Petraeus Falsely Claims That Six Months Ago, ‘No One Would Have Forecast’ Anbar’s Success
Petraeus Falsely Claims That Six Months Ago, ‘No One Would Have Forecast’ Anbar’s Success
Today in his testimony to the House, Gen. David Petraeus cited the reduced violence in the Anbar province as evidence that President Bush’s “surge” is working. He added that it would be “premature” to withdraw U.S. troops now, because in January, “no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months“:
However, in my professional judgment, it would be premature to make recommendations on the pace of such reductions at this time. In fact, our experience in Iraq has repeatedly shown that projecting too far into the future is not just difficult, it can be misleading and even hazardous. The events of the past six months underscore that point. When I testified in January, for example, no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months.
Watch it:
Yet in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Commitee six months ago — just two weeks after Bush first announced his escalation plans — Petraeus admitted that in Anbar, there already appeared “to be a trend in the positive direction where sheikhs are stepping up”:
You’ve seen it, I know, in Anbar province, where it has sort of gone back and forth. And right now there appears to be a trend in the positive direction where sheikhs are stepping up and they do want to be affiliated with and supported by the U.S. Marines and Army forces who are in Anbar province. That was not the case as little as perhaps six months ago, or certainly before that. [Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, 1/23/07]
Bush’s “surge” is not responsible for progress in Anbar. The Sunni sheik who forged the alliance with the Americans “traced the decision to fight al-Qaeda to Sept. 14, 2006, long before the new Bush strategy.” Nevertheless, the Bush administration “dispatched another 4,000 U.S. troops to Anbar to exploit the situation.”
Last week, CNN correspondent Michael Ware also noted that the Sunni insurgency in Anbar offered to work with U.S. troops — not the Iraqi government — to fight al Qaeda in 2003, but the United States rejected the offer. Only “after four years of bloodshed” was the United States “finally ready to accept those terms.”
UPDATE: The Gavel has video of the opening statements by House Armed Services Committee chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA).
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Regardless of who gets the credit or when it started looking up, Petraeus is certainly not “falsely claiming” (unless you can point to someone 6 months ago who actually dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has) anything in that regard.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm1. It’s still a civil war and we have no cause to be in the middle of it, other than that old Pottery Barn rule.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:12 pmno one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months.
The operative words “transformed the way it has”, a huge difference from “appeared to be a trend”.
Petr saw the trend but he couldnt have known the huge success reaped in Anbar would come as quickly and completely as it has.
This is another example of the simple-minded parsing which normally occurs at TP.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:13 pmIt’s still a civil war and we have no cause to be in the middle of it, other than that old Pottery Barn rule.
Great, I look forward to the cessation of posts lamenting Iraqi civilian deaths on this site.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pmDeaN CT: What is a “paid flamer”? You sound homophobic. Are you?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pmWar was lost in 2003. Now we are just beating dead horse.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:16 pmThe old pottery barn rule eh? Ethics escape you?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pmNo. 5.: Do you lament the 28,000 American wounded? Been to the VA, lately, dickhead?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pmI’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:19 pmNo one would have predicted that a US general would be arming and giving money and ammunition to Sunnis and Saddamists and dead enders who have been killing American troops.
-GSD
September 10th, 2007 at 3:20 pmThe old pottery barn rule eh? Ethics escape you?
Comment by Turd Ferguson — September 10, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
When did the Constitution get replaced with the policy manual from a department store?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:21 pmCan’t we just declare victory and GTFO?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:21 pmThis General is a COMPLETE TOOL of the completely corrupt GW BOTCH misAdministration!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm#
Can’t we just declare victory and GTFO?
Comment by warwhatisitgoodfor — September 10, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
“Mission Accomplished” …..
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pmWow, the region that has 5% of the population is still the second deadliest for our troops. Big improvement.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pmJake(off) D(ick) = TROLL!
IGNORE!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:24 pm‘Mission Accomplished II, Anbar’
September 10th, 2007 at 3:24 pmhttp://www.unknownnews.org/070910a-KevinGood.html
Great, I look forward to the cessation of posts lamenting Iraqi civilian deaths on this site.
Comment by Japaner — September 10, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
WTF???? Try making “sense”…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:24 pmHERE IS THE FULL VIDEO OF THE PETRAEUS REPORT, for those who haven’t seen it:
http://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=8861802a-115f-4506-aa24-08c389ead8c0
September 10th, 2007 at 3:25 pmBush will continue to listen to his Generals as long as the White House writes the reports.
‘Gimmee a Freidman’, now; S! I! X! Six more months!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:26 pmMan…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:28 pmWhere is Bill Clinton when you need him. He knew what he was doing when he spoke about irap all those years ago… Plus he would never put us in the middle of a civil war without an exit strategy, I mean look at Kosovo!!! Duh!!! (eyes rolling)
I like how Hunter and Skelton et al are trying to frame this up as a “Gen. P. is totally honest and unbiased, therefore everyone must agree with his testimony”
I’m sure Hunter said exactly the same thing about super-patriot Duke Cunningham when he came under scrutiny.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:28 pm#
I’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
Comment by Jake D. — September 10, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
You’re jumping around here a little too much, Jerk D. All TP did was quote Petraeus’ own words. It’s not up to TP to substantiate Petraeus’ claim for his sake.
Nice try. Yer comment is a strawman, but hey, you can’t tell the difference between basketball and football, or keep your own age straight. Go figure.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:28 pmNo. 5.: Do you lament the 28,000 American wounded? Been to the VA, lately, dickhead?
Yep, I drive every other night for the DAV, usually shuttling vets from their homes to the VA facilities in the Twin Cities. Ill leave the the slanderous honorifics to you intelligent types.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:28 pmwarwhatisitgood for; I’m with you. Declare victory and go home. (1966)
September 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pmWow TP is smearing the good name of General Petareus while he is still sitting in the chair. Impressive. I guess these are the kind of News items you get when you have a thousand monkeys at a thousand computers.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pmIt sounds like the trolls had their talking points arranged for them in advance today. It makes sense. The right wing noise machine has no doubt spent weeks preparing their strategy around the phony Petraeus report.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pmI mean look at Kosovo!!! Duh!!! (eyes rolling)
Comment by Joneser — September 10, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Whilst living w/ your won incohernecy may not be a problem for you, on this end, all one can say is, WTF???
September 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pmThis is how traitors like TP get when they’re faced with incontrovertible testimony by an independent general: they personally attack him to discredit him. This TP accusation is based on the libtarded slant of the WP; WP is discreditable because of its bias against the war. Further laughable is the fraud that based on the claim that one sheik apparently “entered” into an agreement with the US in fall 06, TP accuses Petraeus of lying. Articles written even by the WP–which TP has posted here in earlier weeks–contain quotes from Sunnis AND US generals testifying to the fact that the Sunnis were actually encouraged by the US surge to fight Al-Qaeda. In other words, without the surge, the Sunnis obviously would NOT have had the wherewithal to fight Al-Qaeda. Further destroying TP’s lies is the fact that if the Sunnis were already working with the US against Qaeda in 06, then why is news of the improvement in Anbar only emerging now, post-surge?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:30 pmWhy are all of the TP posts negative?? What about the 30,000 troops out by next summer business??
September 10th, 2007 at 3:30 pmI’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
Um, try this very post, dumbass. Petraeus himself. Ever heard of him?
That. Was. The. Point.
As for “the way it has,” I guess you mean “not very much.”
All those American lives: wasted. Pissed away. Nothing to show for it.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pm.
WTF???? Try making “senseâ€â€¦
I did, perhaps you should try harder at comprehending. Read the post I was referring to and put the pieces together, youll get it eventually.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pmRegardless of who gets the credit or when it started looking up, Petraeus is certainly not “falsely claiming†(unless you can point to someone 6 months ago who actually dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has) anything in that regard.
Comment by Jake D.
Things are not looking up, this is a lie, we all know it and most are sick to death of our air waves spewing LIES.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pmAfter our illegal immoral Shock and Awe, if our government sincerely wanted to rebuild Iraq, prevent civil war we would have gone along with the Iraqi peoples request… that is let the Iraqi people rebuild their own country… as they put it – they could do it pennies on the dollar. A healthy growing employed nation most likely would resist civil war.
The very reason this is ignored gives suspect to the real intentions of the Bush thug administration.
With the long-awaited surge progress report from General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker due beginning today, Perrspectives has updated its Iraq Document Center. The repository includes the latest news, statistics, key reports and other essential materials surrounding the Iraq war and its run-up.
For the overview, see:
September 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pm“Required Reading for Petraeus, Crocker Testimony.”
I’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
Comment by Jake D. — September 10, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
“You’ve seen it, I know, in Anbar province, where it has sort of gone back and forth. And right now there appears to be a trend in the positive direction where sheikhs are stepping up and they do want to be affiliated with and supported by the U.S. Marines and Army forces who are in Anbar province. That was not the case as little as perhaps six months ago, or certainly before that. [Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, 1/23/07]” Petraeus, General Ass-Kisser-In-Chief, dingleberry Cluster
Who’s reading to you, Jake?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pm“incontrovertible testimony”?
Petraeus’ bullshit was dead before it hit the floor. Crap like that only works on people who can’t count.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pm.
Stand back, I believe the Generals pants are on fire!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pmWow TP is smearing the good name of General Petareus while he is still sitting in the chair. Impressive. I guess these are the kind of News items you get when you have a thousand monkeys at a thousand computers.
Comment by Another Chris — September 10, 2007 @ 3:29 pm
Or one monkey in front of a camera.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pmI’m absolutely sure that the withdrawal by next summer was in no way timed for the elections. I do believe in fairies. I do, I do, I do!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pmhttp://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/New/wehatetheusa.asx
This sums up the left.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:34 pmthis guy’s a politician. people are talking about him running for president. should we expect anything other than distortions, misleading statements, coverups and outright lies?
it’s the nature of the beast. and the beast lies even more in wartime.
That’s my rant. read on if you’d like:
September 10th, 2007 at 3:34 pm“Politicians Lie? Say it Ain’t So!”
http://www.populistamerica.com/politicians_lie___say_it_ain_t_so
I love how all you people are combat and war experts! THE SURGE WASN’T RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY SUCCESS! IT WAS SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE SURGE, DEFINITELY NOT THE SURGE THOUGH. DEFINITELY NOT.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:35 pm“Appears to be a trend” is supposed to be synonamous with “transformed the way it has”, i.e. incredibly successful?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:35 pmComment by Petraeushandingsmackdowntolibtards — September 10, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
your….littttlllee..tteeny…tinnny…memBrain IS NOT WORKING HERE!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:35 pmGo away RepugliscumTard!!!
#4 Dean CT,
This is the third time in a week that ThinkProgress has printed this lie and it is the third time this week they have been caught…It looks like they are relying as the repetitive lie method — Repeat a lie often enough and, hopefully, someone will end up believing it. Fortunately, everytime they shamelessly try to pass off this hoax, they get caught.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:35 pmLet me explain the “Betrayus” thing. First of all it’s lame, Sean Hannity crap. Accuse the opposition of being a traitor. That said, Bush has so far fired EVERY general who said anything that disagreed with his party line and propaganda. He has thrown every other general he’s had under the bus.
The very idea that there are any corners of the government left which are impartial and nonpartisan is bullsh!t. That is why we are all over Petraeus. This is a setup just like all the other setups.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:36 pmThinkProgress has been overrun by trolls! We may have to destroy ThinkProgess in order to save it.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:36 pmBobwurst – anyone with an opposing view is classified as a troll in your book. The overrun is true in that there are many more people with an opposing view in this country than you thought.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pmAs Japaner pointed out:
The operative words “transformed the way it hasâ€, a huge difference from “appeared to be a trendâ€. Petr[aeus] saw the trend but he couldn’t have known the huge success reaped in Anbar would come as quickly and completely as it has. This is another example of the simple-minded parsing which normally occurs at TP.
TP put these two quotes together, along with the headline: “Petraeus Falsely Claims That Six Months Ago, ‘No One Would Have Forecast’ Anbar’s Success” to feed the Bush haters.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pmTHE SURGE WASN’T RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY SUCCESS! IT WAS SOMETHING OTHER THAN THE SURGE, DEFINITELY NOT THE SURGE THOUGH. DEFINITELY NOT.
Comment by Eatery — September 10, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
What success? There is no success until American soldiers aren’t being blown to pieces every damn day, idiot.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pmThe RNC plants are certainly here just for this article…. tell me trolls – Why do you continue to support these obvious lies and this corrupt administration?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pmComment by Exley — September 10, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
LONGTIME TROLL!!! IGNORE!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:39 pmFortunately, everytime they shamelessly try to pass off this hoax, they get caught.
Comment by Exley — September 10, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
and every time Betryus speaks, he lies, and gets caught. Every time.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 pmMr sack, and anyone who disagrees with you is a traitor, what’s your point?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 pmThe Petraeus testimony is irrelevant. Bush is going to stay the course NO MATTER WHAT. That much is clear. Petraeus is just the latest in a long line of fig leaves, each of which has given the administration less cover than the last. Bush will drag the GOP into oblivion by the time he leaves office.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 pmOr one monkey in front of a camera.
More proof that the liberals really do love the troops. Slurs like this have become so common that they rarely shock me anymore, rarely.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 pmTP put these two quotes together, along with the headline: “Petraeus Falsely Claims That Six Months Ago, ‘No One Would Have Forecast’ Anbar’s Success†to feed the Bush haters.
Comment by Jake D. — September 10, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
Still allergic to the truth, Jake? That’s what that (R) means, allergic to truth.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:40 pmComment by ronjazz — September 10, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
See #54…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:41 pm“I’m in the U.S. illegally.
Comment by Bobwurst ”
I rest my case, mr. sack.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:41 pmMr sack, and anyone who disagrees with you is a traitor, what’s your point?
Comment by Bobwurst — September 10, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Who said anything about being a traitor? I just made a statement that the trolls (as you put them) are overrunning because they far outnumber your point of view. Get with the program.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:41 pmMore proof that the liberals really do love the troops. Slurs like this have become so common that they rarely shock me anymore, rarely.
Comment by Japaner — September 10, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
the fact that you have happily sold your country out to enrich the already wealthy traitors that laugh at you all the way to the bank no longer shocks me, either.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:42 pm“It’s a quagmire”
Dick Cheney on the idea of invading and occupying Iraq, 1994
Why does Dick Cheney Past hate the troops? Was he saying the Future Troops are imcompetent? Didn’t he realize we would be turning the corner every six months? WTF?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:43 pmGet with the program.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
Nah, you’re already with the program. still getting your marching orders from traitor Kristol, i see.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:43 pmWhat success? There is no success until American soldiers aren’t being blown to pieces every damn day, idiot.
Comment by ronjazz — September 10, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
You forget that the Repugs and the BushCo enablers don’t give a shit about the troops: They are just numbers (or commas in Snow-job’s words). Since they have a dogtag, they are US property, to be used as Darth and the NeoCons see fit.
And Petraeus is the worsat kind of military keader, one who puts everything else in front of his troops’ safety; his career, politics, his next star and his morals. Guess that is why he is one of the few senior Generals left who will still carry the BushCo water. I just hope it breaks his f’ing back.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:44 pmExcuse me, “progress” as it says in the article above.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:44 pmLet’s see, an elected Congress votes for the war and the war begins. Almost immediately a liberal base protests against the war and begins disinformation campaigns to do anything they can to undermine the effort and stop the war. I don’t know how you define treason, but I think that shoe fits pretty well with the anti-war movement.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:44 pmTrolls are always outnembered 6 to 1 by patriots here. The trolls are only 2 or 3, with dozens of sock-puppets. They represent the ever-shrinking, brain-dead, troop-hating rightwing basketcases left holding the Bush bag of shit.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:45 pmPersonal attacks are not necessary ronjazz. I mis-typed. No need for immature name calling here.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:46 pmMore proof that the liberals really do love the troops. Slurs like this have become so common that they rarely shock me anymore, rarely.
Comment by Japaner — September 10, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Criticizing one corrupt general for being a partisan political hack and Bush sycophant is slurring the troops how?
This sort of low rhetorical garbage is typical of the guttersnipes who troll for Bush these days.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:46 pm“I just made a statement that the trolls (as you put them) are overrunning because they far outnumber your point of view. Get with the program.
Comment by John Sacks”
Really? maybe in the troll population, but not overall:
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
Namejacking idiots are part of your program.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:46 pmLet’s see, an elected Congress votes for the war and the war begins. Almost immediately a liberal base protests against the war and begins disinformation campaigns to do anything they can to undermine the effort and stop the war. I don’t know how you define treason, but I think that shoe fits pretty well with the anti-war movement.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Johnny Coward, not posting from iraq, when you open your post with a lie, don’t expect anybody to read the rest. You’re some f*cking stupid, boy.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pmThere really is no such thing as a left winged patriot since you really do have to be a nationalist, not a “one world government” type to be a patriot. Given that the liberals are pushing for world socialism then it is impossible for any liberal to be a patriot.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pmI don’t know how you define treason, but I think that shoe fits pretty well with the anti-war movement.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
No, it’s called Democracy, and we WILL get our counbtry back, and clean the BushCo shitstains off the constitution too. Life will be better for you as well. You will see, just don’t fear the change.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pmLet’s see, an elected Congress votes for the war and the war begins. Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
You forgot the part where the Bush administration LIED about the intelligence to gin up a war.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pmI wonder what it says when you disparage the highest ranking general of United States… What does that say about your view of our military? Or what of the level of condescension TP’ers have for the best men and women who volunteer and sacrifice thanklessly for their belief in their country. Are they idiots? are they followers? are they ignorant? are they kids, children? Because they left their comfortable chairs at home and decided to hangout in 100+ degree whether for fun? Well then again… maybe its harder to leave your comfy couch and die your hair pink.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pmThe actual reality that the overwhelming majority of those men and women don’t remotely share your outlook of what we are doing there, doesn’t dawn on you? Mainly, because they are there seeing it everyday?
Sorry ron but I cant accept your faux concern for the troops. In one post you refer to General Petr as a monkey, in a following post you profess concern that our troops are being blown-up, then again you slander Petr as “Betrayus”. General Petraeus is a troop is he not?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:48 pmMy analysis of TP’s troll presense means a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y squat.
I’ve been trying to get a job with TP as a paid troll statistician, but they keep hanging up on me.
:(
September 10th, 2007 at 3:49 pmI hear that TP is producing a fictional account, post after post, to propose as a scripted replacement for ‘Passions’ on NBC. They want to call it “Vietraq†or some else equally retarded.
Comment by Dean CT — September 10, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
well, they figured the White House long-running fiction about “turning hte corner”, etc., etc., is selling pretty well, but now they know that it isn’t, so they’ll just continue going with the truth, until you stop the lies. Isn’t it always the way: we’ll stop telling the truth about you when you stop lying about us.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:49 pm” LIED ” – the old false comeback of a liberal with no substance in their debate. Again we are back to the liberal “I know you are but what am I” way of debating. Good luck.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:49 pmCriticizing one corrupt general for being a partisan political hack and Bush sycophant is slurring the troops how?
Because the bushtards have to change the subject from the argument they can’t make to how mean we are. It’s the whining of losers.
Petraeus has gone the way of Powell. Apparently, the bushtards think they can hide bullshit behind a title.
Uh, no. You already lost, thanks for playing.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:50 pm.
No, it’s called Democracy, and we WILL get our counbtry back, and clean the BushCo shitstains off the constitution too. Life will be better for you as well. You will see, just don’t fear the change.
Demcracy is when we accept the results of an election then cary out what ever agenda the election resolved. In the case of the Iraq war, it was that – war. Undermining this after it was decided by Congress to move forward is not democracy but closer to anarchy or mob rule.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:50 pm9 American soldiers killed in Iraq
September 10th, 2007 at 3:51 pmBAGHDAD – Nine American soldiers died in Iraq on Monday — all but one killed in vehicle accidents in and around Baghdad, the military said.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:51 pmThe actual reality that the overwhelming majority of those men and women don’t remotely share your outlook of what we are doing there, doesn’t dawn on you? Mainly, because they are there seeing it everyday?
Comment by Joneser — September 10, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
The military is split about 50/50 same as the rest of the country. The brave men and women, are part of a volunteer army that is supposed to defend the US. Use of these men and women for empire building, and to settle a personal grudge is poor leadership.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:51 pmI wonder what it says when you disparage the highest ranking general of United States
Comment by Joneser — September 10, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
Uh, maybe it says that you believe that the highest ranking general of the United States isn’t doing his job. Is this somehow against the rules in your mind? Thou shalt not criticize one’s leaders? This might be how poeple in your authoritarian cult think, but it isn’t how democracy works in this country.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:51 pmthe old false comeback of a liberal with no substance
Wow, you haven’t even read the post, have you? It’s right there, above your stupidity. Right at the top of the page.
You can lead a bushtard to water, but you can’t make him think.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:51 pm.
Comment by Another Chris — September 10, 2007 @ 3:29 pm
Still hanging around, petending you’re something you’re not, huh?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pmI wonder what it says when you disparage the highest ranking general of United States… What does that say about your view of our military?
It says that even the highest-ranking general of the United States is a scum-sucker capable of selling his country out. It has happened countless times throughout history. It also says that America can only be defeated by the rightwing robots continuing to suck off Bushco puppets.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pmThe military is split about 50/50 same as the rest of the country
I call BS on that comment. Back that up soldier.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pmOr one monkey in front of a camera.
More proof that the liberals really do love the troops. Slurs like this have become so common that they rarely shock me anymore, rarely.
Comment by Japaner — September 10, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
Like conservatives supported Jack Murtha or John Kerry, Shinseki or teh generals who have come out calling for a change in strategy or the troops who authored an op-ed for the Times? Like Dick Cheney supported the troops in Vietnam by securing five deferments? Like George W. Bush supported his comrades fighting in southeast Asia by keeping the skies above Alabama safe from communists (when he wasn’t working on political campaigns, that is)?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pmBAGHDAD – Nine American soldiers died in Iraq on Monday — all but one killed in vehicle accidents in and around Baghdad, the military said.
3771
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pm†LIED †– the old false comeback of a liberal with no substance in their debate. Again we are back to the liberal “I know you are but what am I†way of debating. Good luck.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
WHINING ABOUT GETTING CAUGHT LYING – the old false comeback of a conservative with no substance in their debate. Again we are back to the conservative “I know you are but what am I” way of debating when they’re caught LYING. Good Luck – LIAR!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:52 pmComment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Your comment is dumb and completely out of touch with recent and well documented history!
You seem to be another useless troll ‘roun’ here!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pmBAGHDAD – Nine American soldiers died in Iraq on Monday — all but one killed in vehicle accidents in and around Baghdad, the military said.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pmUndermining this after it was decided by Congress to move forward is not democracy but closer to anarchy or mob rule.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
HUH??? WTF???
Try “making sense”…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pm#48, let us not act like the reich but merely walk away…..Leave it to the black hearted little troll’s and it will be fixed or not as TP chooses……That will prove just how Thinking progressive they are wont it…….Blessings
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pm†LIED †– the old false comeback of a liberal with no substance in their debate. Again we are back to the liberal “I know you are but what am I†way of debating. Good luck.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
False comeback? So, all of the WMDs are where? Your back yard?
Lies, moron, the coin of the rightwing realm. lies, more and more, better and better, but lies just the same.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pmThis is the third time in a week that ThinkProgress has printed this lie and it is the third time this week they have been caught…It looks like they are relying as the repetitive lie method
Comment by Exley — September 10, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
Sorry, I’m still searching for your outrage regarding a select few who call Obama, “Osama”. Not having much success, mind you, but I am still searching.
Meanwhile, what exactly is “the lie” TP is repeating? Not “what you feel” is a lie. Exact lies, please.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:53 pmAgain, here is the FULL VIDEO OF THE PETRAEUS REPORT:
http://beta.redlasso.com/Community/ClipPlayer.aspx?i=76ca1a48-5aaf-4641-b1e8-074da3b68de8
September 10th, 2007 at 3:54 pm“Let’s see, an elected Congress votes for the war and the war begins. Almost immediately a liberal base protests against the war and begins disinformation campaigns to do anything they can to undermine the effort and stop the war. I don’t know how you define treason, but I think that shoe fits pretty well with the anti-war movement.
Comment by John Sacks ”
Funny you see it that way. what exactly was the disinformation campaign you speak of? Was it the campaign to convince the country that there really wasn’t any WMD in Iraq? Was it the campaign to convince the nation that Saddam really didn’t pose a clear and imminent threat to our country? That there were no connections between Iraq and the 9-11 attacks? Enlighten me here mr sack.
Becuse the way I see is the country was lied into a war, and the few patriots who see through the lie use their first amendment rights to speak out against an injustice . And now 4 plus years later after we’ve suffered through the worst managment of two wars this country has ever seen, the public has come to the conclusion that the war is a mistake,and bush couldn’t manage a paper route much less a war.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:54 pmron “hugh†jazz is full of crap. She is a confused and angry adolescent and nothing more. Personal attacks from hugh to follow.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:55 pmCriticizing one corrupt general for being a partisan political hack and Bush sycophant is slurring the troops how?
How is he corrupt, I really want to know?
And please refrain from the usual schlockery that Petr is a “sock puppet”, “lying turd”, “Chimpy mouthpiece” or any of the other juvenile slander that is such a staple of the libs on this site.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:55 pm“The lie” has never been figured out. The ole WMD thing was not a lie so if you call that a lie then you are just wrong. I guess if a hollywood type says there are lies, then there must be lies regardless of reality.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:55 pmBAGHDAD – Nine American soldiers died in Iraq on Monday — all but one killed in vehicle accidents in and around Baghdad, the military said.
3771
Comment by Tobey Tall — September 10, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
We must defeat the vehicle accidents in Iraq so we don’t have to
September 10th, 2007 at 3:55 pmThe actual reality that the overwhelming majority of those men and women don’t remotely share your outlook of
Don’t you ever get sick of being wrong?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pmron “hugh†jazz is full of crap. She is a confused and angry adolescent and nothing more. Personal attacks from hugh to follow.
Comment by Eatery — September 10, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Ah, irony, thy politics are right wing.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pmYou are just wrong about that then. Noone was lied into war. The intelligence gathered by the past 3 presidents including W led to the decisions in this war. Whether they were wrong or not, there was no lie in that.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pmHi, everybody! I was ‘MichaelIsretarded.’ Feel free to ignore me as regularly scheduled.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pmron “hugh†jazz is full of crap. She is a confused and angry adolescent and nothing more. Personal attacks from hugh to follow.
Comment by Eatery — September 10, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Thanks, p, I knew I could count on you to cry and pout. Want a hankie? I’m so glad you have given up personal attacks.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:57 pmmr sack is hiding behind the troops again. no one can criticize a general because that will harm the morale of the people who are getting their legs blown off because this administration can’t be bothered arming them properly.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:57 pmJohn Sacks, can you point to any evidence that “War” was declared? You use that term stating we have to all accept it but there hasn’t been a declaration of war for Iraq.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:57 pmHi, everybody! I was ‘MichaelIsretarded.’ Feel free to ignore me as regularly scheduled.
Comment by UprightLeftIsDownrightStupid — September 10, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
Hi everybody, Pee Stain is a NAMEJACKER, because he a whiny little Pansy that feels IGNORED in the world…
September 10th, 2007 at 3:57 pmStupdity,
Man your obsessed with me, that’s not healthy.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:58 pmThe ole WMD thing was not a lie …
We have a disqualification!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:58 pm.
“The lie†has never been figured out. The ole WMD thing was not a lie so if you call that a lie then you are just wrong. I guess if a hollywood type says there are lies, then there must be lies regardless of reality.
Comment by John Small Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Oh dear lawd. John, do you just type to see your name on line?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:58 pmBecause you’ve just posted a paragraph with absolutely no substantial evidence, yet treated it as fact.
Hey, I can play that game:
Bush is a known bisexual who prefers men. I guess if you call that a lie, then you are just wrong.
It’s a troll frenzy today. The authoritarian cultists are in thrall to their leader Bush. Any attack on him is an attack on them, and nothing symbolizes Bush more than his failed war.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:58 pmDoes war actually have to be declared to take military action? State that law will you?
September 10th, 2007 at 3:59 pmEstablishing working relations with the Sunni sheikhs has clearly been a necessity ever since the Insurgency coalesced. -cognitorex blogspot-
This is from my post of January 2005 circa when Arafat died. It seemed clear that America needed a highly regarded Sunni leader that would both hold out his palm for American lucre and make political accommodation. Back then, Rummy said “It’s not like you can just pick up a phone and call these guys.” Had BushCo. tried all this would have happened earlier.
Now the Military is making nice with perceived bloody handed heavyweights, which as I wrote, was always an eventual necessity.
(excerpt “The Ghost of Arafat” Jan. 2005):
The ghost of Arafat will appear from the Sunni side and George B. to his enormous bile-choking displeasure will have to deal. Were that it were otherwise, but this is written.
Fielding one per cent of the Sunni fighting-age men as active insurgents/freedom fighters with three percent as cadre (40,000) creates a stalemate. They can not dislodge us and our Shia forces nor can we pacify them.
Personally I would find this leader (or group) now and begin the next phase. Offer them administrative control of electric and water reconstruction projects. They create no-kill, no-maim zones, implement the projects, Halliburton yes, Halliburton no, who cares, and we release the money on a quasi ‘completion’ basis.
This gambit lacks all pride and ego but we do get to stay a while.
Sarge might say “Light em if you got em,” for a change.
In a picture that makes one cringe,Abu Aardvark has commentary and a photo of Bush with a less than savory Sunni nuevo ally. (He beams in his necessary yet nefarious success.) link is http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark/2007/09/bush-and-abu-ri.html
September 10th, 2007 at 3:59 pmYou are just wrong about that then. Noone was lied into war. Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
BHAHAHA, yeah, NO-ONE falsely cooked the book from the Pentagon Special Operations office!! You can just IGNORE the Pentagon’s OWN REPORT that showed this happened!!!
The intelligence gathered by the past 3 presidents including W led to the decisions in this war. Whether they were wrong or not, there was no lie in that.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
BAHAHA, the intelligence was COOKED and the american people were lied to by the NEO-CON F*CKERS in Rumsfeld’s private propaganda office!
September 10th, 2007 at 3:59 pmNoone was lied into war. The intelligence gathered by the past 3 presidents including W led to the decisions in this war. Whether they were wrong or not, there was no lie in that.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
You are wrong about THAT. Congress was lied into war, the “16 words” is merely one instance, along with Colin Powell’s career-ending self-destruction in front of the entire world. Lies on lies on lies. No word of truth whatsoever, and no previous presidents decided to “f*ck Saddam, we’re taking him out” because of their daddy-penis issues. History has already flunked you; you really should crawl back into your gutter, if it will have you after this embarrassing display.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:00 pmJohn Sacks is starting to sound like Jake.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:01 pmDoes war actually have to be declared to take military action? State that law will you?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 3:59 pm
No, but a WAR has to be declared before the for RIGHTS OF WAR are in place constitutionally! But then again, you ANTI-CONSTITUTIONALIST FASCISTS really work to SHRED OUR DEMOCRACY with your LIES, DISTORTIONS, DECEIT and MISREPRESENTATIONS!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:01 pmEverything is cooked in your world I am sure, including your own brain. Still doesn’t make you right or anything you say as true. So, since most of what you say is not true, does that make you a liar?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:01 pmJohn Sacks is starting to sound like Jake.
Comment by VerbalKint — September 10, 2007 @ 4:01 pm
They’re ALL THE SAME… Just a HAND FULL of lonely RETARDED FAT GOP NERDS!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:01 pmIf we IMPEACH CHENEY then we remove his spastic, corporate hand from the a$$ of this pusspuppet moron known as GW BOTCH!!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pmPlease explain “RIGHTS OF WAR are in place constitutionally! ” and state the sections of the Constitution to go along with that.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:02 pmJohn Sacks,
Military action without a clear objective cannot be justifiably sustained. The AUMF is what has sustained this current conflict. The coherent objectives have already been met. The intangible fear concept can’t be defined so I ask you where is the threat to this country that is greater than others?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:03 pmUprightLeftIsDownrightStupid has made his case for actually ranting about something it knows nothing about. Typical.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:03 pmhellinabucket – you are obviously for a complete withdrawl of our troops right?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:04 pmWMD’s? Mushroom cloud? AQ connection with Saddam? Immenant threat?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:04 pmUprightLeftIsDownrightStupid has made his case for actually ranting about something it knows nothing about. Typical.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
and it applies perfectly to you. perfectly.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:04 pmronjazz – of course since you are obviously on that side. What a great comeback – did you attend community college or are you still in highschool?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:05 pmSuccess! Another TPer called you hughjazz! Whah whah whah.. Betarus this, bush is bin laden’s replacement that.. Quit your whining woman.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:05 pmAnswer my questions and I’ll answer yours John Sacks. Where is the threat to this country from Iraq? Where were they ever a threat?
I’d take you more seriously if you didin’t try to ask the strawmen questions.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:06 pmAnbar is the biggest lie ever , Anbar is under seige thats all, 93% of the Sunnis support attacks on American troops
pretty pathetic using a seige to demand staying when you lost 9 troops today alone
September 10th, 2007 at 4:06 pmPetraeus is being asked alot of questions that are above his pay grade . . . and he’s not smart enough to just say that and refrain from answering them.
I am not impressed with this testimony. He is nothing more than a soldier but he somehow fashions himself as an authority on Iraq, what’s causing the sectarian violence, etc.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:06 pmYou are just wrong about that then. Noone was lied into war. The intelligence gathered by the past 3 presidents including W led to the decisions in this war. Whether they were wrong or not, there was no lie in that.
Comment by John Sacks
That is pure crap. When cheney says on meet the press that it’s pretty well confirmed that Atta met with Iraqi agents in prague, he was lying. you can hang your hat on the pretty well confirmed part if you want, but it was an attempt to get people to believe the substance of the argument.
When bush spoke those 16 words in his state of the union address about nigerian urainium, he layed it at the feet of the british becuase the CIA would not back him up because they knew the “evidence” was forged. Bush said it anyway and gave himself the out of saying it was the brit’s fault. That is not only dishonest it shows a lot about bush’s character.
When rumsfeld said “we know exactly where the WMD are” right before the invasion he lied. He never took that statement back.
Feel free to argue around this, say they are not technically lies, Hide behind Clinton, and daddy bush if you want. It just makes you look all the more pathetic.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:06 pm9 US troops killed today
11 wounded
September 10th, 2007 at 4:07 pmThe “Surge” is an unqualified success. All ya gotta do is send a big eared, dickheaded american president with a bag full of $75 million bucks and Anbar is yours.
“I wish I could have been there as Abu Risha nodded along sagely while Bush promised to funnel large-scale American economic development funds in Anbar, perhaps offering the services of his own highly professional office in seeing to the disbursement of the funds. It’s kind of humiliating to watch an American President get rolled by a two bit, corrupt petty shaykh.”
September 10th, 2007 at 4:07 pmThat is pure crap. When cheney says on meet the press that it’s pretty well confirmed that Atta met with Iraqi agents in prague, he was lying.
This statement doesn’t meet your world view but to just say he is lying because you hate the guy? That is what is wrong with your side. Unless you had a lie detector tied to him on that day when he made that statement, they you are just full of hot air.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:08 pmPlease explain “RIGHTS OF WAR are in place constitutionally! †and state the sections of the Constitution to go along with that.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution is the declaration of war clause, and the Constitution sets what powers the executive and legislative have both in war and in peace.
UprightLeftIsDownrightStupid has made his case for actually ranting about something it knows nothing about. Typical.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:03 pm
Says the f*cker that doesn’t realize the Constitution determines the guidelines for war powers and Constitutional responsibilities!
Come one dumbass, please explain to us your UNDERSTANDING of the Constitution! Oh wait, you don’t HAVE ANY!! BHAAHA, Typical ConTURD!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:09 pmI guess if a hollywood type says there are lies, then there must be lies regardless of reality.
Comment by John Small Sacks
Pretty funny coming from the party of reagan, thompson, cooter from the dukes of hazard, gopher, sonny bono, and Ahhhnold.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:09 pm9 US troops killed today
11 wounded
September 10th, 2007 at 4:09 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Squeal….snurk…..snurk…..snurk…..wreeeeeeeeeeeee…chomp…chompVoice of Republican Farmer to Democrat hog…HILLARY…..STOP CRAPPING IN THE TROUGH YOU OLD SOW.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:09 pmThis statement doesn’t meet your world view but to just say he is lying because you hate the guy? That is what is wrong with your side. Unless you had a lie detector tied to him on that day when he made that statement, they you are just full of hot air.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Well he WAS lying, because the CIA and FBI had already informed him that they had Atta under surveillance during this time period and that he was IN THIS COUNTRY!
Now YOU are the KNOWN LIAR (either that or FULLY RETARDED!)
September 10th, 2007 at 4:10 pmThis statement doesn’t meet your world view but to just say he is lying because you hate the guy?
Comment by John Tiny Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
….so, Atta did meet with Iraqi agents? Please provide the proof that he had.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:10 pmThank you in advance for your time and effort in your research of the topic you’ve offered.
John Sacks, what evidence was true that deserved sending our troops to fight in Iraq?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:10 pmAs a rule of thumb, don’t believe anybody above the rank of lieutenant colonel. That’s the rank most warriors are forced to retire at. Most of the rest are politicians in uniform.
Petraeus is dishonest – - NEXT GENERAL PLEASE
September 10th, 2007 at 4:11 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
We DID have our types, we’re the REASON that the war was EXECUTED WITH COMPETENCE – you LYING UNAMERICAN PIECE OF SH!T TRAITOR!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:11 pm“Petraeus is being asked alot of questions that are above his pay grade . . . and he’s not smart enough to just say that and refrain from answering them.”
Well given the impression most people on this site have of him, he’s damned if he does and damned of he doesn’t. Imagine if he said he wasn’t qualified to answer certain questions, you guys would be all over him saying he is a fool and a Bush crony. He’s trying to answer as hoinestly as he can and he’s still getting killed, jeez.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:11 pmMan, all of the trolls are furiously spinning their little wheels in an attempt to kick up enough dust to obscure the pathetic legacy they’re supporting.
But I gotta hand it to john sacks. He kicks up more dust with less talent than any troll I know. Well done, John Sacks! You are the Troll of the Day®!
(Note: Troll of the Day® is an honorary title awarded based on an inverse ratio of bandwidth used to logic displayed. It is not affiliated with Subway Restaurants, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, or the consulting firm Challenger Grey and Christmas.)
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 pmThat is pure crap. When cheney says on meet the press that it’s pretty well confirmed that Atta met with Iraqi agents in prague, he was lying.
This statement doesn’t meet your world view but to just say he is lying because you hate the guy? That is what is wrong with your side. Unless you had a lie detector tied to him on that day when he made that statement, they you are just full of hot air.
Comment by John Sacks
It’s not a question of whether it meets my world view or not. That statement was directly refuted by the FBI. He lied. sorry it doesn’t fit your world view. How does your world view bush’s preformance in the state of the union? While were at it, I forgot to mention how Powell was suckered in his united nations presentation.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 pmPetraeus is dishonest – - NEXT GENERAL PLEASE
Comment by Tobey Tall — September 10, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
General BetrayUS is just doing what the GOOD GOP SOLDIERS DO, LIE for their Commander so he won’t LOOK LIKE THE INCOMPETENT FOOL THAT HE IS!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 pmArticle. I. – The Legislative Branch – Section 8 – Powers of Congress – which gives the explicit powers to Congress under the Constitution. So explain your so called “Rights of War” – I am waiting for that lesson genious.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 pmyou LYING UNAMERICAN PIECE OF SH!T TRAITOR
The sign a a great debator – or in liberal speak, a Master Debator.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:12 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
What “type” is that – people who know when to stop fighting an unjust war?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:13 pmThis statement doesn’t meet your world view but to just say he is lying because you hate the guy? That is what is wrong with your side. Unless you had a lie detector tied to him on that day when he made that statement, they you are just full of hot air.
What do you call it when the president, the vice president, the secretary of defense and the secretary of state, all get up and on camera tell you that Iraq has WMD’s, that Iraq has nuclear weapons and are pursuing uranium, that Iraq has ties to al queda and are shown pictures of mobile weapons labs and you know, that they know, that none of what they are saying is true?
What do you call that? Would you call that lying?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:14 pmthe big question to the right wing trolls is – do you wnat another 800 dead troops or not
September 10th, 2007 at 4:14 pmThat statement was directly refuted by the FBI. He lied
Show me how he lied. His statement was based on some report given to him, whether later refuted or proven wrong by the FBI, does not make him a liar. He has to willingly know that the report was not true when making that statement – prove that.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:15 pmgenious?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:15 pm“the big question to the right wing trolls is – do you wnat another 800 dead troops or not
Comment by Tobey Tall ”
The answer is they don’t care as long as you don’t call bush or any of his lackeys liars.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:16 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Actually, millions of Americans did speak German in 1941, especially in Texas. They treasured their heritage.
But you’re not an American, so I don’t expect you do know anything about my country.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:17 pm.
onjazz – of course since you are obviously on that side. What a great comeback – did you attend community college or are you still in highschool?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Of course I’m on that side. I am well-educated, thoughtful, liberal patriot, not an ignorant, kool-aid swilling rightwing dolt following obediently at the heels of a lightweight frat-boy deserter-in-chief who is a world-class failure at everything.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:17 pmKeep up the good work John, they have no good arguments for you. It shouldn’t take too long for them to give up. Libs don’t have much of an attention span, especially if there’s something good on tv or someone shows up at their house with pot.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:17 pmI guess we could end all war and call back our troops so that they won’t get hurt anymore, let the emminant genocide begin in Iraq and watch yet another people attempt to completely wipe out a race or religion. Then with the vacuum left behind, we can watch Iran do what they say they are going to do on a daily basis, watch them completely destroy Isral with nukes only to have themselves destroyed with nukes – and I suppose non of this will impact our country. Ok, let’s do what you want.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:18 pmHere’s some evidence to show they lied John Sacks.
“Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.â€
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq has 500 tons of chemical weapons:
- Sarin gas
- Mustard gas
- VX Nerve agent
Not True
Zero Chemical Weapons Found
Not a drop of any chemical weapons has been found anywhere in Iraq
“U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein
had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable
of delivering chemical agents.â€
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq has 30,000 weapons capable of dumping chemical weapons on people
Not True
Zero Munitions Found
Not a single chemical weapon’s munition has been found anywhere in Iraq
“We have also discovered through intelligence
that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq has a growing fleet of planes capable of dispersing chemical weapons almost anywhere in the world
Not True
Zero Aerial Vehicles Found
Not a single aerial vehicle capable of dispersing chemical or biological weapons, has been found anywhere in Iraq
“Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people
now in custody reveal that
Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda
And implied that Iraq was somehow behind 9/11
Not True
Zero Al Qaeda Connection
To date, not a shred of evidence connecting Hussein with Al Qaida or any other known terrorist organizations have been revealed.
(besides certain Palestinian groups who represent no direct threat to the US)
“Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq has attempted to purchase metal tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production
Not True
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as well as dozens of leading scientists declared said tubes unsuitable for nuclear weapons production — months before the war.
“Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites.”
Bush speech to the nation – 10/7/2002
Iraq is rebuilding nuclear facilities at former sites.
Not True
Two months of inspections at these former Iraqi nuclear sites found zero evidence of prohibited nuclear activities there
IAEA report to UN Security Council – 1/27/2003
“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”
State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003
Iraq recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa
Not True
The documents implied were known at the time by Bush to be forged and not credible.
“We know he’s been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.”
VP Dick Cheney – “Meet the Press†3/16/2003
Iraq has Nuclear Weapons for a fact
Not True
“The IAEA had found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq.”
IAEA report to UN Security Council – 3/7/2003
“We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn’t let them in.”
Bush Press Conference 7/14/2003
Iraq’s Saddam Hussein refused to allow UN inspectors into Iraq
Not True
UN inspectors went into Iraq to search for possible weapons violations from December 2002 into March 2003
September 10th, 2007 at 4:18 pmShow me how he lied. His statement was based on some report given to him, whether later refuted or proven wrong by the FBI, does not make him a liar. He has to willingly know that the report was not true when making that statement – prove that.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
And here we have displayed the great right-wing commitment to “responsibility”. The prime tenet of this concept is this: if you have someone you can blame it on, then you’re not responsible.
No wonder they love G Dubious.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:18 pmhad a lie detector tied to him on that day when he made that statement, they you are just full of hot air.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Cheney’s statment was a lie, and he is a liar. There is no technical way around it.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:19 pmI apologize for the cut and paste.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:19 pmTROLLS! Back to your bathroom stalls. Our feet aren’t gay, & if we need any shit out of you, we’ll squeeze your heads.
Worst. President. Ever.
Hey Sacko, aren’t you supposed to be on Powerline today?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:19 pmTCF misses your misguided input.
The Oil law has stalled till after Ramadam – thats another 100 troops dead
then the law will be talked about for another two months thats another 200 troops dead
Meanwhile Maliki is dangling the oil covered carrot in Bushes face ( he cant resist it ) thats another 200 troops dead
27 existing Oil fields belong to the Iraqi National Oil company who by Christmas will have chossen Partners – - NONE ARE AMERICAN – thats another 300 troops dead
when the Oil contracts get sorted out – America will not get any
thats why you must leave NOW – -
September 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pmespecially if there’s something good on tv or someone shows up at their house with pot.
Comment by Another Chris — September 10, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
speaks the little projectionist.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pmOf course I’m on that side. I am well-educated, thoughtful, liberal patriot,
I don’t know how patriotic or unpatriotic you are, but I do know this you speak the words of a “koolaide” drinking radical left, so do believe that you are some free thinker. You guys and your so called “free thinking” always remind me of the goths that run around with their black paint and piercings claiming to be unique – laughable.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pmActually, millions of Americans did speak German in 1941, especially in Texas. They treasured their heritage.
And Hitler. Nazi Germany had many friends in Texas or was that Kennebunkport?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pmMany people still speak German but it is not the official language of the US my friend and to my point.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pmThat statement was directly refuted by the FBI. He lied
Show me how he lied. His statement was based on some report given to him, whether later refuted or proven wrong by the FBI, does not make him a liar. He has to willingly know that the report was not true when making that statement – prove that.
Comment by John Sacks
Ok, the fact that several years later he repeated the same claim, after it had been thoughlly debunked on meet the press and timmy (in true liberal media fashion) said nothing.
now, explain bush’s claims in the state of the union. in order for you to make the claim that we weren’t lied into the Iraq war you need to refute all the ‘allegations” of lying. so far you haven’t refuted one.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pmMakes you wonder how much Bush is paying Betrayus to keep the “war” going until the end of his term.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pmLets ask Al Gore about the Iraq threat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64
September 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pmif you were trully patriotic , you would put your troops first and get them out of Iraq and forget George Bushes OIL – cause he aint getting any OIL
September 10th, 2007 at 4:23 pm“Zero Chemical Weapons Found
Not a drop of any chemical weapons has been found anywhere in Iraq”
Incorrect
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=060622055545.07o4imol&show_article=1
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40754
Just a few links as proof.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:23 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks
Thank god we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would have invaded peru.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:24 pmMany people still speak German but it is not the official language of the US my friend and to my point.
That’s because there is no “official language of the US,” and the only point you have is under your hat, son.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:24 pm.
Thank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks
The uniformed always try and simplify a complicated situation. Disconnected historical references are rarely a good way for you to explain your position. Germany in 1941 and present day geo-political events in the ME are not to be compared. They have no connection and the situations are vastly dis-similar. You must do a better job of validating your support for this invasion using points and information which matter to TODAY. If there were no oil in the ME, we would not be there. It is that simple.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:24 pmespecially if there’s something good on tv or someone shows up at their house with pot.
Comment by Another Chris — September 10, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
I’m not much for tv
September 10th, 2007 at 4:24 pmLets ask Cheney about the Iraq threat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
September 10th, 2007 at 4:25 pmOk, the fact that several years later he repeated the same claim, after it had been thoughlly debunked on meet the press and timmy (in true liberal media fashion) said nothing.
State your references to that statement.
The fact that the administration jumped the gun to rush to war is not a lie, it might be considered bad policy but it is not a lie. The over use of this word has destroyed the left’s ability to have a reasonable debate about Iraq and has contributed greatly to the polarization of the people that we now see.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:25 pmUh0oh… we may have to recount the votes for Troll of the Day®…
Another Chris has just offered a World Net Daily link as substatntiation for a claim… classic troll move, sure to please the judges…
September 10th, 2007 at 4:25 pmBottom line:
If bush took a dump in an icecream dish these trolls would say it’s a chocolate sundae.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:25 pmJust a few links as proof.
“Proof” from wingnut daily? That’s a laugh.
1. mustard gas residue does not = chemical weapon.
2. old nerve gas (in a non-IRG shell, btw) so old and degraded that it couldn’t even kill two guys at point blank range does not = chemical weapon.
You lose again.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:26 pm.
I don’t know how patriotic or unpatriotic you are, but I do know this you speak the words of a “koolaide†drinking radical left, so do believe that you are some free thinker. You guys and your so called “free thinking†always remind me of the goths that run around with their black paint and piercings claiming to be unique – laughable.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
Now…dat..rite…dar..is..hee…haa…is down rite stoopid droolin’…
September 10th, 2007 at 4:26 pmand I suppose non of this will impact our country. Ok, let’s do what you want.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
Oooh, the scary brown people are out of control! what a racist snot you are, Johnny-gurrl. Saddam had this all under control, and you f*cked it all up, now you want to blame anybody but your and your bunch of fair-weather, non-serving, war-profiteering liars. We said not to do it, you said to do it. We were right, you were and are, wrong, at the cost of more than 650,000 lives and a trillion dollars. it’s hard to be more wrong, although you are cestainly capable of just that. What a crew of sociopaths you fellate.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:26 pmJapaner,
Great Gore link. I think they stopped the tape right before he said Global Warming doesn’t exsist.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:26 pmThe fact that the administration jumped the gun to rush to war is not a lie, it might be considered bad policy but it is not a lie. The over use of this word has destroyed the left’s ability to have a reasonable debate about Iraq and has contributed greatly to the polarization of the people that we now see.
Comment by John Sacks
You know what. for the sake of discussion, I’ll concide that one, now, what about bush’s state of the union address?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:27 pmJohn Sacks, are you ignoring the post of #167? They were the prominent reasons given by this administration to invade Iraq and have been proven to be false.
Symantics to call it lying or not. They were wrong and continue to be wrong.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:27 pmTrollbuster,
Just proving a point that a 2 minute google search provided articles about chemical weapons found in Iraq.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:27 pmNot really bobwurst, Bush has angered everyone with his stance on amnesty and his pushing of big government over the past 6 years. I am not a Bush supporter, I just don’t think this constant slinging of untruths like the “lie comments” is getting us anywhere. Just look at the liberals on this place (and most other blogs) with their personal attacks – either starting the attack or responding to a conservatives presonal attacks. You are all a joke and thank God the blogs are the only place you people can do any damage.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:28 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks
Thank god we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would have invaded peru.
Comment by Bobwurst — September 10, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
Sacks’ comment also speaks to the astonishing historical ignorance of “conservatives”. Neither Germany or Japan ever intended an invasion of the US, nor had the resources to do so, yet people like Sacks are trembling in anticipation of the magical Muslim invasion of the US, in which we all end up reading the Q’uran and Paris Hilton is no longer free to flash her junk on the Internet.
In their desperate attempts to legitimize the occupation of Iraq (not to mention the absurd invasion), they’re trying to associate it with noble efforts like WWII or even the American Revolution. They’re desperate and they’re ignorant, which is a dangerous combination.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:28 pmThe over use of this word has destroyed the left’s ability to have a reasonable debate about Iraq
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Wrong, John Sacks. What has destroyed the left’s ability to have a reasonable debate about Iraq is the lack of a reasonable opposition. Pure and simple. The Left can’t debate with a fixed-minded, uninformed counterpart that doesn’t respect priniciples of logic, reliance on demonstrable fact and the search for the truth. No one can.
And, unfortuantely, that is exactly what faces the Left in this debate.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:30 pmJust proving a point that a 2 minute google search provided articles about chemical weapons found in Iraq.
Comment by Another Chris — September 10, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
A 2 minute google search could also provide articles about the Flood and how dinosaurs and humans walked side by side. What’s your point?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:30 pmDaryll
You can’t handle the truth
Comment by Dermot — September 10, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
My belief is based on truth. Why can’t you admit that there is progress in Iraq. Just like you libs to look at the negative instead of the positive. Can any lib on this blog say one positive thing about Iraq? Do you respect the work of our troops. Jake D has revealed how your party dwells on negativity, pertaining to conservative issues. Prove him and me wrong.
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
September 10th, 2007 at 4:31 pmYou are all a joke and thank God the blogs are the only place you people can do any damage.
john sack
And how is this not a personal attack? how about when you question my patriotism? I notice that you are not addressing bush’s state of the union address. Am I to take your silence and attempts at diversion an agreement that bush lied then?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:31 pmHah Hughjazz calling someone else racist??? That’s rich!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:32 pmIf bush took a dump in an icecream dish these trolls would say it’s a chocolate sundae.
If Bush ate a dish of ice cream the libs would claim he was destroying the environment, hurting the poor, being imperialistic, creating terrorists, stealing oil, etc. etc.
When in doubt about anything, just blame Bush.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:32 pmAnother Chris has just offered a World Net Daily link as substatntiation for a claim… classic troll move, sure to please the judges…
Comment by trollbuster — September 10, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Don’t forget his other post, from Beitbart.com, a Dredge/Faux Entertainment partner. But even that article says the weapons were pre 1991 and these were sold to Saddam by Rummy and ronnie raygunz.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:32 pmJapaner,
Were you under the bridge on August 1st? You Trolls should know that living under bridges is dangerous business.
How’s that head injury? Any short term memory issues?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:32 pmThank God we didn’t have your type in 1941 or we would all be speaking German right now.
Comment by John Sacks
Thats strange coming from a neocon, most neocons think they did lose the war and would be better of if the germans had won ???
—————–
anyway Both my grandparents were killed in the war – but hey that was 1945 and I forgive the Germans , I have no qualms with them at all
BUT back to 2007 . yes the twentyfirst century –
1 year of peace and six years of war – things are looking bleak so far – so John why dont you go and get some toilet paper and empty your sacks its making you frustrated – -
September 10th, 2007 at 4:32 pmThe over use of this word [lie] as destroyed the left’s ability to have a reasonable debate about Iraq
Comment by John Sacks
So we should all assume that you were chastizing the right wingers when they were howling about the definiton of is?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:33 pmThank you General Westmoreland for your shill work. We can now piss away how much more money and the blood of how many soldiers so Bush can blame another president for his failures.
Oops, my bad, not Westmoreland, but Petreaus.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:33 pmDems join GOP in slamming ad attacking Petraeus
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/10/petraeus.moveon/index.html
September 10th, 2007 at 4:34 pmJust look at the liberals on this place (and most other blogs) with their personal attacks – either starting the attack or responding to a conservatives presonal attacks. You are all a joke and thank [your useless] God the blogs are the only place you people [what people you racist?] can do any damage.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Hypocrite much m0r0n???
YOU ARE THE JOKE!!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:34 pmIt’s a wonder why some of the TP’ers haven’t put on some black nike cortezes, drink some Kool-aid, hop in the bunk bed, tunr the lights out and wait for the comment, cause you’d think it was the end of the world.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:34 pm“When in doubt about anything, just blame Bush.
Comment by LibTeenie”
hey. yur funy.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pmComment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:31 pm
What’s positive about an occupation? What is the end game. How long are you willing to sacrifice american lives and create a debt that generations of americans will pay.
Why are we there? Why do you think we are there?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pmThis follows on the heals of the end of the cold war. I was born in 1974. I remember growing up with the constant “threat” of communism, and nuclear war. Funny how the USSR crumbled, and all of a sudden we have a nasty new enemy bent on world conquest. Pretty convenient…
September 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pmDaryll, don’t confuse respect for the troops and the mission that is decided by this administration. I have no doubt there may be some successes within Iraq that are directly related to our troops being there. I also know that long term security will not happen without Iraqis taking a vested interest in do so. When it was Bosnia the republicans hated the idea of being the world’s police but it’s fine now because it was a republican that started it.
Daryll, where is the truth in attacking Iraq?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pmCan any lib on this blog say one positive thing about Iraq? -Duhryll
I’m positive Iraq was a lie and our intent is to control their oil.
Any other questions, Troll?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:35 pmIf Bush ate a dish of ice cream the libs would claim he was destroying the environment, hurting the poor, being imperialistic, creating terrorists, stealing oil, etc. etc.
When in doubt about anything, just blame Bush.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
But what would the right say if he shared that ice cream with Bill Clinton?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:36 pmWere you under the bridge on August 1st? You Trolls should know that living under bridges is dangerous business.
How’s that head injury? Any short term memory issues?
Hooo boy, thats a good one. Im laughing on the inside, really I am.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pmHow can the guy responsible for implementing the “surge” strategy be considered credible when asked to comment on whether it’s working or not??? What am I missing? This is like asking W if burning fossil based fuel is contributing to global warming.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pmConservatives just like killing people . . . as long as other people actually do the killing and the Conservatives profit from it.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pmJohn Sacks (of $hit):
I patiently awaited your proof that Atta met with Iraqi agents.
Are you just ignoring me (like Exley), or have you not come across anything to back up your claim.
Because, seriously, if you cannot offer facts regarding my one simple request that was initiated by you, what makes you think that anything you post hence is worth reading?
Maybe you can randomly type talking posts, and Rush quotes, and someday, you’ll make sense.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:38 pmIke Skelton and the DLC bluedog TRAITORS have laid down the gauntlet…
…Skelton ordered anti-war demonstrators removed from the chamber…
…and threatened others with some legal bullsh*T…
…Skelton and ALL of the other DLC TRAITORS have got to be dealt with…
..if the people are going to take back our government…
…from Hillary to Rahm to Ike the DLC wing of the Democratic Party…
…is in league with the MSM to frame this Iraq debate as…
…We can’t affor to leave Iraq because chaos will ensue…
…BULLSH*T!
…first of all the rest of the world’s superpowers…
…Russia and China aren’t going to allow the world’s second largest oil reserves fall into the hands of “terrorist” organizations…
…they (Russia and China) are merely waiting for ALL of our trrop strength and treasure to be sapped to unrecoverable levels…
…Iran and Venezuela are waiting for the same…
…These TREASONOUS basta*ds in the House and Senate realize that the criminal Bushite junta…
…has created an untenable situation in Iraq where we’re DAMNED if we stay and DAMNED if we leave…
…but in the interim THEY (the elitists in the RNC and DLC) are going to make out like bandits…
…WHY haven’t the Howard Deans, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lees, and other prominent, stalwart ANTI_WAR Dems been given air time?
…Because the DLC and RNC and the Bushite controlled media want us to believe that Hillary and Iraq are foregone conclusions…
…Keep sleeping with these frogs America…
…and your plague is coming!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:39 pmSo we are or are not making progress on our optional fraudulent war? I mean if you are going to fight a war of aggression against someone that never attacked you then it is pretty important to make progress right? Or else you just violated everything you stand for just so you can end up ….what? Pretending like it never happened? Progress on becoming a colonial empire… nice… real nice…
September 10th, 2007 at 4:39 pm1 year of peace and six years of war – things are looking bleak so far – so John why dont you go and get some toilet paper and empty your sacks its making you frustrated – -
Comment by Tobey Tall — September 10, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
That is where your ignorance shows. Islamic fundementalist have been rising and falling for 1500 years and most recently with acquired oil wealth in the ME, they are on the rise once more. The modern terrorist war really started in the late 1940’s and only escalated greatly after 9/11. To think otherwise is to have your head in the earth’s ass – (burried in the sand).
September 10th, 2007 at 4:40 pmI don’t really find it surprising that Patraeus was deceptive about his statement on the Anbar Province – what does he really have going for him evidence-wise? I’m sure violence has not really been better or the levels of poverty going on. I wish we could focus on the extreme poverty that is ravaging this place. It is the underlying source for most unrest.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:40 pmre # 222
mr sack isn’t defending the bush state of the union address either. I guess he figures that it’s better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open his mouth and remove all doubt. (I don’t have a citation for that)
September 10th, 2007 at 4:41 pmI don’t really find it surprising that Patraeus was deceptive about his statement on the Anbar Province
At this point Jesus himself would be called a liar by the left if he supported one ounce of anything they disagree with. All of a sudden all of our military are liars now to these guys. Who are the real patriots?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:41 pmI was born in 1974. I remember growing up with the constant “threat†of communism, and nuclear war. Funny how the USSR crumbled, and all of a sudden we have a nasty new enemy bent on world conquest. Pretty convenient…
Funnier still when the dems complain that Bush has been ignoring the communist nuclear power nation of North Korea. We should just ignore them as the “threat” isnt real.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:41 pmFunny how some people claim that if Liberals were in charge in WWII we would “now be speaking German.” Considering Papa Bush was knowingly in business with the Nazis, it seems Conservatives would want to avoid the subject.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:42 pmBobwurst – you have no proof for your point of view, only your flawed opinions and regurgitations of your left-wing brethren. There is no point in even trying to talk sense withsome who speaks from a flawed basis. Enough said.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:43 pmDaryll, where is the truth in attacking Iraq?
Comment by hellinabucket — September 10, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
You may want to leave Parodyll alone. He just admitted to me that the jumpers on that fateful morning of 9/11 were commiting sin.
His cult has really messed up his head.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:43 pm#230. Real patriot is someone who fights for the United States and its Constitution (see: John Kerry), NOT someone who dodges the draft (see: George W. Bush / Dick Cheney).
September 10th, 2007 at 4:43 pmComment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
So you back the one’s that couldn’t figure this out before going into Iraq. If this has been the big scourge for so long don’t you think this administration would have put a better plan in place?
You are following a fool John Sacks.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pmand only escalated greatly after 9/11. To think otherwise is to have your head in the earth’s ass – (burried in the sand).
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
That part you got right. BushCo created most of those terrorists with his phony invasion and his “Mission Accomplished” Codpiece photo op. There was no need to go in, and even after he did go in, he had NO F’ING PLAN TO OCCUPY THE COUNTRY! We learned all about that aftet WWII, but that would take reading history, something the Commander Guy couldn’t be bothered with.
The Repugs will have to carry the guilt of this A$$KLOWN with them to their graves!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pmBobwurst – you have no proof for your point of view, only your flawed opinions and regurgitations of your left-wing brethren. There is no point in even trying to talk sense withsome who speaks from a flawed basis. Enough said.
Comment by John Sacks
September 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pmAllyou have is sophistry and dodge mr sack. you have offered no proof here either. you may not like what I say, but you haven’t refuted anything. you’re just a cut and run republican.
Bush was knowingly in business with the Nazis – Moore Koolaide from the left. Business with Europe was very commonplace among many – just ask Joe Kennedy. It is exactly this kind of dribble that continues to discredit the liberal koolaide driven rants. You guys all sound alike and you claim to be a “free thinker”.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pmflawed basis. Enough said.
Comment by John Sacks
If you can provide no evidence of the flaw then you look the coward unable to back up his BS…
September 10th, 2007 at 4:44 pmJake D has revealed how your party dwells on negativity, pertaining to conservative issues. Prove him and me wrong.
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Liberals are, in fact, negative pertaining to “conservative” issues, Darryl. Otherwise we’d be, well, “conservatives.” We believe your opinions to be wrong, in spite of your assertion that they are based on “truth” (part of your blinkered Taliban belief system), and we are exercising our right to express those opinions. You may think we’re negative, but we think you’re wrong. Desperately and dangerously wrong.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pmBobwurst – you have no proof for your point of view, only your flawed opinions and regurgitations of your left-wing brethren. There is no point in even trying to talk sense withsome who speaks from a flawed basis. Enough said.
Comment by John Sacks of $hit — September 10, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Back atcha:
September 10th, 2007 at 4:45 pmJohn Sacks, you have no proof for you point of view that Atta met with Iraqi Agents, only your flawed opinions and regurgitations of your right-wing brethren. But I will point that out to you even though you speak from a flawed basis.
’nuff said!
How can the guy responsible for implementing the “surge†strategy be considered credible when asked to comment on whether it’s working or not??? What am I missing? This is like asking W if burning fossil based fuel is contributing to global warming.
Comment by Don’t know nothin’
Or like asking a TPer anything at all. All you’re going to get is completely biased responses that rarely contain anything remotely resembling facts.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pmFunnier still when the dems complain that Bush has been ignoring the communist nuclear power nation of North Korea. We should just ignore them as the “threat†isnt real.
Comment by LibTeenie
What’s even funnier than that is that bush has settled for the same agreement that clinton had in place before he left, except that now N korea has 6 nukes where before they had none. good job bush!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pmI was born in 1974. I remember growing up with the constant “threat†of communism, and nuclear war. Funny how the USSR crumbled, and all of a sudden we have a nasty new enemy bent on world conquest. Pretty convenient…
I was born considerable earlier but remember when terrorists in Nicaraqua were “freedom fighters”
September 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pmWho are the real patriots?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
Not you, the ones who ignore the facts on the ground, and cleave to the lies of the few that benefit from dead soldiers and murdered Iraqi families. Teddy Roosevelt would spit on you and beat you to a pulp if he heard your treasonous worship of the weak, ineffective loser Bush, the worst president in US history, a failure who has proven his inability to win a war against the weakest country he could find that had oil. That’s a fact, sacks; he can’t win a war against Iraq, even after killing the leader and his family ( a real civilized move, by the way, just like the terrorists).
September 10th, 2007 at 4:46 pmBobwurst – you have no proof for your point of view, only your flawed opinions and regurgitations of your left-wing brethren. There is no point in even trying to talk sense withsome who speaks from a flawed basis. Enough said.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Translation: “my beliefs are true, yours are wrong because they oppose my beliefs. Your opinions are obviously flawed and mindless because they’re not my own. I am a great and wise thinker because I agree with myself.”
September 10th, 2007 at 4:47 pmSo Mr. Nut Sacks, please tell me which countries Germany invaded who were forced to speak German.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:47 pmThat part you got right. BushCo created most of those terrorists with his phony invasion and his “Mission Accomplished†– how ignorant is that – all of a sudden the Islamic Fundementalist movement came out of nohere because of that photo-op. What kind of history are they teaching these days?
This war has been going on for 50 years – mostly covert – sometimes overt in Iraq/Kuwait the past 15 years. Problem is that both the dems and the gop can probably do nothing to stop this war with Islam from continuing and it will probably go on for another 500 years.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:47 pmSeems like John’s Sacks is ashamed of Papa Bush’s business dealings with the Nazis. Of course, all Republicans should be ashamed of such activity . . . which is now the source of the Bush wealth.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:47 pmThis is like asking W if burning fossil based fuel is contributing to global warming.
Or asking Edwards if charging $50,000 to give a speech on poverty is hypocritical.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:48 pmWho are the real patriots?
Who gives a crap about your bullsh!t patriotism? Who judges who are the “real patriots”? YOU?
Take your patriotism and shove it.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:48 pmSeriously though, a lot of people on this site will blame bush for anything and everything they don’t like. Hughjazz especially is guilty of this.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:48 pmWe should just ignore them as the “threat†isnt real.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
doesn’t look like Bush has been to worried about the threat from North Korea either.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:48 pmOr like asking a TPer anything at all. All you’re going to get is completely biased responses that rarely contain anything remotely resembling facts.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — September 10, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
I dig the irony of your well crafted self collapsing post.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pmI was born in 1974
You have all the experience needed to solve the worlds problems right sonny?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pmHis cult has really messed up his head.
Comment by DRxJ — September 10, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
It’s not just cults, but, mainstream religions that corrupt the mind and make slaves of otherwise free thinking, curious, intelligent and loving people.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pmThe US troops dont even control the road from the airport to the greenzone after 5 years but the surge is working – get real
September 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pmBusiness with Europe was very commonplace among many – just ask Joe Kennedy. It is exactly this kind of dribble that continues to discredit the liberal koolaide driven rants. You guys all sound alike and you claim to be a “free thinkerâ€.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
Don’t let the facts stand in the way of your treason, sacks. Bush was funding Hitler, not Europe. Hitler. Remembe him? hitler was Bush’s partner. Remember the name of Bush’s partner: Hitler.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pmI care as much about old man Bush’s dealings with the Nazi’s as old man Kennedy’s dealing with them – nothing.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pma real patriot will question his country to ensure that the constitution is being followed and upheld.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pm#230. Real patriot is someone who fights for the United States and its Constitution (see: John Kerry), NOT someone who dodges the draft (see: George W. Bush / Dick Cheney).
Comment by Snidely Whiplash
Whoa, slow down there Snidely. Might want to rethink the Kerry as war hero angle. Seems like we put that notion to rest last time around…
Re. Bush — since when did he dodge the draft? Seems to me he was in the service training as a pilot, no?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pmSomebody needs to tell this guy to stop breathing into the mic.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pmComment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:31 pm
What’s positive about an occupation? What is the end game. How long are you willing to sacrifice american lives and create a debt that generations of americans will pay.
Why are we there? Why do you think we are there?
Comment by gnois — September 10, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
To liberate. You don’t believe that they should have the same liberties that we have?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:51 pmBush single handedly funded Hitler – lol at more stupidity. I love the way peole just make crap up on the left – but if Mr. Moore says so then it is gospal and all the spin that goes with it is truth.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:51 pmOr asking Edwards if charging $50,000 to give a speech on poverty is hypocritical.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 4:48 pm
He didn’t charge the poor, littleteeniedick, although that’s a detail you conveniently left out. You’re weaker than usual.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:51 pmThe right wing bloggers are out of their cages. LOL
They have been prep to try and discredit any means necessary.
I think the majority of the American public know what’s happening and that this adminstration doesn’t care about the troops, certainly not the Iragis, and the American people. It’s all about greed and power.
Wonder how this adminstration and the right wingers sleep at night, oh wait, “their” God is on their side.
The God I love would ever do what these people are doing in this name.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:52 pmInteresting comparison… Joe Kennedy’s son went on to become a war hero while Prescott Bush’s grandson went on to become a draft dodger.
Hahahaha!! Quite a legacy!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:52 pmI think the majority of the American public know what’s happening and that this adminstration doesn’t care about the troops, certainly not the Iragis, and the American people. It’s all about greed and power.
I guess that is why the approval rating for Bush is double that of the DNC controlled congress right now.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pma real patriot will question his country to ensure that the constitution is being followed and upheld.
Comment by hellinabucket
and will actually support the very people who are putting their lives on the line to protect the country! A real patriot doesn’t lie about supporting the troops while doing everything they can to give encouragement to the enemy.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pmYou have all the experience needed to solve the worlds problems right sonny?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
Never claimed I did. Nice of you to resort to a personal attack. I was pointing out that I grew up with the communist threat. The Islamic threat seems to be an extension of it. The need for a bad guy.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:53 pmTo liberate. You don’t believe that they should have the same liberties that we have?
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
So whom else do you wish to liberate? I say China would be best. What with their population this seems to be best in terms of cost benefit
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmWhoa, slow down there Snidely. Might want to rethink the Kerry as war hero angle. Seems like we put that notion to rest last time around…
Comment by Cynicon Implant — September 10, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
Funny how the Navy disagrees with you.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmPrescott Bush’s son was also a war hero and his grandson in the national guard. So you are saying that all of those in the national guard were draft dodgers? Credible statement.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmRe. Bush — since when did he dodge the draft? Seems to me he was in the service training as a pilot, no?
Comment by Cynicon Implant — September 10, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
No.
He used family influence to get in the Guard, jumping well ahead of others. In those days, that was a guarantee to avoid service in Vietnam. He didn’t even fulfill his requirements for Guard service. It was just one of the ways people, especially rich and politically-connected people, avoided service.
So, no.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmDaryll, don’t confuse respect for the troops and the mission that is decided by this administration. I have no doubt there may be some successes within Iraq that are directly related to our troops being there. I also know that long term security will not happen without Iraqis taking a vested interest in do so. When it was Bosnia the republicans hated the idea of being the world’s police but it’s fine now because it was a republican that started it.
Daryll, where is the truth in attacking Iraq?
Comment by hellinabucket — September 10, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Nice try. We’ve stated that we made a mistake, but we can’t fail the Iraqis. We must finish the mission. Do you believe in failing. Have you given up all of your life. If not, please give the troops the chance to prove victory. Stop listening to Hillary Clinton.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmThis war has been going on for 50 years – mostly covert – sometimes overt in Iraq/Kuwait the past 15 years. Problem is that both the dems and the gop can probably do nothing to stop this war with Islam from continuing and it will probably go on for another 500 years.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
And our going into Iraq did nothing but create more issues, and solved none. We had hard bases in Saudi Arabia, considered part of the Muslim Holy Land and now are creating hard bases in Iraq, an illegally invaded country and are now illegally occupying said country.
We have not studied the ME culture, history, languages so why should we expect to understand their position on anything; if it doesn’t match ours, then Cheney them!, right?
Explain why that isn’t cause for a response from the invaded country? But I assume you would not be pissed if YOUR country was invaded, huh? Naw, probably not.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:54 pmTo liberate. You don’t believe that they should have the same liberties that we have?
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
it matters more what they believe, Daryll. That’s the point of liberty.
You are stupid, aren’t you?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:55 pmHe used family influence to get in the Guard really? Did you learn that from Dan Rather?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:55 pmBush single handedly funded Hitler – lol at more stupidity. I love the way peole just make crap up on the left – but if Mr. Moore says so then it is gospal and all the spin that goes with it is truth.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
You conveniently ignore the fact that the congress lifted Bushco’s banking license because of his treason in WW2. Bush family traitors have a long, shitty history, covered up nicely by the rightwing media.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:56 pmExplain why that isn’t cause for a response from the invaded country? But I assume you would not be pissed if YOUR country was invaded, huh? Naw, probably not.
So you are making the moral equivalence between the US and a dictator led country friendly to our enemies?
September 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pmI guess that is why the approval rating for Bush is double that of the DNC controlled congress right now.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:53 pm
Wow. It’s been a week or more since one of the trolls trotted out this entirely-discredited bullsh!t.
DEBUNKING THE BS
September 10th, 2007 at 4:57 pmI guess that is why the approval rating for Bush is double that of the DNC controlled congress right now.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:53 pm
and half of Bill Clinton’s
Hahahahahahahahaha…LOSER!
September 10th, 2007 at 4:58 pmYou conveniently forgot that Bush is responsible for all bad things in the world today.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pmHe used family influence to get in the Guard really? Did you learn that from Dan Rather?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:55 pm
It’s old news and well-documented. Do your own research. Not even GWB ever denied it, and it wasn’t at all uncommon among politically-connected people of either party.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pmHarriman Bank was the main Wall Street connection for several German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler. He was later jailed by the Nazis for his opposition to the regime. Business transactions with Germany were not illegal when Hitler declared war on the United States (December 11, 1941), but, six days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act after it had been made public that U.S. companies were doing business with the declared enemy of the United States. On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of German banking operations in New York City. President Franklin Roosevelt’s Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order cited only the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), of which Prescott Bush was a director and held one share, which had connections with a Dutch bank owned by Thyssen.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pmHe used family influence to get in the Guard really? Did you learn that from Dan Rather?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:55 pm
what difference does it make who it was learned from? It’s a fact, well-known and easily proven.
September 10th, 2007 at 4:59 pmSo you are making the moral equivalence between the US and a dictator led country friendly to our enemies?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
where is the difference? Bush kisses terrorists, plays footsies with North korrea (gave up that plane mighty fast), shreds the Constitution. i see very little difference.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:01 pmSo you are making the moral equivalence between the US and a dictator led country friendly to our enemies?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
Dictatorship which we think might be helpful are A-okay though. Did someone say moral equivalence?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:01 pmwhat difference does it make who it was learned from? It’s a fact, well-known and easily proven.
Dan Rather was fired from CBS for airling false documents that supported such a lie – that is why I asked.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:01 pmFunny how the Navy disagrees with you.
Comment by ronjazz — September 10, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
Awww, Kerry is just a monkey in front of a camera, who cares about his military decorations
September 10th, 2007 at 5:01 pmThe right wing bloggers are out of their cages. LOL
Seriously, nothing gets them frothier than war “debate”. There’s nothing they love more than to preen and pose like real tough guys. As though they’re pulling triggers not sitting on their overfed behinds typing away. There’s nothing they love more than to try to put “extreme” positions in liberals mouths, to say “liberals want everyone to die and have to convert to islam and kiss OBL’s feet and be forced to cook dinner for Muhammed in a frock”. blah blah blah
You war pigs sit here and think that calling us names, telliing us we’re terrorist sypathizers, questioning our patriotism and masculinity, and claiming that we hate our country and want it to lose – that this is some kind of argument. That belligerant name-calling and ad hominem attacks are somehow going to convince us that we’re wrong.
Your arguments are horseshit and not one of your predictions or positions over the last 6 years has turned out right. You are like the pathetic losers 3 years removed from high school still cruising the campus, stuck in your glory days not realizing that your 80’s haircut, 10th grade education and rusty Camaro aren’t cutting it anymore.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pmNice try. We’ve stated that we made a mistake, but we can’t fail the Iraqis. We must finish the mission. Do you believe in failing. Have you given up all of your life. If not, please give the troops the chance to prove victory. Stop listening to Hillary Clinton.
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
At what point do you concede that “victory” is possible, Daryll? Are we to wait 10 years? 20? Jake thinks we should be willing to occupy Iraq for 50 years or more. Do you agree?
And remind us why you’re not in the military, since you’re so willing to commit Americans troops to an occupation with no apparent signs of success.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pmgummitch, I’m sure all the folks in the National Guard will be glad to hear you think they are “avoiding service”.
Why don’t you just admit it, you hate the military and any president who has the stones to use it to keep us safe.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pmComment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
Thanks for agreeing that Bush funded hitler, and was sanctioned by the US government for it. Now explain to me why you still follow these traitors.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:02 pmYou conveniently forgot that Bush is responsible for all bad things in the world today.
Comment by François — September 10, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
I’m so confused. I was told it was anyone named Clinton. Irrational blind ideology knows no party nor age barriers
September 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pmSo you are making the moral equivalence between the US and a dictator led country friendly to our enemies?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 4:57 pm
WTF is that? I said if ANY country invaded the US, would you be pissed. Having a Dictator for a Ruler doesn’t excuse an illegal invasion, even if it is the USofA. But you will blindly support any activity that BushCo espouses, just like the German people in pre-WWII Germany.
And, FYI, Saddam was hated by almost every other country in the ME, he was no “friend to our enemies”.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pmwhere is the difference? – so you ARE making the moral equivlence between Sadam and Bush – hence your flawed basis. Ok, you are wrong because your fact basis is flawed – and enough said.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:03 pmWhy don’t you just admit it, you hate the military and any president who has the stones to use it to keep us safe.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — September 10, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
Too bad he couldn’t keep us safe when it counted, and too bad he’s not keeping anybody in iraq safe. Details, details.
weaker and weaker you grow, wingnuts.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:04 pmAwww, Kerry is just a monkey in front of a camera, who cares about his military decorations
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
Especially when it’s inconvenient to acknowledge that the rich white boy actually served in combat when he could have easily gotten out of any service at all. Best pretend his medals don’t count, or make up filthy lies about how they weren’t deserved. If you can’t work around the inconvenient facts, just slander the man.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:04 pmA company of which he was a director and owned one share of – I call that being in the wrong place at the wrong time. He didn’t fight what was going on, he went along with it and dealt with the embarassment it caused.
If this is all you have to make these statements then your arguement is weak.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:05 pmwhere is the difference? – so you ARE making the moral equivlence between Sadam and Bush – hence your flawed basis. Ok, you are wrong because your fact basis is flawed – and enough said.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
I have to assume your weasally non-answer means you completely agree that Bush and Saddam are morally equals. Thanks.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:05 pmI’m so confused. I was told it was anyone named Clinton. Irrational blind ideology knows no party nor age barriers
Comment by dbadass — September 10, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
So true.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:05 pmwhat difference does it make who it was learned from? It’s a fact, well-known and easily proven.
Military service must have been quite the concern for you during the ‘92 and ‘96 elections when the non-vet Clinton ran against two combat veterans. Did you vote for Clinton’s adversaries?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:06 pmDaryll, what’s the mission? How many US lives is this mission worth? How much $ is this mission worth? How will we pay for this mission? Who will be held accountable for the original mistake?
Why do you ignorantly think I’m listening to Hillary Clinton? You are a very simple person with your logic.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:06 pmIt’s a well know fact that the “rich white boy” Kerry was running for office and needed a war credential so he went in and made up a bunch of injuries to get out early with Purple Hearts – then used it for political gain. I thought we resolved this swift boat thing last election.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:07 pmHe didn’t fight what was going on, he went along with it and dealt with the embarassment it caused.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
Says it all. Prescott Bush was a traitor to the USA. You’re doing all my work for me today, sackless. Nice job.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:07 pmNo use giving hughjazz the time of day… This is the lady who thinks Bush is Bin Laden Jr.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:07 pmhave to assume your weasally non-answer means you completely agree that Bush and Saddam are morally equals. Thanks.
Actually i believe they are moral opposites – you are the one making the moral equivalent statements then dodging the question. Enough said.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:08 pmgummitch, I’m sure all the folks in the National Guard will be glad to hear you think they are “avoiding serviceâ€.
Why don’t you just admit it, you hate the military and any president who has the stones to use it to keep us safe.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — September 10, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
Typical. The modern Guard is obviously not an escape from combat duty. When we had an active military that was filled from the Draft, it was, and it was extremely difficult to get into the Guard without influence. You’re probably not even old enough to vote, so you lack the historical reference.
I don’t hate the military, I hate the sort of puke cowards like yourself that are eager to send the military into combat for dubious goals and do so from the safety of your keyboard bunker. Typical of the cowards in this administration who studiously avoided combat during the Vietnam War while calling war resisters traitors. Now they send the children of those resisters to Iraq while still hiding behind their desks and calling antiwar people traitors.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:08 pmWhy don’t you just admit it, you hate the military and any president who has the stones to use it to keep us safe.
Comment by Cynicon Implant
How quidkly you forget that Bush ignored overt warnings and allowed bin Laden to fly two jet airliners into the World Trade Center and one into The Pentagon, resulting in the worst terrorist attack ever to occur on American soil.
That’s some job “keeping us safe.” Losers.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:08 pmI guess FDR was a traitor too then since his family had similar interests in business in New York.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:08 pmNice try. We’ve stated that we made a mistake, but we can’t fail the Iraqis. We must finish the mission. Do you believe in failing. Have you given up all of your life. If not, please give the troops the chance to prove victory. Stop listening to Hillary Clinton.
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 4:54 pm
At what point do you concede that “victory†is possible, Daryll? Are we to wait 10 years? 20? Jake thinks we should be willing to occupy Iraq for 50 years or more. Do you agree?
And remind us why you’re not in the military, since you’re so willing to commit Americans troops to an occupation with no apparent signs of success.
Comment by gummitch — September 10, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
I am supporting our country as a Goverment Contractor (IT). I’m testing web-based programs and giving IT consulting ideas that will enhance our ability to capture terrorist and prevent terrorists attacks from happening on our soil. Get my drift?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:09 pmMilitary service must have been quite the concern for you during the ‘92 and ‘96 elections when the non-vet Clinton ran against two combat veterans. Did you vote for Clinton’s adversaries?
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:06 pm
Did the left slander them and lie about their service? of course not; the Left respects the troops when they are defending Aemrica. Only the right slanders decorated, wounded veterans to make political hay with its ignorant, knuckle-dragging base. Only the right avoids service at all costs while mouthing off about their “patriotism”.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:09 pmJohn’s Sacks: Everything the Swift Boaters said in the ad was documented to be false. Care to try something else?
Hahahaha!!
September 10th, 2007 at 5:09 pmZOMG! The ambassador disappeared. Bush must have had him silenced for some reason!
September 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pmdon’t hate the military, I hate the sort of puke cowards like yourself that are eager to send the military into combat
Military excersises are decided by the Executive and Legislative branch of government, most have never served in the military. It is our system – a civilian led system with a military arm.
This logic always cracks me up because, to have it your way based on this the country would be run by the military. Is that what you want?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pmIt’s a well know fact that the “rich white boy†Kerry was running for office and needed a war credential so he went in and made up a bunch of injuries to get out early with Purple Hearts – then used it for political gain. I thought we resolved this swift boat thing last election.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
So either you were involved in spreading likes about Kerry or you swallowed those lies whole, in spite of eyewitnesses who came forward to refute them. None of the Swift boats liars was even in the area.
But you’re right, we did resolve this several years ago. It’s just that people like you can’t read, or refuse to read anything but the bullsh!t dished out by the Republic Party.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pmEverything the Swift Boaters said in the ad was documented to be false. Care to try something else?wrong.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI am supporting our country as a Goverment Contractor (IT). I’m testing web-based programs and giving IT consulting ideas that will enhance our ability to capture terrorist and prevent terrorists attacks from happening on our soil. Get my drift?
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 5:09 pm
yes, you’re a coward with a convenient excuse. loud and clear. Coward.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:11 pmIt’s a well know fact that the “rich white boy†Kerry was running for office and needed a war credential so he went in and made up a bunch of injuries to get out early with Purple Hearts – then used it for political gain. I thought we resolved this swift boat thing last election.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
Way to support the troops, JS. er – selectively support the troops, that is.
You can either claim the right to criticize Kerry for his actions while in uniform, or you can claim that anyone who criticizes Patreaus doesn’t support the troops. Your choice. Can’t have it both ways.
Just pick one principle and stick with it.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:11 pmBest pretend his medals don’t count, or make up filthy lies about how they weren’t deserved. If you can’t work around the inconvenient facts, just slander the man.
Not me, Kerry is a fellow Navy vet and I wont impugn honorable service; Im just confused about ronjazz calling the highly decorated Petraeus a “monkey” earlier in this thread, i.e. slander.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:11 pmComment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
That is one of the funnier things I’ve read all day John Sacks. You swallow the swiftboat BS and ask for more but won’t budge when independent studies show Bush has lied and pushed us into an unnecessary invasion of another country.
Your mind is already made up and that’s too bad because the fall is going to be so much harder for you when more and more people come to realize the errors of their ways in following this administration.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:13 pmThis logic always cracks me up because, to have it your way based on this the country would be run by the military. Is that what you want?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:10 pm
No, what we want is a little less cowardice and shirking of that military duty by those most eager to send the National Guard where it doesn’t belong, isn’t trained for and can’t win.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:13 pmDaryll, what’s the mission? How many US lives is this mission worth? How much $ is this mission worth? How will we pay for this mission? Who will be held accountable for the original mistake?
Why do you ignorantly think I’m listening to Hillary Clinton? You are a very simple person with your logic.
Comment by hellinabucket — September 10, 2007 @ 5:06 pm
We must liberate Iraq at all cost. I propose that the House/Senate add a tax increase to all Americans (including myself) to ensure that we have the proper funding to continue this war. We must finish. Oh, actually Bill Clinton had many chances to knock out these terrorists groups, but he felt it wasn’t important because of his pending case (bj). Also, you and Hillary have identical ideas/beliefs regarding the Iraq war. Do you support the troops.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:14 pmComment by John Sacks
How DO you do it? How do you in the very same thread attack those who question the integrity of a general who works for the most dishonest administration in this country’s history and in practically the same breath justify questioning the service record and integrity of a senator who served in the very same military? How?!?!?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:14 pmNot me, Kerry is a fellow Navy vet and I wont impugn honorable service; Im just confused about ronjazz calling the highly decorated Petraeus a “monkey†earlier in this thread, i.e. slander.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
No combat decorations, just political salad. simple really, like you.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:14 pmHow?!?!?
Comment by lefty — September 10, 2007 @ 5:14 pm
Bipolar disease along with sociopathic tendencies. it’s common among the chickenhawk class.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:16 pmNo, what we want is a little less cowardice and shirking of that military duty by those most eager to send the National Guard where it doesn’t belong, isn’t trained for and can’t win.
And what is cowardice in all of this? Give that a rest. Shrinking of the military – that I agree that you do want given the cuts we saw during the 90’s when Clinton had his way.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:16 pmI am supporting our country as a Service-Based Consultantâ„¢, preparing and providing fresh, delicious food items for busy consumers — some of whom may someday join the military. I’m helping to keep our nation healthy and well-fed, and enhance our ability to go after Islamofascistsâ„¢. Face it, you can’t pursue terrorists when your hungry, right Daryll?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:16 pm“chickenhawk” – a favorite madeup word by the anti-war left – kind of like homophobe my other favorite made up word.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmYou can either claim the right to criticize Kerry for his actions while in uniform, or you can claim that anyone who criticizes Patreaus doesn’t support the troops. Your choice. Can’t have it both ways.
Just pick one principle and stick with it.
Comment by trollbuster — September 10, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
This will surely not happen.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmJust pick one principle and stick with it.
Comment by trollbuster — September 10, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
Now THAT’S funny.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThis logic always cracks me up because, to have it your way based on this the country would be run by the military. Is that what you want?
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:10 pm
No. But your inability to separate “veteran” from “military” is clear.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmNot me, Kerry is a fellow Navy vet and I wont impugn honorable service; Im just confused about ronjazz calling the highly decorated Petraeus a “monkey†earlier in this thread, i.e. slander.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
LibTeenie, they do not respect the military. They are using our soldiers and officers for political gain. Personally, I think is sickening. They are just as sick as child molester, rapists, killers, etc. They would sell our country out for an ounce of gold. JUDAS!!!!
September 10th, 2007 at 5:17 pmAnswer my goddamn question Sacks!
September 10th, 2007 at 5:18 pmhear you think they are “avoiding serviceâ€.
Why don’t you just admit it, you hate the military and any president who has the stones to use it to keep us safe.
Comment by Cynicon Implant
188 national guardsmen’s names are on the wall in Washington. yeah people joined the national guard in the 60’s to get out of going to Vietnam. It was a different time. Are you going to argue that because national guardsmen are dying in Iraq now in record numbers that they served in combat in Vietnam? Really?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pmDaryll and John Sacks:
I appreciate your efforts, but you will never convince them. They can’t even point to ANYONE who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pmOnly the right slanders decorated, wounded veterans to make political hay with its ignorant, knuckle-dragging base. Only the right avoids service at all costs while mouthing off about their “patriotismâ€.
ONLY the right? Sorry no. The same Swiftboat veterans you have been maligning were themselves treated as shat by the left for their stance.
But back to the question: did you vote for the non-vet Clinton or his combat vet opponents, as military service seems to be such a high priority for you?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pmDaryll, seriously, friend, seek some counseling. Or at least some medication. You’ve got some real cognitive issues, dude.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:19 pmAnd what is cowardice in all of this? Give that a rest. Shrinking of the military – that I agree that you do want given the cuts we saw during the 90’s when Clinton had his way.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
shirking, moron. Another made-up word, which, idiot, they all are. You’re a fool and a tool, and can’t read or reason, so I’m done with you. Back to the gutter, go hang out with that smelly Frenchman i’m ignoring. I tried, but you can’t learn.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmThey would sell our country out for an ounce of gold. JUDAS!!!!
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
I agree daryll, that is why Bush and Cheney must be impeached.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmDaryll, Iraq has been liberated so you are already behind. The conflict has never been declared a war so maybe you should ask your congressman/woman to do that.
If you want to go back to Bill Clinton to blame then you should also go back to Ronald Reagan and GB senior because they created OBL when they supplied him with weapons and money to fight the USSR. Plus, that’s just dumb talk about any pending case. Stick to facts and you can continue to be debated. Resort to BS and you’ll get all that you deserve.
The original mistake was in reference to your earlier post stating going into Iraq was a mistake. So could you stay in the current argument and not jump to past presidents?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmI am supporting our country as a Goverment Contractor (IT). I’m testing web-based programs and giving IT consulting ideas that will enhance our ability to capture terrorist and prevent terrorists attacks from happening on our soil. Get my drift?
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 5:09 pm
If by “drift” you mean you refused to answer the question about how many years we needed to occupy Iraq, yes, I get it.
I also get that you think other people should be in the desert fighting while you sit in comfortable a/c buildings playing with web programs. I definitely got that drift.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmEverything the Swift Boaters said in the ad was documented to be false. Care to try something else? wrong.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
“Wrong” THAT is your response? Now we have the Troll Definitive Argument Award of the Day, Folks!
I take it you aren’t a lawyer, because that might not hold up in a courtroom, because it sure doesn’t here.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:21 pmLibTeenie, they do not respect the military. They are using our soldiers and officers for political gain. Personally, I think is sickening. They are just as sick as child molester, rapists, killers, etc. They would sell our country out for an ounce of gold. JUDAS!!!!
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
You really shouldn’t talk about Cheny that way, Daryll. he’ll shoot you in the face and then buy off the local cops.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:21 pm“chickenhawk†– a favorite madeup word by the anti-war left – kind of like homophobe my other favorite made up word.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Made-up words like “Islamofacist”?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:22 pmThe same Swiftboat veterans you have been maligning were themselves treated as shat by the left for their stance.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:19 pm
I see. So your position is that military service ought to protect one’s reputation in the face of evidence of lying and character assassination?
Got it.
Hey, folks, apparently, for Libteenie, if you were in the military, you can murder your wife and no one can say “Boo”.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:22 pmre # 287
Mr sack, for someone who recently criticized me for not using sources to back up my opinions, this post is embarrasingly devoid of sources. or do you only need sources for other people’s arguements.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:23 pm“chickenhawk†– a favorite madeup word by the anti-war left – kind of like homophobe my other favorite made up word.
Comment by John Sacks — September 10, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Yeah wouldn’t it be neat if the “homophobe” “chickenhawks” experienced some “enhanced interrogation” at the hands of the “Islamofascists”
“Talk Talk Elephant Talk”
September 10th, 2007 at 5:23 pmAnswer the question
September 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pmpatriot: “a person who loves, supports, and defends his/her country and its interests with devotion”
Notice that there’s no mention of “government” or “political party” or “president” in that definition.
Has there been military progress? No doubt. I’d sure hope that 30K more troops would have an impact. But the “progress” in Anbar is a result of the US ignoring the central Iraqi government and directly arming local groups. The “progress” is larged unrelated to the surge.
But there have been some pockets of progress. Is this limited military progress sustainable? Not without political progress. Has there been political progress. No. At least, none that can be seen by anyone but Petreus and the WH.
Oh, and the troop drawdowns – they *have* to start withdrawing troops by April, based on reaching maximum deployment lengths and rotation policies. Unless they want to change the rules AGAIN.
BTW, for all the GOP supporters. Honestly, how can you say that Bush supports the troops when he has tried to cut their pay, limit/eliminate their benefits, extend their tours, and says things like “bring it on!”?
Bush supports the war, not the troops fighting it. We support the troops but not the war. We’ve fought the GOP for proper equipment, limits to the length of deployment, increased pay and better benefits.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pmHahah, you think I’m French! Good job ignoring me hugh. I WAS ACKNOWLEDGED! I win.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pmYou really shouldn’t talk about Cheny that way, Daryll. he’ll shoot you in the face and then buy off the local cops
I dont know, you think that would be preferable to having him drive off a bridge, leave me to drown while he sleeps off his drunk and then buy-off the local cops?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pmAnswer… the… question… moron
September 10th, 2007 at 5:26 pmRemember that time hughjazz called the Iraqis ‘camel jockeys’? This is one caring lady, yeah.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:27 pmDaryll, I surely hope you aren’t talking about me when you say:
LibTeenie, they do not respect the military. They are using our soldiers and officers for political gain. Personally, I think is sickening. They are just as sick as child molester, rapists, killers, etc. They would sell our country out for an ounce of gold. JUDAS!!!!
Comment by Daryll — September 10, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
God and I know that doesn’t pertain to me so if you respect your view as being honest with God you had better recant that.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:27 pmlefty, sackless will never answer a straight question. if the talking points haven’t been emailed to him, he has no answers. forget about him, he’s diseased, his mind is jello. or koolaid. flush him, it’s better.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:28 pm“Not me, Kerry is a fellow Navy vet and I wont impugn honorable service;
Comment by LibTeenie ”
“Awww, Kerry is just a monkey in front of a camera, who cares about his military decorations
Comment by LibTeenie ”
What?!?!?!?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:28 pmHahah, you think I’m French! Good job ignoring me hugh. I WAS ACKNOWLEDGED! I win.
Comment by François — September 10, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
I knew I smelled something…
September 10th, 2007 at 5:29 pmHey Lefty, maybe we have to say please? I’ll try…
Please Sacks answer the question.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:29 pmSorry I was in stall #3 tapping away….
September 10th, 2007 at 5:29 pmWe support the troops but not the war.
Ill try to remember that the next time leftie kooks assault a soldier, vandalize a recruiting office, drive ROTC off a campus, try to stop a Blue Angels show or publish demeaning cartoons about the troops.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:30 pmmr sack doesn’t answer questions, he questions answers.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:30 pmCmon Sacks answer the question
and don’t give me any of that support the troops crap or some other idiotic slogan
September 10th, 2007 at 5:30 pmI dont know, you think that would be preferable to having him drive off a bridge, leave me to drown while he sleeps off his drunk and then buy-off the local cops?
Comment by Clipper — September 10, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
Oh, Cheney’s well ahead in the body count, well ahead. Kennedy, by the way, was charged and went through the system. Too bad about your ignorance, you’ll never get over it.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:32 pmIll try to remember that the next time leftie kooks assault a soldier, vandalize a recruiting office, drive ROTC off a campus, try to stop a Blue Angels show or publish demeaning cartoons about the troops.
Comment by Clipper — September 10, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
This is the part we have trouble explaining to “conservatives”. While Republicans and “conservatives” have no trouble walking in lockstep (one might even say “goose step”), liberals are encouraged to think for themselves. Some of them even make mistakes, which unlike “conservatives”, we are free to acknowledge.
So when we say “liberals support the troops”, we don’t mean that 100% of all liberals think exactly the same way about the troops. Just as when you say “conservatives support the troops” you’re mostly full of sh!t.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:34 pmWhat?!?!?!?
Look back a few hundred posts to see where ronjazz referred to Petraeus as a “monkey sitting in front of a camera”.
Ron waxed eloquent about John Kerry the veteran in the same thread he used to slander General Petraeus who is also a veteran (obviously); I was just pointing out the vast difference of opinion he had about these two veterans using his own words.
You ok now?
September 10th, 2007 at 5:35 pmCLAPPER you’re an brainwashed idiot. What exactly have you done to support the troops.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:37 pmThis Lib has taken in several into my own home for 9 months at a time to help them get their shattered lives together, you more than likely nothing as most repukians have.
My mother and sister paint portraits for the families of the fallen, you nothing.
So screw you and your BS about Libs not supporting the troops.
So when we say “liberals support the troopsâ€, we don’t mean that 100% of all liberals think exactly the same way about the troops. Just as when you say “conservatives support the troops†you’re mostly full of sh!t.
Comment by gummitch — September 10, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
Their “big tent” gets real small real quick.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:38 pmWhat?!?!?!?
Look back a few hundred posts to see where ronjazz referred to Petraeus as a “monkey sitting in front of a cameraâ€.
Ron waxed eloquent about John Kerry the veteran in the same thread he used to slander General Petraeus who is also a veteran (obviously); I was just pointing out the vast difference of opinion he had about these two veterans using his own words.
You ok now?
Comment by LibTeenie
Yeah, and you complained about it then smeared Kerry.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:40 pmOh, Cheney’s well ahead in the body count, well ahead. Kennedy, by the way, was charged and went through the system. Too bad about your ignorance, you’ll never get over it.
And that system certainly seemed to do the man well considering he caused the death of a young woman. He was charged with leaving the scene of an accident and received a two month sentence, suspended. Meanwhile Mary Jo is still dead, drowned while Kennedy waited until the next morning to notify anyone.
Too bad about your willingness to shrug this event off, youll never get over it.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:41 pm#364: I guess that’s all you could find to argue against, huh?
Are there some loons on the fringes of the left? Sure. Do I *really* need to dig up some of what’s been done by right-wing extremists?
My accusations against Bush are based on facts; yours are generic allegations. Even if you *could* back them all up with verifiable dates and places, do you really want to stack your list of “offenses” against what Bush and the GOP have done?
As documented in the new Bush bio, Bush wants to run out the clock on Iraq. He’s willing to leave the troops in the middle of a barely restrained civil war for another year and change just so he can walk away and leave it for the next president to clean up.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:43 pmYeah, and you complained about it then smeared Kerry.
You do understand that I was trying to point out to ronjazz that his 180 degree opinion of two different soldiers differed so much, based on nothing more than their supposed political stance, using his own words against him?
Whatever, I dont think you are able to understand.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:45 pmWhat we completely ignore about the Anbar “progress” is that we have caved into the groups who were killing our soldiers. Of course they will stop killing us for awhile during the time that we give them guns and money — the more guns and money we give them, the better.
Of course they will form armed militias to go after “al Queda” which means anybody who has a Shia surname or who is unwise enough to express any resistance to the takeover of their city by armed gangs.
Sometimes I can’t believe how gullible the American public is.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:50 pmThe trolls are desperate when they start pulling out Kennedy. Too funny.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:50 pmToo bad about your willingness to shrug this event off, youll never get over it.
