Comments on: Explosions Rattle Baghdad, Kill 26
Prime Minister Al-Maliki Vows No Letup Against Terrorism
- Only difference is, How many more of our troops would have died in vain?
Posted by wayfedup
What about the troops who WILL die in vain?
All the more reason to drop the big one and ensure a victory. - Reply to this comment
- "iraq's prime minister insisted Thursday there will be "no safe place in Iraq for terrorists," hours before a suicide car bombing killed at least 26 people... and two rockets slammed into the heavy fortified Green Zone"
LOL that's hilarious, I hope the whole scene over there just continues to fall to pieces, I don't give a rat's fat arse what they do over there- they can bomb and kill each other off till the last towel head standing for all I care, I DO care that this BUSH moron wants one BILLION dollars MORE for "reconstruction" on top of the $15 Billion thrown away there while *OUR* roads, bridges, tunnels, infrastructure, schools, University tuition, industries, power grid and all the rest just FALLS APART! While we increase R.E taxes and lay off teachers, police, fire and EMT's because of LACK OF FUNDS!
NO MORE MONEY FOR THESE MORONS, time we spend OUR money on OUR country!!!!!!! - Reply to this comment
- mcdazz, the plan I outlined is what I suggest and support.
I was inquiring because most people consider me a redneck conservative and it would be extremely humorous if I were really a bleeding heart liberal.
Somehow, I don't think anyone in real life would mistake me for a bleeding heart liberal.
Not to disagree with your assessment, Bozo Bush's "plan" appears to be do more of the same and hope he isn't impeached before he is allowed to retire on his app. $200k a year plus millions in bennies for the rest of his life.
Grunts are sent home in body bags and missing body parts while Bozo lives in luxury at taxpayer expense.
And, that's what "conservatives" claim they support and is "supporting the troops."
With "support" like that, US forces need no enemies. - Reply to this comment
- r_bayless
Well said. - Reply to this comment
Bottom line.
Bush's plan is too little too late as far as troop #'s go. It also lacks a diplomatic component. I know that many hate the idea of negotiating with people who we consider enemies but the reality is that we have little choice. If we really want to succeed in Iraq, we've got to start negotiating with the neighboring countries. There was a time when we could have done it on our own but that chance has been wasted.- Reply to this comment
- If we leave tomorrow, Iraq will fall to the radicals the day after we leave. If we send in more troops, Iraq will fall to the radicals in about two years.
Posted by dirtydog55 at 08:44 PM : Jan 25, 2007
Only difference is, How many more of our troops would have died in vain? - Reply to this comment
- Except for saving American troop lives, I don't think it makes any difference if we leave Iraq tomorrow or send in more troops.
If we leave tomorrow, Iraq will fall to the radicals the day after we leave. If we send in more troops, Iraq will fall to the radicals in about two years. - Reply to this comment
- Bush and Cheney are the poster childs for failure and the spokespersons for losers and eunuchs everywhere.
They are embarrassing us... - Reply to this comment
- POINT would be moot, that is.
- Reply to this comment
- Worth repeating:
The insurgents will persevere as long as possible. They're simply waiting for the Democrats and the media to completely demoralize the American public so that they will demand a surrender and retreat out of Iraq . . . then the terrorists will have won. Anyone that doesn't believe that scenario simply hasn't been paying attention.
Posted by badaxmofo at 08:01 PM : Jan 25, 2007
YOUR wrong a s s repubs got us into this Fiasco, badax- Had their country NOT been wrongly invaded in the first PLACE, then your loint would be moot.
Let me ask you a simple question; IF IRAQ invaded the U.S.,(which they haven't)would YOU just ROLL OVER, or would you DEFEND your HOME AND COUNTRY TO THE DEATH? You want this war to end? LEAVE. NOW. - Reply to this comment
- "I'm just curious: How much longer would you have liked the U.S. to stay in Vietnam? How much longer would you have liked the Soviet Union to stay in Afghanistan" Posted by r_bayless
Your 'goldminer' analogy is right on.
