Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
But those of us who have kids and other family in the military, who KNOW how noble and just the mission in Iraq is, have a harder time dealing with this than other issues.
With Miers, Schiavo, even the border, their angry rants could be somewhat ignored, but when it involves Iraq it cuts much deeper.
I'm not sure how interested I am in 'outlasting' these people any more.......
"I agree that discussion is a good thing. I just don't think this thread was written to facilitate discussion. Even the title is written as a insult."
Judging from the amount of activity on this thread, it most certainly facilitates discussion. Personally, I find the title refreshing, not at all insulting.
Freepers were generally on the same side-life-for Schiavo. That's not the point. Myers was the worst IMHO, and a lot of Bush supporters here were, for the first time, questioning his mindset. Support has further eroded since that time for President Bush. Maybe your experience is different.
OK, I am so stealing that one.
FLEEpers.
I like it.
dont worry Newt will take care of it all
I agree with your sentiments except about the author.
He acted a total ass in Crawford last year and that has tainted
any wisdom he might put forth ever since.
GO TROOPS!
It was a utopian regional strategy. Take out Saddam, create a democracy in its place, which will become a City on the Hill to all the Middle East, and democracy sweeps across the region. The only flaw with the plan: Muslims are not capable of making democracy work.
now wait a minute ; when Lugar is quoted as saying that Bush is changing his tune with regard to NK, when it is actually Lugar who has said diametrically opposite things, and you tell me that I "may choose to call it a lie," it leads me to believe you have not developed any kind of skepticism at all to the leadings of the press , which really wants one thing--US defeat and withdrawal. Lugar pretty well proved with his MTP comments that Bush would be unwise to trust him with any of his intentions, so why would I believe that Lugar has any knowledge that Bush intends to sit down with Iran or Syria? This especially since the assassination of Gemayel?
I have watched Lugar for a long time...he is basically a GOP mouthpiece for Joe Biden...I don't trust him very much.
But even if you tried, you could not find them, because they do not exist. Your perception is a fabrication of your unethical imagination and your liberal situation ethics.
This is over, Blackbird. You offend my conservative ethics with every post you write to me.
Just stop lying about me, and don't post to me. I don't care what you think of me, but I don't want you lying about me on a public forum again.
"Rumors of yesterday's atrocities included one report of six Sunni men who emerged from services at a Baghdad mosque and were doused with kerosene and burned alive. But two Baghdad imams, in an interview, denied that the incident took place."
As I said, the issue at hand is dealing with a perceived incipient, and perhaps now not so incipient, civil war. I suspect a major change of course may well be near at hand, probably towards some de facto quasi partition. If it happens, it will happen rather quickly, if the Iraqi forces start dissolving de jure into sectarian factions.
I hope it does happen, I wish it does not happen, and if it does happen, it will be a tragedy. Bush's long pass towards remaking the middle east for the better will be recorded by history has an interception.
Gee, I dunno. Maybe because Lugar is the chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee? The Chief Executive can not really do squat in regards to foreign relations without legislative review, BTW.
I disagree...I have listened to all of President Bush's speeches...and I have read a lot of analyse's of the Bush Doctrine.
I DO believe he understands the enemy...and what this WAR will entail..and he has warned us repeatedly that this is not going to be easy or short.
However, he is working with a State Dept...and a MEDIA and Congresspeople that have openly fought him from the get go.
I think you were pretty dismissive of both he and Rummy in an unfair way...but, that is your opinion, and you are entitled to that.
I haven't seen any posts that have even ventured a guess that perhaps the reason we HAVEN'T been hit again, is because President Bush understands the enemy, and it doing a lot of things that unfortunately the media and the Dems and the agencies would rather LEAK...than give Bush credit for.
Cheerleading has turned into a sport in its own right. But I remember a time when cheerleading was only a side show to the main event.
At at the main event, the winning objective was obvious and the winning team was certain.
What is the objective today in Iraq?
How will we know that the US has won?
Can anyone currently imagine any scenario where the place doesn't go to Hell- even worse then now- when the US pulls out? Or does the US stay there forever? Bleeding day after day.
No one argues that the troops are top notch and would win whatever ordered. It is why may of us are upset that Rumsfeld was fired. What is happening in Iraq is not the fault of the military.
The insurgency is not small because the pipeline- for political reasons- hasn't been closed. As long as Iran and Syria and others are not taken care off, the "insurgency" will flow in perpetuity. Are Iran and Syria going to be taken on?
You are in for a severe disappointment. The Bush Administration is going to lean on the coming report prepared by appeaser James Baker and developed by such military geniuses as Sandra O'Conner and Leon Peneta.
All logic points to this Administration "cutting and running" in one way or another. With Iraq falling to Iranian influence. The only question is, how many Americans have to die in Iraq while that occurs.
I supported that war too. With fear. And all my fears have materialized.
I hope I'm wrong. And I hope I'm not too hated here for writing the truth as I see it happening.
I understand. This WAS a great site and still has some FINE ones on it. The composite, however, has become increasingly problematic for you and others like you. Sorry.
I don't doubt that.
The de-Baathification strategy seems not to have worked very well, and it seems it would've been better to establish security before trying to establish democracy (and might still) but again, perhaps that's 20/20 hindsight.
thanks for 1092. the little icing of the cake that "Iraqi security forces stood by doing nothing" shows how hard some propagandists are working and how little editorial filtering is going on
Allegra...you know the freeper that came up with that name...Teufelhunde!!! Figures, huh??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.