col (name withheld) served staff officer Secretary of Defense . A High-Ranking Military Officer Reveals how Defense Department Extremists Suppressed Information and Twisted the Truth to Drive the Country to War "War is generally crafted and pursued for political reasons, but the reasons given to the Congress and to the American people for this one were inaccurate and so misleading as to be false. Moreover, they were false by design. Certainly, the neoconservatives never bothered to sell the rest of the country on the real reasons for occupation of Iraq -- more bases from which to flex U.S. muscle with Syria and Iran, and better positioning for the inevitable fall of the regional ruling sheikdoms. Maintaining OPEC on a dollar track and not a euro and fulfilling a half-baked imperial vision also played a role. These more accurate reasons for invading and occupying could have been argued on their merits -- an angry and aggressive U.S. population might indeed have supported the war and occupation for those reasons. But Americans didn't get the chance for an honest debate" . BTW Jimbo, read all your rants this eve, a little to much coffee today maybe?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: