Let's impeach the president.

[Daseal]

I don't think a single democrat could have done it better.

Not sending us to Iraq in the first place would have been a good start.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Not sending us to Iraq in the first place would have been a good start.

See that's what he is talking about. All these Dems basically jusy say that. They have no answers other than "not what we are currently doing." That is why so many people look at the Dems as the party of no ideas. Of course just as many people look at the Reps as the party of bad ideas. Which is worse? I don't know. But years of doing nothing about Muslim extremists didn't do the job. It is time the Dems started saying what we should be doing to combat terrorism in general.

When people like John Edwards deny that there is even a war against terrorism it just shows have naive they are.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

See that's what he is talking about. All these Dems basically jusy say that. They have no answers other than "not what we are currently doing." That is why so many people look at the Dems as the party of no ideas. Of course just as many people look at the Reps as the party of bad ideas. Which is worse? I don't know. But years of doing nothing about Muslim extremists didn't do the job. It is time the Dems started saying what we should be doing to combat terrorism in general.

When people like John Edwards deny that there is even a war against terrorism it just shows have naive they are.

count me as one of those naive people. how the hell can you fight a war, when you really have no idea WHO the enemy is? time for us to pack our bags, and see how bad Iraq really wants a democracy. let them work for it, not have us there babysitting. and i always get a kick out of people that say democrats have no plan. can one person please tell what Geo. Bush's plan consists of? removing Hussein, and then what?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by dmek25

count me as one of those naive people. how the hell can you fight a war, when you really have no idea WHO the enemy is? time for us to pack our bags, and see how bad Iraq really wants a democracy. let them work for it, not have us there babysitting. and i always get a kick out of people that say democrats have no plan. can one person please tell what Geo. Bush's plan consists of? removing Hussein, and then what?

Well, before this war started, Bush warned us it would take a LONG time to complete. He was right. We will leave when we are at an acceptable level of terrorism. We can not irradicate terrorism 100%, it's impossible, but when there are still many attacks, clearly the job is not yet done and therefore we should not pull out. Otherwise the lives we lost would be in vain, and a disgrace to each family. No point in starting something you can't finish, but we (especially Dems) are a group of quitters. It's the American way.

Why do we as Americans think we know everything? I have no freakin clue what is REALLY going on with this war, and neither do you because the powers that be have no intentions of telling us what is truely going on. Why would they? 1 person is intelligent, but put 300 million people together, and we are collectively dumb sheep. Dumb sheep panic. We give great advice sitting in our nice AC houses and comfy sofas and only knowing half of the story at best...it another story in what is ACTUALLY going on.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Well, before this war started, Bush warned us it would take a LONG time to complete. He was right. We will leave when we are at an acceptable level of terrorism. We can not irradicate terrorism 100%, it's impossible, but when there are still many attacks, clearly the job is not yet done and therefore we should not pull out. Otherwise the lives we lost would be in vain, and a disgrace to each family. No point in starting something you can't finish, but we (especially Dems) are a group of quitters. It's the American way.

Why do we as Americans think we know everything? I have no freakin clue what is REALLY going on with this war, and neither do you because the powers that be have no intentions of telling us what is truely going on. Why would they? 1 person is intelligent, but put 300 million people together, and we are collectively dumb sheep. Dumb sheep panic. We give great advice sitting in our nice AC houses and comfy sofas and only knowing half of the story at best...it another story in what is ACTUALLY going on.

Let me get this, the public is too stupid to get the big picture so it might be best for the government to pretend it doesn't exist? Hmm, perhaps the government should educate the public? Naaah, an educated public is dangerous because it won't fall for bullshit easily. Keep the people fat, dumb, and lazy I say.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

See that's what he is talking about. All these Dems basically jusy say that. They have no answers other than "not what we are currently doing." That is why so many people look at the Dems as the party of no ideas. Of course just as many people look at the Reps as the party of bad ideas. Which is worse? I don't know. But years of doing nothing about Muslim extremists didn't do the job. It is time the Dems started saying what we should be doing to combat terrorism in general.

When people like John Edwards deny that there is even a war against terrorism it just shows have naive they are.

They really are not naive, they know that thier ideas are not in the best interest of the country but they figure the end justifies the means once they get in, you see if they attack someone it's for the good of the people, but if another party does the same thing it's us making the world angry at us. Thier platform as a whole is based on opposition of the repub's, that is why they are the party of no ideas, they just take an opposite stance to the opposing party and make that thier platform, and usually have no solution or regard for the consquences of that opposition, or a better direction once they get thier wish.

Case and point, they want to make the opposition to the war on terror thier battle cry, in so doing hoping to gain support from people tired of the war, yet what will they do if they do take over to secure the safety of this nation? Just sit back and do nothing? Just say we wont bother you so you shouldn't bother us? They will sit around in ignorance until the next attack, 8 years of dems [Clinton] and we were attacked how many times? They attacked the WTC in I believe 94' and failed to drop it, the USS cole and almost sunk it, and 2 embassies in Kenya, and Tanzania [not to mention a billion dollars a year to N. Korea while 10's of thousands of people starved to death so N. Korea could develope a nucluer program] and what was done? Impossed santions? That did nothing but allow Bin Laden breathing room to cultivate the 9-11 attack which I might add should be credited to Clintons legacy, he laid the ground work with his failure to go after Bin Laden and his ilk to begin with, now we should stop chaseing this vermin because someone want's to be president? I may be wrong about this but I don't believe we have been attacked on our soil since 9-11. Keeping the enemy on the run is the best defense we have right now. Something the Dems want no part of! And for all those that think pulling out of Iraq and leaving Al Qaeda alone will settle the hostility and bring peace? Good luck and God bless, because we are a target and alway's will be!