Comment by LibTeenie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
No one shrugs it off. It was a terrible accident. So was this: LAURA BUSH
Teddy Kennedy benefited from his family’s wealth and political clout in Massachussets, just as GWB benefited from his family in Texas. Yet you’re more than willing to “shrug off” Bush avoiding military service. The odds are that someone else was drafted in Bush’s place. Did that person die? I dunno, but if he did, Bush holds some responsibility. Shrug that one off as well.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:52 pmI see I get to have the Petreaus Treatment used against me now; hysterical rantings that automatically portray me as what you want me to be without having the sense or the manners to actually ask beforehand and wait for an answer.
Not that it would matter now, if I were to list my involvement with veterans or even my own service you would write it off as lies and whine that Im a “brainwashed idiot”. So whatever.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:53 pmClipper, that was a bunch of nothing. Stand up man and show what you believe in.
gummitch, good post at #378.
September 10th, 2007 at 5:56 pmFYI to all of you!!! I had a meeting with several oil and gas engineers over the weekend. Some of the smartest and most dedicated people in the business. They informed me that crude oil will be in such high demand over the next seven to eight years, that every major country is now positioning themselves for it. There is not enough to go around for everyone, and by 2017, there will be wars to gain control of the crude market. World Wars. China, The Soviet Union, The European Union, Japan, and The U.S. will fight for control. The first place is Iraq. Of course we went there for oil. If we don’t win this war, our economy will suffer! That means our people will suffer. That means we will have to begin drafting our sons and daughters to fight another war, in the same damn place we are now, FOR OIL. Why do you think China and The Soviet Union are buildding and rebuilding their armied forces? Crude oil! Crude oil is the life line of any growing economy around thew world.
If you think life is bad now, wait until the next decade if we don’t WIN. I know you on the left want to stick your heads in the sand, act like children, and pretend you don’t hear or understand the world we live in! Get over it. You hate Bush..fine. But you better understand that not winning this war sends a message to all other countries; The worlds greatest Super Power with the worlds greatest Armed Forces, could not win in Iraq. They actualyl believe they can beat us based on the last two major wars, Iraq and Vietnam. And why? Because some hate Bush and want to destroy him. They’re tired of war! They will do and say anything to regain control of this country! Great. Because you don’t like one party, it’s ok to destroy the country!! They are laughing at how childish we are behaving and how seperated we are as a country. It’s a mixture that spells defeat for us. You hit when the enemy is weak! And we are weak right now.
Instead of calling me a troll and blaming everything on Bush and Cheeny; do some research on crude oil and it’s coming shortage. And look at the effect it will have on not only our country, but all of them. War is bad for all people, but leaders find it neccesary and unavoidable. They will fight for it!
September 10th, 2007 at 5:58 pmYet you’re more than willing to “shrug off†Bush avoiding military service. The odds are that someone else was drafted in Bush’s place. Did that person die? I dunno, but if he did, Bush holds some responsibility. Shrug that one off as well.
Last time I checked, NG service was military service. My entire point of this particular tack was that liberals didnt give a hoot about military experience when Clinton ran for office, if they had Clinton wouldnt have been elected.
Suddenly Kerry appears on the scene and the dems spend their time demeaning Bush’s ANG service as being inferior to Kerry’s combat experience.
The left didnt want to talk about veteran status when two combat vets ran against Clinton, yet it was all the rage when Kerry “reported for duty” complete with a salute and Bush became some dope skipping out on the war.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:00 pmCLAPPER – in other words you have done squat, nothing, nada.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:01 pmI served my 4 years in the service also. I believe that every citizen should have to spend at least 2 years of service (government, community, or military). Not very Lib like, but then again I do support our country and OUR CONSTITUTION which is something the present criminals in the WH and the repukes do not.
Instead of calling me a troll and blaming everything on Bush and Cheeny; do some research on crude oil and it’s coming shortage. And look at the effect it will have on not only our country, but all of them. War is bad for all people, but leaders find it neccesary and unavoidable. They will fight for it!
Comment by Johnny Swank — September 10, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
I won’t argue with your post but I will make one major point: WHY WON’T BUSHCO SAY THAT WAS THE REASON IN THE FIRST PLACE? We all know it, but they are chickenshats to avoid speaking the truth. Afraid maybe some of the Repug sheeple wouldn’t support an OIL WAR?
UHUH!
September 10th, 2007 at 6:03 pmClipper, that was a bunch of nothing. Stand up man and show what you believe in.
Why, Ill just get flamed. Look at the post I responded to and ask yourself if that poster will give any credence to what I say.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:03 pmI’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
Comment by Jake D. — September 10, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
bush did
September 10th, 2007 at 6:03 pmAgreed upside00. There will be a greater demand for oil throughout the world. The next president would do well to address this in a different light than the current one.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:07 pmCLAPPER – in other words you have done squat, nothing, nada.
Case in point: tried and convicted before the trial; this dude doesnt even have the common courtesy to use my actual moniker.
This site is a jokey echo-chamber.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:07 pmIn my post of July 19, “Training the Iraqis: A contrary view,” I reviewed the report of the Iraq Study Group (IRQ). I wrote–
September 10th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Instead of calling me a troll and blaming everything on Bush and Cheeny; do some research on crude oil and it’s coming shortage. And look at the effect it will have on not only our country, but all of them. War is bad for all people, but leaders find it neccesary and unavoidable. They will fight for it!
Comment by Johnny Swank — September 10, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
Fine lets use some of the money we spent on this war, and get our asses moving on using something besides oil. Then we could do two things in one fell swoop.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:08 pm1.) stop funding the very terrorists that are attacking us.
2.) Our economy doesn’t collapse when the world runs out of oil.
haha the libs cower with fear, pulling their timelines off the table, hiding under their desks when the commanding general walks into the room. oh man i hope giuliani asks petraeus to serve as vp on his ticket. america’s mayor and a 4 star general with a phd vs a first lady and a former muslim with no experience ahahhahahahahahhahahahaaahahahhahahaha
September 10th, 2007 at 6:09 pm1. I’m still waiting for TP to point to someone who actually dared to forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has.
Comment by Jake D. — September 10, 2007 @ 3:19 pm
TP doesn’t have to find us Jake. I pointed to the same thing, based on a number of MSM pieces. The NYT, in particular, had some fairly decent coverage on this effort by the local shieks and other tribal leaders, to run al-Qaeda, (again since there was never an al-Qaeda presence in Iraq BEFORE the US invasion and occupation) OUT of their homeland and their communities. They, ALONE, (with no assistance or recognition from any US entity in Iraq) decided this on their own behalf, and at least as late as a year ago, as the article explains, if you had read it.
So, this is not a US accomplishment, since they had already worked this out, and it’s only an “accomplishment†because the Iraqis did it, and not US.
And, what pray tell, DIDN’T he tell us about this “transformation†in Anbar province alone? The terms of this “transformation†require all of the concrete enclosures, razor wire, and miles and miles of check points. He didn’t mention that part of the transformation. He didn’t mention that Baghdad and other surrounding provinces have been turned into prisons, and that’s why it’s been “transformedâ€.
And no, 6 months ago, I couldn’t have told you that this much of that formerly sovereign nation would have been turned into another Gaza Strip or West Bank, or any of the other refugee camps that dot the Middle East landscape. I only knew that the Iraqis could and would eventually have to be the ones to handle their own security, and that the continued presence of the US military would prevent that from happening in any measurable way, that would guarantee the safety of that population.
And, THAT hasn’t changed. And, it won’t change until the Cheney team relinquishes its demands to pursue the theft of the resources of that same nation. They KNOW why we are there, and they don’t like it.
Meantime, BetrayUS is indeed full of the same BS that has emanated from the District of Cheney for over seven years, and its destroying us as surely as they have destroyed Iraq.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:13 pmhaha the libs cower with fear blah, blah, blah
Comment by liberals destroyed america — September 10, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
That would be brilliant, an unpopular, mob connected idiot, and a 4 star general that over half the country doesn’t trust. Man and I thought Fred Thompson was the republican daddy figure this cycle.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:14 pmWhen the Congress accepts those lies, we will all pay.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:15 pmGuliani is the best the republicans have? His own firemen from NYC wouldn’t vote for him. All he does is tout what he did for a city. McCain’s experience blows the cross dresser away.
PUt Guliani as the republican nominee. Please.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:15 pmThis site is a jokey echo-chamber.
Comment by Clipper — September 10, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Then leave. No one is forcing you to post.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:15 pmInstead of calling me a troll and blaming everything on Bush and Cheeny; do some research on crude oil and it’s coming shortage. And look at the effect it will have on not only our country, but all of them. War is bad for all people, but leaders find it neccesary and unavoidable. They will fight for it!
Comment by Johnny Swank — September 10, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
No argument; most US foreign policy for decades (or longer) has been based on a desire to control access to resources in other countries. We take it as our God-given right.
Rather than send young people off to war in order to control resources overseas, why not put some effort into seriously reducing demand for oil? Ah, that’s not the “conservative” way. We must be able to use as many resources as we want, regardless of the impact on the lives of others, here and abroad.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:16 pmAh, that’s not the “conservative†way. We must be able to use as many resources as we want, regardless of the impact on the lives of others, here and abroad.
Comment by gummitch — September 10, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
I would add now and in the future. Way to go Greedy Ol Pigs (GOP).
September 10th, 2007 at 6:25 pm>Comment by Johnny Swank
Congrats to you, for your honestly that in fact oil was a main reason (not the ONLY reason, trolls).
You’ve got more balls than most conservatives to admit that.
As gummitch said, heaven forbid we actually begin exploring substantiative ways to persue other sources of energy… no worry though, as soon as there is little oil left to fight over, oil companies will swoop in with some new technology.. they just need time to develop that technology…basically we are waging wars to buy time for oil companies to monopolize new sources of energy….
September 10th, 2007 at 6:27 pmCyrena:
If you “forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has” please provide a link.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:38 pmComment by the Mocha Messiah — September 10, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
If we spent HALF what Iraq has cost us in alternative energy research and development, we would not only have a viable alternative, but would be light years ahead on slowing the effects of Global Climate Change.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:39 pmTo continue on #401
And if we had done that, Dubya would have gone down as one of the finest Presidents and world leaders ever, instead of the worst president in our history.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:41 pmReturning to the question, the Sunni chiefs will join US as long as it furthers their interests. They will take US money and arms, as they prepare oust US when it is in their interests to do so.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:46 pm“basically we are waging wars to buy time for oil companies to monopolize new sources of energy….
Comment by the Mocha Messiah — September 10, 2007″
Awesome summary!
Chook.
September 10th, 2007 at 6:55 pmComment by John Sacks
Comment by LibTeenie
I don’t know about any of my fellow Liberal progressives on this thread…
…but I’m in awe…
…to be in the presence…
…of such a teenie weenie minority…
…the 5% of Bushite disciples…
…who are STILL able to fellate Patraeus and Crocker …
…with their gods Bushiva and L’il Dick’s members in their mouths…
…Johnny Sacks of Sh*t and GlibTeenie…
…APPLAUSE…
…what talented fascist TRASH…
September 10th, 2007 at 8:27 pmFirst, I must say that I couldn’t manage to read all the 400+ posts above but I did scan a great number of them and I did not see any real analysis of the 30000 soldiers Gen. Betrayus (hey, it fits) graciously will allow to come home in April. This surprises me greatly because I thought it was well known that the escalation aka “The Surge” was only sustainable due to the increase of our servicemembers’s tours to 15 months from 12 months. Well, unless all the pro endless war fascist Republican brown nosing cowards who spend their days with “other priorities” like the ones here supporting their dear leader suddenly put down their keyboards and pick up an M16, the only way to further extend the escalation aka “The Surge” beyond April would be through another extention of tours to 18 months. Since Gen Betrayus does not wish open rebellion within the military (Bad PR), they have chosen to let the escalation aka “The Surge” to come to an end in April. There is zero calculation going into this that concerns anything like “progress” it is simply when the clock will run out on the escalation aka “The Surge” period. Since Gen Betrayus has chosen to frame it as “hope”, I believe the reality is actually just spin. When what you are actually spinning are lives and 12 BILLION a week, I call that lying. I know that Republicans call it “What we do best” and that is because the only ideas Republicans have are “who do we kill next?” Republicans are scum and they know it. That is why they try to drag the rest of us down. That is what cowardly scum does. They can’t help themselves.
Anyway, I have a 100% solution to finding a way out of this mess. I believe we will find a consensus way out of this mess the minute basic training is up after passing a law reinstating the draft. In the law I would call for reporting to make sure rich people and their sons and daughters are handed an M16 (just because you have a Harvard MBA doesn’t mean you serve as a staff officer, you get an M16 too) and are sent directly to the areas where they can be killed and maimed for life at similar rates to the brave poor and middle class service people do today. (Personally, I would make rich people serve at twice the rate of the poor and middle class since more of what we are protecting is theirs anyway.) Anyway, I guarantee a near unanimous consensus to GTFO before the end of basic when THEIR loved ones would be put in harms way. There is one other possibility that I thought of. Instead of serving, all these rich kids, since they have the money, will give up their US citizenship and move to some other country at which time their parents can continue to prosecute this war that they have profited from so much. Even if this second possibility played out at least we would finally know that the national loyalty of the rich is conditional and, if this scenario would come to pass (I think at least a good number would choose this route) we would know that the loyalty of the rich should be suspect for good reasons.
Of course I don’t ever expect any of this to come to pass. Look who is in control of our government and media….Rich people…all of them. Obviously a few of them, despite being rich, are good loyal Americans. For instance a couple congress members family are in Iraq as we speak. I am sure though that their peers make it absolutely clear to them that they should never propose that they should behave similarly.
I could go on but I know I am just ranting and I have a life so I will stop. My points, in summary are:
1) The 30000 soldiers that will be coming home next summer were already coming home before Gen Betrayus graciously allowed them.
2) Republicans are modern day fascists who like to kill things with your money
3) Make rich people fight and die for their country and all of a sudden our foreign policy will be VERY, VERY different.
Chris
September 10th, 2007 at 9:10 pmThis is what a certain commenter was saying about Anbar, a little less than six months ago.
September 10th, 2007 at 9:52 pm>If you “forecast 6 months ago that Anbar Province would have been >transformed the way it hasâ€
Jake, there isnt enough money in the US treasury to bribe every local iraqi leader the way we’ve dumped cash to some key players in Anbar. Yes, I have no doubt, if we offered every single person in a position of power in Iraq several million dollars, like we have done in Anbar province (oh wait, its not bribes, its “aid packages”), then sure, yeah , we could probably have peace for awhile. nevermind that in reality, southern iraq and baghdad are the real problem.,.,, they are now controlled by the very same people that Ronnie Alizheimers was helping Saddam gas….
September 11th, 2007 at 2:59 amGeneral Petraeus = General Betray Us. Move.org got that right.
September 11th, 2007 at 8:44 am