Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
"John Gaquin" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message Yep as I recall the "plan?" was that our guys would be greated with food and flowers -- Bushes wet dream No, that's not, and never was, "the plan". That's a high-school level attempt at clever snideness. And it doesn't work. OK -- Since YOU seem to be privy to "THE PLAN" -- educate us as to Just what it was/is please. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...on_go_ot/sept_ 11_cia_warnings&cid=513&ncid=716 Excerpt: The CIA warned as early as 1995 Two or three generic warnings, several years ago and some years apart, that some or particular muslim terrorists might, at some time or other, want to attack highly symbolic American targets, or hijack American airplanes, does *not* constitute "...repeated warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack...". That level of prescience can be had at any working-man's breakfast coffee shop. Umnnnnn -- lots more than 2-3 -- sometimes more than that per day -- didn't you watch Fr. Rice? 3. Telling the American people that Iraq definitely possessed WMD, 26.34% Iraq *did* possess B & C weapons, and *did* have a nuclear program aborning. All past tense. So what? The last best intelligence is all anyone can go by. We know they had them. We know they used them. These are documented facts, and they are incontrovertible. We knew he had them because we sold them to him (wonder if the check was good?) He was ordered to get rid of them, and all evidence to date indicates that he did You forgot #5 5. Disparaging Army Gen. Eric K. Shinseki when he said more troops would be needed in Iraq, 1.71% I didn't forget, I ignored. Less than 2% thought it was a big mistake, and I agree. Shinseki shouldn't have publicly dissed his boss, and W shouldn't have publicly dealt with it. So now he (bush) has extended to duty of 20,000 troops Shinseki had a 50% chance of being right. No one really knew. Remember Winston Churchill's quote. Shinseki was in the field risking his ass -- Bush was probably golfing or fishing or something. Who has a better picture? last item. in future, please respond on the NG only. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
John Gaquin wrote:
That's a high-school level attempt at clever snideness. And it doesn't work. Didn't work for you 4 days ago in this same thread. You must have missed the second link in the original post. Help him remember by voting here. http://www.americanprogress.org/site...RJ8OVF&b=45639 -- __________m___~ΏΤ___m____________________________ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
"Jim" wrote in message news:cfEgc.2026 OK -- Since YOU seem to be privy to "THE PLAN" -- educate us as to Just what it was/is please. I never said I was privy to any plan. I merely pointed out that the notion that an army of 150,000 would have no plan for occupying captured territory is ludicrous on its face, notwithstanding what you read in The Guardian. The fact that a plan is not working is not prima facie evidence that no plan exists. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
"John Gaquin" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message news:cfEgc.2026 OK -- Since YOU seem to be privy to "THE PLAN" -- educate us as to Just what it was/is please. I never said I was privy to any plan. I merely pointed out that the notion that an army of 150,000 would have no plan for occupying captured territory is ludicrous on its face, notwithstanding what you read in The Guardian. The fact that a plan is not working is not prima facie evidence that no plan exists. So if I understand you, There was a plan nobody knows what it is, but it's not working? Yep -- sounds like Bush |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
"Jim" wrote in message news:Q9Mgc.1907 So if I understand you, There was a plan nobody knows what it is, but it's not working? Not *quite* right. Take out your spin, and you have "There was a plan, but it's not working". They are improvising and adapting. This is not at all unusual in combat. Most often it is the norm. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
"John Gaquin" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message news:Q9Mgc.1907 So if I understand you, There was a plan nobody knows what it is, but it's not working? Not *quite* right. Take out your spin, and you have "There was a plan, but it's not working". They are improvising and adapting. This is not at all unusual in combat. Most often it is the norm. " improvising and adapting" -- Isn't that what you do when there is no plan? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
You guys should put a poll together,,, ask if the net lives saved so far
justifies Bush's agenda? Ask if the figure 40,000 lives murdered each year (on average) that has stopped is something that Bush might have thought about. Because you morons would have criticized Bush had he done nothing and the 40,000 lives lost every year (on average) in Iraq would have continued. Do you morons believe that the Iraqi lives are not worth saving? Because you seem to have a problem with this "unexpected""" benefit that seems to have just happened without thought..... GYHAS "John Gaquin" wrote in message ... "Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c5us59 What was that plan? Oh...our troops would be met with gifts of flowers and virgins, or some nonsense. There were no "...repeated warnings of an imminent al Qaeda attack before 9/11..." Hehehe. Ignoring everything that has been revealed to date, eh? Wait, there is more to come. See my response to Jim, above. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
" Tuuk" wrote in message ... You guys should put a poll together,,, ask if the net lives saved so far justifies Bush's agenda? Ask if the figure 40,000 lives murdered each year (on average) that has stopped is something that Bush might have thought about. Because you morons would have criticized Bush had he done nothing and the 40,000 lives lost every year (on average) in Iraq would have continued. Do you morons believe that the Iraqi lives are not worth saving? Because you seem to have a problem with this "unexpected""" benefit that seems to have just happened without thought..... GYHAS From an earlier post 8,875 to 10,725. The minimum and maximum estimates of the number of Iraqi civilians killed in Iraq so far, 3,466. The total of American soldiers wounded in action in Iraq through April 17, 2004, 793. Total coalition soldiers killed in Iraq since the war began, 600. The number of people killed during the current siege of Fallujah 110. The number of coalition soldiers killed in November 2003 92. The number of coalition soldiers (65 Americans and 27 Brits) killed in March 2003 91. The number of coalition soldiers killed in April 2004, Also which of your numbers are we to believe -- in one instance you say "Ask if the figure 40,000 lives murdered each year (on average) that has stopped is something that Bush might have thought about." In another " "Do you know that the net lives saved so far is approximately 30,000 lives?" And to answer your question -- NO, I DON"T think Bush thought about it. I doubt Bush does much thinking at all. " |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
" Tuuk" wrote
You guys should put a poll together,,, ask if the net lives saved so far justifies Bush's agenda? Ask if the figure 40,000 lives murdered each year (on average) that has stopped is something that Bush might have thought about. Because you morons would have criticized Bush had he done nothing and the 40,000 lives lost every year (on average) in Iraq would have continued. Do you morons believe that the Iraqi lives are not worth saving? Because you seem to have a problem with this "unexpected""" benefit that seems to have just happened without thought..... Are you talking about the lives lost due to the US embargo on Iraq? If so, maybe you can tell us if the embargo is still enacted? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
( OT) Help your president
Come on,,, get with the program
"Don" wrote in message ... " Tuuk" wrote You guys should put a poll together,,, ask if the net lives saved so far justifies Bush's agenda? Ask if the figure 40,000 lives murdered each year (on average) that has stopped is something that Bush might have thought about. Because you morons would have criticized Bush had he done nothing and the 40,000 lives lost every year (on average) in Iraq would have continued. Do you morons believe that the Iraqi lives are not worth saving? Because you seem to have a problem with this "unexpected""" benefit that seems to have just happened without thought..... Are you talking about the lives lost due to the US embargo on Iraq? If so, maybe you can tell us if the embargo is still enacted? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
A devastating attack on the Bush Administration... | General | |||
) OT ) Bush's "needless war" | General | |||
The Bush Transcript...well, sort of. | General | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General |