Comments Posted By tubino
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 17 Comments

POLITICIANS HEAD FOR THE BRIAR PATCH TO AVOID IRAQ TAR BABY

I believe it was Ariel Sharon who said that a power cannot win an occupation -- it can only pick the size of its humiliation.

"There are two choices in Iraq; win or lose."

CHOICE? Look, the Bush admin gave up months ago. Proof? They stopped appropriating reconstruction funds MONTHS AGO. Yes, they cut and ran from rebuilding.

Bush lost this war, and he's losing in Afghanistan.

Comment Posted By tubino On 15.11.2006 @ 21:28

IRAQ: QUIT OR COMMIT

"If Pres Clinton had removed Saddam instead of waging a half-hearted effort every 6 months, then Al Queda never would have grown to power through inept and impotent responses used to recruit, and thus Al Queda would have fallen by the wayside."

yeah, and if the 1998 attacks in Iraq hadn't succeeded, Saddam probably would have had WMDs.

And if Bush I had invaded to Baghdad, ... then what? Clinton wouldn't have inherited that mess? Is that your take?

And if Bush II hadn't committed the biggest blunder, the next president would have a ready military, half a trillion less debt, and the ability to deal with Iran and Korea.

Nice game we're playing here.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 16:20

Neither of you have answered the simple questions:

why is the WH distancing itself from the Iraq-AQ claims?
What difference do the claims make now?

If invading Iraq was clearly a trap for the US, why support those who fell for it?

How many Iraqis were on the 9-11 planes? Where did most of the AQ members in Afghanistan come from?

Now that the US fell for the trap, why do you want to pour more resources into something getting worse?

If you think things are getting better, how do you explain the increasing number of attacks on coalition forces, apart from the civil war?

Do you realize that your incessant wankering on details keeps you from the simple questions about accountability, responsbility, and a plan for the future?

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 16:17

"If it’s bad there now, imagine how bad it’d be if the US left, and tell us all how that’s better."

If it was bad last year, and worse in January, and worse in March, and worse in June, and still worse in August,... it's getting WORSE. See the graph I linked.

Tell us all how getting worse is really getting better. Be sure to tell us HOW.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 14:30

"Where does Bin Laden express his desire to have the US invade Iraq(I could give a crap about what Harper’s or some columnist said in 02 about invading Iraq)? answer: he doesn’t."

It would be funny if it weren't tragic.

Too bad you can't read the links I posted.

I give up.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 14:14

Wow, you still don't get it.

Even if you're right, Mark, it's irrelevant. And even if you're right, there were a dozen other nations with stronger AQ ties, and some posed and still pose bigger terrorist problems.

Why is that hard to understand? You didn't even try to refute that, even though it means you're just blowing smoke here.

Sam can't read the graph on insurgent activity, and he doesn't realize that by his numbers, the US won in Vietnam, and Israel never pulled out of Lebanon. Sam doesn't understand insurgent activity.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 14:12

Mark, forgot to ask: what point do you think you're making with all this AQ stuff?

MY point all along has been that the US likelihood of success in Iraq was very very low all along, and that this isn't hindsight but rather what millions of us thought at the time, in 2002.

Those coming to the realization now, like Rick, might as well face what we saw then.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 11:45

Mark,

Try to grasp this simple concept: Bush did not have to invade Iraq, but hd *did* invade Iraq, despite it being clear to many many people that this woudl be playing into OBL's hands. This information was so compelling that a major magazine put it on their cover, columns were written, and the Bush admin smeared everyone they could, and did it anyway.

And so it happened, and 5 years after 9-11, Bush has managed to strengthen AQ. And in the face of this, your reaction is to say that somehow this catastrophic stupidity in the face of evidence shows that Bush was RIGHT somehow??? When your own argument is that AQ was THERE only means it was even dumber to do what he did?

You have some powerful powerful delusional drugs.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 11:35

Back from the memory hole, here's a piece from Sept 2002:

http://www.post-gazette.com/columnists/20020929gene1.asp

I'd like to hear Sam Pender's reaction. There it was, back in 2002, the predictions that came true. How many shows have you seen where they brought that poster, and the people who created it or even just believed in it, to explain why they were right?

Does it make you made to realize that Bush fell into OBL's trap? Join the rest of us.

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 11:02

Here's a link to the bin Laden, I want you to invade Iraq poster:

http://www.nathancallahan.com/democracy.html

Even before the invasion, it was no secret that bin Laden would gain if the US took the bait.

Remarkable what can vanish down the memory hole, but a large number of the anti-war protesters were saying that invading Iraq would make the US LESS safe.

And that's just what happened. Imagine a world where some of those who were RIGHT about Iraq actually got some air time on the pundit shows. Half the country was against invading -- why can't they find anyone to put on TV now?

Comment Posted By tubino On 23.08.2006 @ 10:46


 


Next page »


Pages (2) : [1] 2


«« Back To Stats Page