War in Iraq: Defeat Without End

Joe Hill · 02-04-08, 06:06 AM

T'he sheer idiocy of the combined 8 years of NeoCons has now been institutionalized as "condition normal." The term, "a time table for withdrawal" means nothing, just as "the peace process" means nothing in the 50+ years of brutal israeli occupation of Palestine. America will not be able to afford to care for its own....except of course the very ones who benefit the most from wasting our treasury on Bush's Folly. "“This administration is so absolutely corrupt, incompetent and malevolent, it pales anything that came before it. Why is our economy tanking? The war, the war, the war.” John Sullivan, veterans for common Sense

War in Iraq

Quote:

War in Iraq

Defeat Without End

By Robert C. Koehler

03/02/08 "ICH" -- - “Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching . .” There it is again, that choking lie, so smoothly administered — with just enough fear to help America gag down all that righteousness. President Bush told it again in his final State of the Union address the other night, of course. What choice did he have? The truth, coming from him at this point, would be . . . too weird, too offensive, impossible to comprehend.

CUT

Consider the number 72,000. This number — of total U.S. battlefield casualties in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, through Jan. 5, 2008 — is simple enough, but as I ponder the fact that Paul Sullivan and his organization, Veterans for Common Sense, had to wrest it from the Department of Defense with a Freedom of Information Act request, and the fact that the only media outlet to pick up on it so far is the Scottish newspaper The Herald, I begin to grasp the extent of the deception in place sustaining the war on terror.

[See remainder. . . . . ]

War ... should only be declared by the authority of the people, whose toils and treasures are to support its burdens, instead of the government which is to reap its fruits. : James Madison (1751-1836)

MarcusMagnus · 02-06-08, 02:43 PM

Bush will never pull out of Iraq. He can't. To do so, will be admitting he was wrong. And he can't do that.

In 2009, any American president that pulls out of Iraq will be seen as admitting defeat and not supporting the troops.

bhkad · 02-06-08, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcusMagnus

Bush will never pull out of Iraq. He can't. To do so, will be admitting he was wrong. And he can't do that.

In 2009, any American president that pulls out of Iraq will be seen as admitting defeat and not supporting the troops.

There are two schools of thought.

The first school of thought consists of those who believe the President has been reluctant to reveal the entire set of reasons for the invasion because it would show him to have acted unethically or illegally.

The second school of though is comprised of those who think there were good reasons for the invasion, many of them are already in the open, and any others there might be are not revealed in order to protect National Security.

I believe you attend a different school altogether. But you want the support of those from the first school.

Well, they aren't going to join you because, unlike you, most of the other posters see that progress is being made and recognize, however vaguely, that even if they can't get behind Bush, they can get behind the mission NOW.

That's where, why and how you and the OP and a few others, are alone now.

MarcusMagnus · 02-06-08, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

There are two schools of thought.

The first school of thought consists of those who believe the President has been reluctant to reveal the entire set of reasons for the invasion because it would show him to have acted unethically or illegally.

The second school of though is comprised of those who think there were good reasons for the invasion, many of them are already in the open, and any others there might be are not revealed in order to protect National Security.

There are not two schools of thought. There's only the truth and the lie you made up to justify an illegal invasion. Bush said over and over again, Iraq has WMD. Iraq turned out not have any. So, either Bush lied or he was ignorant? Which is it?

The idea that the real reason is some national security issue is very undemocratic and unAmerican.

You need to prove it.

Quote:

Well, they aren't going to join you because, unlike you, most of the other posters see that progress is being made and recognize, however vaguely, that even if they can't get behind Bush, they can get behind the mission NOW.

That's where, why and how you and the OP and a few others, are alone now.

If what you say is true, then I weep for this board. Ignorance has taken hold and truth, justice and logic have fallen. Would be a sad day indeed if you were correct.

tecoyah · 02-06-08, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Well, they aren't going to join you because, unlike you, most of the other posters see that progress is being made and recognize, however vaguely, that even if they can't get behind Bush, they can get behind the mission NOW.

That's where, why and how you and the OP and a few others, are alone now.

I suppose I am amongst the few misguided individuals on this board that can't quite see the progress beyond the nightmare. Personally, I cannot get behind an invasion based on lies....regardless of its success (which is simply not an obvious thing to my limited mind). I do however, find it interesting that you feel accepted enough in this forum to speak for the membership en mass, when the vast majority find you to be rather silly.

bhkad · 02-06-08, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcusMagnus

There are not two schools of thought. There's only the truth and the lie you made up to justify an illegal invasion. Bush said over and over again, Iraq has WMD. Iraq turned out not have any. So, either Bush lied or he was ignorant? Which is it?

The idea that the real reason is some national security issue is very undemocratic and unAmerican.

You need to prove it.

If what you say is true, then I weep for this board. Ignorance has taken hold and truth, justice and logic have fallen. Would be a sad day indeed if you were correct.

He was ignorant.

Why should I HAVE to prove it?

You can't prove the story that you cling to.

And my truth is more reasonable, more logical and explains more than your story does.

President Bush's main error was in believing that the real truth and a real sense of Patriotism would be enough to keep America on the right path. And while it has, at least, been sufficient to prevent our leaving Iraq, it hasn't proven to be enough to prevent the legions of folks like you from being able to capitalize on our weakest brained Americans.

Well, you have succeeded in getting a large segment of Americans to believe your hypothesis is true, but as time goes on the REAL truth will prevail.

Your glory days are behind you.

bhkad · 02-06-08, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tecoyah

I suppose I am amongst the few misguided individuals on this board that can't quite see the progress beyond the nightmare. Personally, I cannot get behind an invasion based on lies....regardless of its success (which is simply not an obvious thing to my limited mind). I do however, find it interesting that you feel accepted enough in this forum to speak for the membership en mass, when the vast majority find you to be rather silly.

Hahahahaha!

Hoodie.

tecoyah · 02-06-08, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Hahahahaha!

Hoodie.

Seriously....is that really the best you have to offer?

It must be somewhat humiliating.

Mori Wanna · 02-10-08, 01:22 PM

Food for thought:

Quote:

Consider the number 72,000. This number — of total U.S. battlefield casualties in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, through Jan. 5, 2008

According to the DOD, the casualties for both Afghanistan and Iraq are 35,677 as of TODAY.

I don't know what methodology they are using, but most responsible folks who follow the death toll and wounded numbers usually wait for the DOD to verify the deaths or injuries. It seems the numbers are being padded for emphasis.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf

Again, you don't have to like the war in Iraq----I don't. You do not have to like the fact we went there in the first place, I don't. And every death and injury is just as tragic for the families as if there were 72,000, but exaggerating does nothing but diminish the anti-war side of the argument because it is not truthful.

Just my opinion.

Sergeant Stinger1 · 02-10-08, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcusMagnus

Bush will never pull out of Iraq. He can't. To do so, will be admitting he was wrong. And he can't do that.

In 2009, any American president that pulls out of Iraq will be seen as admitting defeat and not supporting the troops.

-
The best support we can show to our Troops is to pull them out as soon as possible.
-
BTW: You are right about bush.