Regarding Vietnam, Robert Kennedy said that 'the end is not just around the corner, and there is no light at the end of the tunnel.' How many years did we stay there after he was killed?
Pat Buchanan, an extreme right-wing Christian, and a Bush critic said that we can't win a war against terrorists, that we must find another way to deal with them.
Maybe we should just drop the big one on Baghdad. We can always rebuild the city after all is said and done.
Do you see sick humor in that, badax? - Reply to this comment
- "If WWII were today - we'd LOSE"
badaxmofo
With Bush at the helm... of course we'd lose. Bozo couldn't organize a p i s s up at a brewery - Reply to this comment
- Punks Bush and Cheney can't even contain Afghanistan. Bush and Cheney (are girlie men) who haven't fought a single day in combat (along with their sissy Neocons are all bark and no bite. The situation we have in Iraq is what happens when pansies (who masquerade as tough guys) get elected and decide to swing non existent meat/manhood.
What do they do during the day before their sleepy time naps? Eat their milk and cookies, put on their capes, grab a handful of GI Joe's and run around the Situation Room yelling "die commie, terrorists, die".
These losers are "all talk"; but THEY HAVE PROVEN that they "can't walk, the walk."
In view of their bravado/success in Afghan/Iraq, what makes ANYBODY think these 'tough guys' can pull it off in Iran, Syria and Lebanon? Bunch of Girl Scouts got more balls/testoreone then Clowns Bush/Cheney. (It is easy to visualize Bush/Cheney in grade school, high school and college getting beat up for their (parents) lunch money. Some track record. Jeez... - Reply to this comment
- frankly
You're right
badax, I'm sorry for not giving you a chance to express yourself. I look forward to discussing the topics at hand with you... I'll type slower - Reply to this comment
- tuckerndfw:
You've explained your perception of the liberal point of view, but what is the neo-con/republican plan?
Send more troops, escalate the violence, create an even bigger civil war, have more US troops die, send more troops in, escalate the violence, create an even bigger civil war then before and have even more US troops die?
Is that the neo-con plan?
Well, I'm sorry, but after nearly 4 years of the US being in Iraq, violence is not getting better -it's getting worse.
Sending in troops is hardly new and it's not exactly a plan.
The one part of GW Bush's "plan" that I agree with is to make Iraq more responsible for stopping the violence.
The Iraqi Gov needs to kick into action instead of sitting back and allowing the US to do most of the hard work for them.
Unfortunately, there are many in the Iraqi Gov who don't care how many US troops die - they've got what they want - power and US money.
They could stop the militias if they wanted - but they don't want to.
They don't need to. - Reply to this comment
- It's as plain as the nose on your face. We were forced to invade Iraq for several reasons. They had WMD, they had some small balsa-wood airplanes that they were going to use to fly over and dump biological weapons on us, they had mobil labratories that moved around the country producing chemical weapons, they were making a nucular bomb, they bought aluminum tubes, they bought yellowcake uranium, they attacked us on 9/11, all the terrorists were hiding there... Bin Laden (or whatever his name is) is still there, Saddam tried to kill my daddy, they have oil.
George W. Bush - Reply to this comment
- Everyone
Ratchet down the hostility. badaxmofo will have a civil, intelligent exchange with you if you don't come out swingin'. You may not agree with him but but it's worthwhile for us all to understand eachother beyond devisive stereotyping.
That being said. Clober singinrick whenever you see him. Total nut...lol - Reply to this comment
- bayless
If you are having trouble with Cheney's first name getting censored, try this:
Vice President/Prick Cheney has commited incredible crimes. - Reply to this comment
- badaxmofo
You are right. The implications for staying or leaving are huge. If we fail to leave a secure somewhat stable Iraq, we may well have to go back for an even bigger fight. I'll give you this for sure. But I think we're out of good options now and were running out of bad options too.
- Reply to this comment
- badax
Now, be careful. Read it twice... slowly, before you respond. You already look silly enough. - Reply to this comment
