posted
Can't wait to see the debate tomorrow night! I'm hoping Kerry will pressure Bush on his policies and make him buckle. If Kerry can get Bush to get off of his "script" he will be fine. Bush will just say "we will stay the course" every time Iraq comes up!
posted
I'll be watching, not crazy enough to tevo it though-glass.
should be rather boring. i'm there for the car wreck. I think kerry has a lot of selling to do, and i wouldn't be surprised if he breaks the rules and questions bush directly.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
this is what a lot of us have been spending so much energy trying to show everybody.... the war in Iraq has been mis-managed from day 1. there was never any need to have ANY of this happen the way it has....
the terrorists there right now are OUR creation....
the admin clearly says--BETTER OFF THERE THAN HERE--what else can that mean????
posted
Bush was told ALL of this would happen... he was told by the CIA, and the military. he has fired many for saying so.... the military people that he fired asked for more than twice as many troops to do the job correctly...the CIA people not only got fired, they even EXPOSED an operative, risking many long-term contacts lives...
if you subscribe to the theory that Bush is smart and has a plan, it's even worse....
cuz the plan i see is to keep Iraq unstable for an indefinite period of time so we can maintain a miltiary presence there indefinitely. this will require the draft that we are hearing rumors about.. and it will lead to HOLY war.
posted
you think bush created???? terrorists, hmmm..... maybe we should look at all the presidents that allowed all of the terrorist training camps to thrive and produce more terrorists than our soldiers.
i dont buy the "the war created it" theory, i am more likely to buy the killem before we get killed theory and iraq is a better place to do it than N.Y.
I would like to see us FLATTEN those parts of iraq and other terrorist training countries immediately! and without the U.N.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i agree with you about wiping them out Keith, BUT
that is not the Bush plan, that's what i've been trying to tell everybody for so long.
having a collective enemy is politically EXPEDIENT....
why is Osama still alive? we have the BEST recon forces in the world. they could have gotten him.
the Osam issue is a major flip-flop that Bush has done and nobody cares.... first he said wanted dead or alive, now he doesn't care...and Bush has said that in so many words....
why would we want to encourage terrorism in iraq? check out the price of oil....
eventually it may be our oil. why? because a democratic iraqi government won't get off the ground in a meaningful way ....so we will just have to run the place ourselves...
the propaganda machine is cranked up and has a full head of steam.....
if Kerry is for real (and i question that) he will slam Bush on these issues and Saudi tonight.
posted
Tonights debate should be interesting. Kerry is already whinning about the placement of the lights. Maybe he does not want his tan showing so well on T.V. His advisors said they were going to bring their own screwdrivers tonight to take down the lights. I hate how Bush is favored to do much better than Kerry, it puts too high of expectations on him. Thats why he did so well last year, because everyone expected him to do poorly. Tonight is make or break for Kerry. If he does not do well, he is done.
Posts: 1120 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
i agree with you currently its not the bush plan. i also think its not the kerry plan. i honestly dont think kerry has a plan though.
it seems that the sunni triangle is now down to two cities, a little slowly, but two. I think with the upcoming election there will be a lot going on over there from terrorists and hopefully nothing over here.
I assume when bush wins, and he feels he has more options he will hit those cities harder.
Here are the odds for osama:
What will be the fate of Osama Bin Laden before 12/31/05? (Note: first option to occur will win, all others will be losers)
Will be consigned to U.S. Authority (Dead or Alive) -200
Will be M.I.A. +150
Will join Saddam Hussein in a World Tour named "World Criminals Unite" +15000
Will visit T.R.L. as a guest +15000
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
my problem at this time centers around the facts that Bush DID NOT get elected the first time with a majority, and has behaved as though he won by a landslide. he is nowhere near to being a great leader or even a minor UNITER (as he claimed he would be) if he does win, he will continue doing WHATEVER HE WANTS cuz that's what he has already done.
posted
I ALSO find ALOT of fault in Bush admin - bettr of there than here - Actually by us being there and because of bush policy - more hatred towards us - more terrorists created - and more - so ultimately more -process feeds itself ,more to fight us and more to eventually attack here.
i am shocked at bush thinking. the sad part is kerry is not a leader either.
posted
I just wish that Kerry and Bush could have a TRUE debate. Most of the rules were but in place by BUSH!!! Heck if Kerry didn't agree with it Bush probably wouldn't debate!
Bottom line, if it was a TRUE debate I think the Kerry would crush Bush!
posted
I also hate the arguement of "better fight them over there then here"! If I was an arab I would be mad. Who to say they want us to fight on their land. I agreed with going into Afghanistan! But Iraq did not have bombers striking daily when Saddam was in power. Plus who knows the TRUE number of civilains who have been killed because of are actions.
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: I just wish that Kerry and Bush could have a TRUE debate. Most of the rules were but in place by BUSH!!! Heck if Kerry didn't agree with it Bush probably wouldn't debate!
Bottom line, if it was a TRUE debate I think the Kerry would crush Bush!
LOL-true but- bush would be hung if he didnt debate. kerry just rolled over again. says a lot for character
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osubucks30: I also hate the arguement of "better fight them over there then here"! If I was an arab I would be mad. Who to say they want us to fight on their land. I agreed with going into Afghanistan! But Iraq did not have bombers striking daily when Saddam was in power. Plus who knows the TRUE number of civilains who have been killed because of are actions.
The military calls it "collatoral damage"!
a lot of people hate that argument, but, it works for me. I hate the we created more now argument. Obviously bin laden is training none now, at least in big volumes, the terrorist camp in northern iraq is now not training anyone....
there are a million more but, ya gotta start somewhere.
Letting these places produce terrorists for the last ten years was the worst thing we could've done and we found out the hard way.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keith no Al-Queda training camps have EVER been active in Iraq PRIOR TO OUR INVASION according to CIN, CIA, and the 9-11 commission....
the only terrorism Saddam is known to have supported is palestinian, and that is a very different problem..... not to be ignored, BUT it has ALSO gotten ALOT worse since the invasion of Iraq.....
Bush's policies are making more terrorists RIGHT NOW than we are killing--PROVEN fact admitted even by Rumsfeld....
we are NOT safer today.... the world is NOT better off because we invaded Iraq....
we are launching a major offensive in Sammara RIGHT NOW against 2000 fighters. this city was off-limits to US troops by interim prime minister Allawi's directives...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited September 30, 2004).]
posted
i never said al-queda, nor did i mean too. yes there were training grounds for terrorists. yes sadam supported terrorism against palestine.
tell me how there are more TRAINED terrorists now than before. and if there ARE new, bigger or better training camps than there were in afghanistan i have missed something.
Are there more people in the middle east that hate us now since the first invasion, i find it hard to believe, did we create more terrorists going into kosovo?
If we attacked syria and iran tomorrow simultaneously and wiped'em out, would there be more terrorists....
or less...
[This message has been edited by keithsan (edited September 30, 2004).]
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rumsfeld admitted this stuff himself earlier this week.....
the terrorist training ground IS Iraq now.... this is the BEST way to build a guerrilla army.
think about the AK-47s the Iraq police and troops are getting back from US...how do WE track who is who???
in a gunfight the weapon is what you are trained to shoot....the uniforms aren't any better either. from what i see on TV they are in civvies....
how do you propose we attack Iran and Syria?? with bombs?? bombs don't win wars...troops win wars.....strategically we are hurtn bud..... i know you don't want to hear it. but there is a reason that the Natl. Guard is being used so much.
the repubs say don't mention the bad stuff--it encourages the terrorists...they don't care....they are going to fight to the death...that is their home...... you would too, if they were here.... we are going to have to kill a lot of people soon.
the Iraqi's didn't welcome US as liberators and they don't think Allawi is their leader..they think he is our puppet, and they are correct.....
Bush said they would welcome US as liberators even tho he was told differently.....again, is this lying or ignorance?? does it matter anymore?
posted
on the job training ok, i can take that for an answer. I dont want terrorist training and plotting to fly here swim here or walk here and kill us. they can learn and die there.
posted
General Ansar al-Islam is a radical Kurdish Islamic group that is supportive of Saddam Hussein's regime. This group is located in the pseudo-autonomous Northern Iraq. This group has ties with Taliban and al-Qaeda. It is the most radical group operating in the Iraqi Kurdistan region.
first paragraph i have a problem: Kurds are the ones Saddam was gassing....HMMMMM
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited September 30, 2004).]
more.... we supported Kurdish rebels after the gulf war...the Turks give us a hard time because of that support.....it is one of the reasons that we had such a hard time putting together a coalition....
who wrote this stuff??? there is no author or references listed!!!!
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited September 30, 2004).]
posted
Keith, do you realise this web-site has no author???? LOL it's just more propaganda.....
Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
bush isn't answering question 1..... same as always.... answer the question Mr. President... Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glass, neither one is answering the questions! Politicians both, not representatives of the people. What about the goddamn domestic issues? What about medicare? What about the huge debt? What about jobs going elsewhere? What about fair taxes? IT'S ALL A BUNCH OF CRAP!!!! Get off that Iraq sh*t. Enough said by either man. We are there, we must finish the objective and then we must get the hell out ASAP.
Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wallace this debate was about Iraq. there are 2 more debates about domestic issues..
i think Kerry won this one but not by much...
Bush looked to be a little tentative.... he also seemed to repeat himself alot..... like he didn't really know what to say.... Bush looked annoyed a lot...hmmmm
Kerry still needs to do more to take the election away from Bush if he really is behind.......
quote:Originally posted by glassman: [b] General Ansar al-Islam is a radical Kurdish Islamic group that is supportive of Saddam Hussein's regime. This group is located in the pseudo-autonomous Northern Iraq. This group has ties with Taliban and al-Qaeda. It is the most radical group operating in the Iraqi Kurdistan region.
first paragraph i have a problem: Kurds are the ones Saddam was gassing....HMMMMM
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited September 30, 2004).]
more.... we supported Kurdish rebels after the gulf war...the Turks give us a hard time because of that support.....it is one of the reasons that we had such a hard time putting together a coalition....
who wrote this stuff??? there is no author or references listed!!!!
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited September 30, 2004).][/B]
well, radical would be considered different, therefore, he was not fighting the radical ones. i.e. we are fighting radical islam not islam..... see the difference.
anyways, DD the hell out of it, i'm not backing that sight at all. I just know they were there, had the front end of an airplane and had terrorist ties.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Kerry ended up with a slight edge. Still rather close. Look forward to the domestic issues. That's where I think they will part ways more radically. Domestically, Bush is in bad shape as far as I am concerned.
Posts: 3607 | From: NJ - Outside Phila. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: I think Kerry ended up with a slight edge. Still rather close. Look forward to the domestic issues. That's where I think they will part ways more radically. Domestically, Bush is in bad shape as far as I am concerned.
i have been wondering why kerry hasnt been attacking that angle. since he was failing so far, i dont think we'll see a change in polls after debate, maybe a point either way.
supposedly good job news coming out, may be why kerry stayed away. we'll find out soon enough. (i know they couldnt discuss in debate)
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |