wrote in message
...

On Feb 7, 12:47 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message

Another thing Bush warned us of, which is now often forgotten, especially
around the election cycles.
He warned us that it's going to be a long, long fight.

Eisboch



He also told us a long, long time ago that it was Mission
Accomplished......

Good grief, has that remark ever been stretched out of context and meaning.

He wasn't referring to the war on terror.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

On Feb 7, 12:47 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message

Another thing Bush warned us of, which is now often forgotten, especially
around the election cycles.
He warned us that it's going to be a long, long fight.

Eisboch



He also told us a long, long time ago that it was Mission
Accomplished......

Good grief, has that remark ever been stretched out of context and
meaning.

He wasn't referring to the war on terror.

Eisboch



As any good linguist or psychologist/psychiatrist will tell you, how words
are perceived is often more important than how they are meant. So, when Bush
used the term "Pakis" to describe Pakistanis, it didn't matter why he used
the term (ignorance, stupidity, a lame attempt to sound cool). The only
thing that mattered was that it's an insulting word, as far as many
Pakistanis are concerned. That trumps any possible explanation for using the
word. Case closed.

"Mission accomplished" falls into the same category, along with "This young
democracy" (describing Iraq). These tricks might work with kindergarten kids
and adults who think like children that age, but not with adults who've been
awake for 20 or 40 or 60 years.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


As any good linguist or psychologist/psychiatrist will tell you, how words
are perceived is often more important than how they are meant. So, when
Bush used the term "Pakis" to describe Pakistanis, it didn't matter why he
used the term (ignorance, stupidity, a lame attempt to sound cool). The
only thing that mattered was that it's an insulting word, as far as many
Pakistanis are concerned. That trumps any possible explanation for using
the word. Case closed.

"Mission accomplished" falls into the same category, along with "This
young democracy" (describing Iraq). These tricks might work with
kindergarten kids and adults who think like children that age, but not
with adults who've been awake for 20 or 40 or 60 years.


Holy crap! He was on the deck of a freeking aircraft carrier, complimenting
it's crew for successfully completing a current, but sort term operational
mission and deployment in support of the war on terror.

The fact that many take the comment as a declaration of victory on the
entire global war on terror is their screw-up, not his.

Eisboch

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:28:36 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

On Feb 7, 12:47 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message

Another thing Bush warned us of, which is now often forgotten, especially
around the election cycles.
He warned us that it's going to be a long, long fight.

Eisboch



He also told us a long, long time ago that it was Mission
Accomplished......

Good grief, has that remark ever been stretched out of context and
meaning.

He wasn't referring to the war on terror.

Eisboch



As any good linguist or psychologist/psychiatrist will tell you, how words
are perceived is often more important than how they are meant. So, when Bush
used the term "Pakis" to describe Pakistanis, it didn't matter why he used
the term (ignorance, stupidity, a lame attempt to sound cool). The only
thing that mattered was that it's an insulting word, as far as many
Pakistanis are concerned. That trumps any possible explanation for using the
word. Case closed.

"Mission accomplished" falls into the same category, along with "This young
democracy" (describing Iraq). These tricks might work with kindergarten kids
and adults who think like children that age, but not with adults who've been
awake for 20 or 40 or 60 years.


If he were referring to the war on terror, would that be worse than Obama
saying he's going to 'save the planet'?
--
John H

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:28:36 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

On Feb 7, 12:47 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
wrote in message

Another thing Bush warned us of, which is now often forgotten,
especially
around the election cycles.
He warned us that it's going to be a long, long fight.

Eisboch



He also told us a long, long time ago that it was Mission
Accomplished......

Good grief, has that remark ever been stretched out of context and
meaning.

He wasn't referring to the war on terror.

Eisboch



As any good linguist or psychologist/psychiatrist will tell you, how words
are perceived is often more important than how they are meant. So, when
Bush
used the term "Pakis" to describe Pakistanis, it didn't matter why he used
the term (ignorance, stupidity, a lame attempt to sound cool). The only
thing that mattered was that it's an insulting word, as far as many
Pakistanis are concerned. That trumps any possible explanation for using
the
word. Case closed.

"Mission accomplished" falls into the same category, along with "This
young
democracy" (describing Iraq). These tricks might work with kindergarten
kids
and adults who think like children that age, but not with adults who've
been
awake for 20 or 40 or 60 years.


If he were referring to the war on terror, would that be worse than Obama
saying he's going to 'save the planet'?
--
John H


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had already
happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he said "mission
accomplished".

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he said
"mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he said
"mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch



See how the meaning of words (and even actions) can be received differently
than they were sent? A pretty huge chunk of the country read the Shrub's
little show differently than you did. There's more, though: The president
does NOTHING in public view that wasn't planned for effect. I seriously
doubt his minders didn't take into account the various meanings that little
show might have to the world.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


No, it would not be worse. Bush was referring to something which had
already happened: 2.7% of the actual goal had been achieved when he
said "mission accomplished".


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch



See how the meaning of words (and even actions) can be received
differently than they were sent? A pretty huge chunk of the country read
the Shrub's little show differently than you did. There's more, though:
The president does NOTHING in public view that wasn't planned for effect.
I seriously doubt his minders didn't take into account the various
meanings that little show might have to the world.


You obviously know very little about the military.
That's ok though. Others take care of it for you.

The reason a pretty huge chunk of the country read the Shrub's little show
differently is because the media wants them to read it differently. And
people like you jump right into line.

Eisboch

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:55:26 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

Well, it's easy to get confused when Bush's speech, given that day,
included, "In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have
prevailed." While the *final* copy of the speech did not include
"mission accomplished", that is due to Rumsfeld, who stated, "I was in
Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just
died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it
back… they fixed the speech, but not the sign."

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:55:26 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


What goal?

To the crew of the ship, *their* current deployment mission had been
accomplished.
You still don't get it.

Eisboch

Well, it's easy to get confused when Bush's speech, given that day,
included, "In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have
prevailed." While the *final* copy of the speech did not include
"mission accomplished", that is due to Rumsfeld, who stated, "I was in
Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just
died, and I said my God, it's too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it
back. they fixed the speech, but not the sign."




Believe what you want. Doug's in the same line.
It doesn't matter.

Eisboch