Comments Posted By PC
Displaying 31 To 40 Of 48 Comments
THE COWARDICE OF THE DEMOCRATS
"Snatch defeat from the jaws of victory"..lol. You cannot be serious! We will win in Iraq when we raise an army large enough and send enough troops to fight this regional war. GWB has failed to do that. We will not win until we do that. The rest is just smoke and mirrors. Your straw man atack is a joke. What victory? What exactly, are we going to win with this current policy and direction in Iraq? "A free and stable Iraq"....lol...give me a break. You think the policy of Amnesty and radical Shiite control of a nation is a "win". Laughable.
Comment Posted By PC On 17.06.2006 @ 08:10
WHY WE NEED MORE INTROSPECTION FROM THE MEDIA
Crosspatch...lol...they must be in their last throes again, it is, the current talking point, after all. Cheney said so, AGAIN TODAY, It must be true.
Comment Posted By PC On 19.06.2006 @ 22:27
Talking points are not policy.
and...a talking point.
Comment Posted By PC On 19.06.2006 @ 03:53
Crosspatch- It is funny to see your justifications for this administrations dismall performance. Side isses about WMD, no mention of the force levels or the planning. Just some other "reasons" connected to those things. Excuses. We have been there four years now my friend, were mistakes made or not? If so, what is the POTUS doing to correct them? .....But dude, " MUSHROOM COUDS...they are going to great us as liberators... they are going to throw flowers at us... their gas is going to pay for this.....several hundred thousand men is a gross over estimation of the force level needed." Give me a break. We still have not changed course. We are still accepting these bogus assumptions.
Comment Posted By PC On 19.06.2006 @ 03:51
As far as your assertation that Iraq resisted inspections...utterly ridiculous. It is not the reason we went to war there. We are there to project power and build a free society. At least that is the reason that is being given, today. Seems like a better reason than a bogus one.
I understand the reason for this power projection. I really could care less about the "reason" given, besides the fact that it made us look like fools. What I do not get, is how so many people can still defend the planning, and the past and current force levels? I will never understand that. How can Conservatives, look at the situation and say, hey, things are going well. How can Conservatives buy into this notion that our Armed Forces should be at its current size, when we are fighting a regional war with the increased threat from China? Iran, North Korea..?? The press has nothing to do with any of this, and this post is an attmept to blame this Administations falures and lame foreign policy on the media. It's a joke.
When are we going to face the facts and change course in this war. When are the Republicans going to grow some balls and deploy enough men to get this job done? They control the WH and both houses, when are they going to lead? Having a political debate on the floor is not the same thing as having a policy. Sending out your PC men with talking points and sound bites is not the same thing as having a policy. THESE MEN ARE NOT LEADING.
Comment Posted By PC On 18.06.2006 @ 13:02
"plan for victory, In another six months...last throes, cut and run, a small group of desperate die hards, this is the turning point...blah blah blah." When, are we going to get some leadership that looks to win this thing? Right now, the only difference between the Republican plan in Iraq and the Dem plan is rhetoric. Both sides are looking for an exit. Both sides are re defining "victory" and the reasons we are there. "Mission Accomplished"....dude, please!
"The results, they said, were unequivocal: Coverage caused more attacks, and attacks caused more coverage—a mutually beneficial spiral of death that they say has increased because of a heightened interest in terrorism since Sept. 11, 2001."
BS. Terrorist have always used the media and always gotten a ton of coverage for their acts. Part of their doctrine is to use propoganda created by a free press, in combination with their own. Their is not new news here. None.
Comment Posted By PC On 18.06.2006 @ 11:45
If anything, the increase in attacks has made coverage less per specific event. There was a time, when a bomb killing dozens would be huge news, now, it is just a blip on the screen. The attacks need to be larger and created more death and destruction to get "good" news coverage after 9/11. That is, a fact.
Attacks are up becuase we have projected power in the region, and there is a huge mix of insurgent and terror activity, and the two are often muddled, or purposly manipulated by both sides of a political argument in order to make the case for or against the Invasion of Iraq.
Of note, is the grace period we had after the invasion when we were welcomed by the Iraqi people, and journalists could get out and around the nation because the security situation was not dismall, like it is today. The majority of Iraqis now believe, that killing US troops is ok. Heck, terrorists are being offered amnesty by the current government.
Attacks increased because of a poor plan, and a lack of boots on the ground to secure urban and rural areas and provide a large enough quick reaction force to events. Ie- the contractors being killed, burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah. Bottom line, this administration did not pay attention to the generals who wanted a larger force structure, and more of a plan for nation building. They gave way to those that adhered to their plan,which called for a small force structure and the premise that we would be welcome with open arms. Everyone can see, where it has lead us.
When are the neo cons going to stop blaming the media,and start blaming the policy makers that put together a lousy plan, based on bogus intel, with poor international buy in? Let me guess.. NEVER.
AMNESTY FOR SOME INSURGENTS MAY BE THE PRICE OF VICTORY
One last thing,all you equating the Iraqi gov giving amnesty to terrorists to our giving amnesty to Nazi's in WW2 are smoking crack. That Amnesty was given on our terms, to people we designated... not on the anyone elses terms. See, WW2, we built an Army and got unconditional surrender..you know, we won! Build an army large enough to win this regional war, put up, make the sacrifice, or shut up, everything else is just smoke and mirrors!
Comment Posted By PC On 16.06.2006 @ 14:05
Amnesty- becuase we do not have enough troops in theater to fight this regional war, that is why. Bush did not raise a large enough Army, and now we are letting the terrorists go free? Don't give me any BS about how insurgents do not equal terrorits, because everytime comservatives talk, the mix the two. ARE WE FIGHTING TERRORISTS IN IRAQ OR NOT? Amensty....jaysus...SMOKE AND MIRRORS, RAISE AN ARMY LIKE REAGAN WOULD, THEN COME TALK TO ME ABOUT WINNING.
Comment Posted By PC On 16.06.2006 @ 13:58
"Victory" will not be achieved until we deploy enough troops to the region to fight this regional war. The rest, is just smoke and mirrors.
Comment Posted By PC On 15.06.2006 @ 20:41
We will not "win" until we deploy enough troops to fight this regional war. The rest is smoke and mirrors.
Comment Posted By PC On 14.06.2006 @ 22:43
