|
|
Post by GB on Nov 28, 2005 11:19:21 GMT -5
"War is too important to be left to the generals" I have a relative serving in Iraq. My relative wants out. I am a bit troubled by Bush saying that he is leaving the decision of a pull back/out of Iraq up to his "commanders on the ground". First Bush declared war, which only Congress can do. Next he is saying that his generals, and not the Commander in Chief makes the decision about continuing or ending a war. What's wrong with this picture??? Why, then, don't we leave the decision of patrolling convicts up to the prison guards? Or how about letting our kids decide what their teacher will teach? And what about Tandy's husband giving her daily instructions on how to run our agency (ooops, that's already happening)... but I thought that when we elected a president to command our military and make decisions about wars that he would make those decisions and not pass the buck to someone lower. I have heard a lot about Bush being a flip-flopper, a coward, a sissy, and a Camp David drunkard, but adding "can't make decisions" to these titles is a signal that we need this man out of the White House. Sometimes I think it would be better if Cheney was president... at least we'd know that as president he would be making the top decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by hadenuff on Nov 28, 2005 20:10:42 GMT -5
"War is too important to be left to the generals" I have a relative serving in Iraq. My relative wants out. I am a bit troubled by Bush saying that he is leaving the decision of a pull back/out of Iraq up to his "commanders on the ground". First Bush declared war, which only Congress can do. Next he is saying that his generals, and not the Commander in Chief makes the decision about continuing or ending a war. What's wrong with this picture??? Why, then, don't we leave the decision of patrolling convicts up to the prison guards? Or how about letting our kids decide what their teacher will teach? And what about Tandy's husband giving her daily instructions on how to run our agency (ooops, that's already happening)... but I thought that when we elected a president to command our military and make decisions about wars that he would make those decisions and not pass the buck to someone lower. I have heard a lot about Bush being a flip-flopper, a coward, a sissy, and a Camp David drunkard, but adding "can't make decisions" to these titles is a signal that we need this man out of the White House. Sometimes I think it would be better if Cheney was president... at least we'd know that as president he would be making the top decisions. I really thought you had more to say about your relative... Not another leftist answering machine! You are right, only Congress is supposed to declare war. Why, I remember well when Congress voted to declare war on Bosnia! Wait a minute...that was Clinton, wasn't it? Unfortunately, prison guards ARE in charge of the convicts, and I don't know which is worse. I know more about this subject than I wish to. A good Commander-in-Chief will leave battlefield decisions to his generals. Technically, the President is Commander-in-Chief ONLY during a declared war. I don't always agree with Bush, but for every false insult you may hurl at him, I can hit Clinton with three steaming piles of hurtful truth. Condi in 2008! |
|
|
|
Post by Youll see on Dec 1, 2005 13:08:01 GMT -5
Remember the Kurds that were gassed back in the early 80's. Remember them? The ones who Little Bush went on and on about, but whose daddy didn't give a shit about?
Yeah, those Kurds. They were insurgents against Saddam Hussein's government, or were supporting insurgents against Saddam Hussein's government. Saddam Hussein was trying to preserve his government, just like Little Bush is trying to preserve the new Iraqi puppet government. Same murderous techniques, different source.
Although, I can assure you, in trying to preserve the new puppet Iraqi regime, Little Bush has killed far more Iraqis than the number of Kurds Saddam Hussein killed.
But when Bush does it, you expect us to think that he's "promoting freedom". In a pig's fucking eye, my friend. In a pig's fucking eye.
|
|
|
|
Post by hadenuff on Dec 1, 2005 21:59:05 GMT -5
Your post is full of hatred for Bush, and little else. If you don't like the present "Iraqi puppet regime," why don't you write letters to newspapers and your representatives demanding that Saddam be put back in power?
Are you the same kid responsible for crapping up the forum with all this Bush-bashing? Get one name and stick with it, please.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cant find them on Dec 10, 2005 13:27:31 GMT -5
"What we will do, of course, is use our intelligence-gathering to see if we (can't) help locate them," Bush said. See if we CAN'T locate them? Like -- See if we CAN'T locate WMD?  Why don't we see if we CAN!!! If we're using USA "intelligence-gathering" -- WE CAN'T!!!! BUSH IS THE DEATH OF AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT! |
|
|
|
Post by hadenuff on Dec 10, 2005 18:14:33 GMT -5
Some of you have such a delusional view of America as the world's greatest villian, so why would you care what happened? Leftist political correctness is the threat to our way of life; those who push this Socialistic agenda make the bad cops look like knights in shining armor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chad on Dec 13, 2005 19:43:30 GMT -5
Q Since the inception of the Iraqi war, I'd like to know the approximate total of Iraqis who have been killed. And by Iraqis I include civilians, military, police, insurgents, translators.
THE PRESIDENT: How many Iraqi citizens have died in this war? I would say 30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis. We've lost about 2,140 of our own troops in Iraq.
Yes.
Q Mr. President, thank you --
THE PRESIDENT: I'll repeat the question. If I don't like it, I'll make it up. (Laughter and applause.)
|
|
|
|
Post by hadenuff on Dec 15, 2005 20:43:29 GMT -5
(crickets chirping)
|
|
|
|
Post by JDR on Feb 5, 2006 16:26:50 GMT -5
That's what usually happens after bush makes a speech. |
|
Why don't we see if we CAN!!!