If someone wants to make the case that we shouldn't be setting up a new gov't in Iraq? OK, but to say that we are not safer now for having gone in thier and having wiped out thier gov't structure is foolish.

I say leave them to themselves, set a major military base in Iraq to keep a strong hold in that region to keep an eye on the entire middle east which would allow us to strike at a moments notice if they try any funny buisness over here, or anywhere else for that matter, and confiscate the oil fields it's about time the people responsible for this so called Jihad against us start fitting the bill!

Boy did I ever turn this subject around, and I wasen't remotly planning on it.

[Crazyhorse1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

See that's what he is talking about. All these Dems basically jusy say that. They have no answers other than "not what we are currently doing." That is why so many people look at the Dems as the party of no ideas. Of course just as many people look at the Reps as the party of bad ideas. Which is worse? I don't know. But years of doing nothing about Muslim extremists didn't do the job. It is time the Dems started saying what we should be doing to combat terrorism in general.

When people like John Edwards deny that there is even a war against terrorism it just shows have naive they are.

We should go to war against terrorism, which is a good reason for leaving Iraq, which is engaging in a civil war having zip to do with terrorism. The Iraqis are a decade or two away from getting it together well enough to terrorize anyone but each other. Osama's boys are slipping into Iraq for a little fun, which they wouldn't have the leisure to do if we attacked a country actually harboring terrorists and having an interest in terrorizing us.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Crazyhorse1

We should go to war against terrorism, which is a good reason for leaving Iraq, which is engaging in a civil war having zip to do with terrorism. The Iraqis are a decade or two away from getting it together well enough to terrorize anyone but each other. Osama's boys are slipping into Iraq for a little fun, which they wouldn't have the leisure to do if we attacked a country actually harboring terrorists and having an interest in terrorizing us.

Huh?

You think if we leave Iraq that terrorists won't move and set up camp there? You are out of your mind. They're there with us going around shooting them uyp. Imagine what a haven it'll be when we leave. Your entire statement ignores the real situation and is terribly naive. I'll agree they are in a civil war and I couldn't care less. What I care about is the fact that a country like Iraq in a civil war is a breeding ground for terrorists and terrorist trainging camps. That is fact.

[Crazyhorse1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Huh?

You think if we leave Iraq that terrorists won't move and set up camp there? You are out of your mind. They're there with us going around shooting them uyp. Imagine what a haven it'll be when we leave. Your entire statement ignores the real situation and is terribly naive. I'll agree they are in a civil war and I couldn't care less. What I care about is the fact that a country like Iraq in a civil war is a breeding ground for terrorists and terrorist trainging camps. That is fact.

You didn't understand my point. Why and who would they terrorize in Iraq if we left. Why would they use Iraq as a breeding ground if we carried the fight to their forces in Pakistan? The terrorists are after us, not Iraq, and the whole 'breeding ground" concept is nonsense; they have no ability to win power in Iraq, unless we win in Iraq and and hand over the government to our supposed puppet government, which strongly favors Iran and wants us gone. We are on the wrong side in Iraq. It's the group we support that is the greatest danger to us and will likely join fundamentalists in Iran. Our foreign policy, as forged by this president, is regarded as insane by the whole civilized world, including our own generals and the majority of the American people.l

The perception that Iraq would be a breeding ground for terrorists if we left is delusional PR from the White House. The actual breeding grounds are Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. The White House has been presenting us with the wrong enemy for years now. For oil? Probably.
From stupidity? Yes. Because it's been useful for profits for a few and a power grab by Chaney and Bush. Absolutely.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Huh?

You think if we leave Iraq that terrorists won't move and set up camp there?

A determined man can not be stopped. Anyone determined enough can become a successful terrorist. Besides it doesn't take much to get into the US. I personally crossed the board with Canada with little effort when I went to the boarder to pick up a family member. I didn't show ID and no one talked to me as I walked through the custom area. It is impossible to secure the United States. I'm not saying we shouldn't try but what transpires outside the country is really irrelevant to securing this country. You're not safe today and you'll never be safe. It's an illusion.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Not sending us to Iraq in the first place would have been a good start.

dems. & rep. both voted in support of bush to go to war in iraq.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

dems. & rep. both voted in support of bush to go to war in iraq.

and that settles that

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Dmek,

I agree that Bush lacked a realistic post-Saddam Iraq plan, but I definately agree that the Dems have no plan either. And, I don't think that you can justify the Dems' lack of a plan by referencing Bush's lack of a plan. I've got to admit, as much as I disdain Bush's politics, I disdain the Dems as much. I think FRPLG is right in that the Dems keep criticizing Bush (which is easy and scores a lot of points with the public), but none of them, when pressed, can articulate what they would do differently. Sometimes they speak in platitudes to avoid being held to those statements, but none of them offer anything of substance. IMHO, if you can't offer an alternative, you should probably be quiet. I strongly disagree with those who are calling for an immediate withdrawal, but I can at least respect them for presenting Plan B.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Dmek,

I agree that Bush lacked a realistic post-Saddam Iraq plan, but I definately agree that the Dems have no plan either. And, I don't think that you can justify the Dems' lack of a plan by referencing Bush's lack of a plan. I've got to admit, as much as I disdain Bush's politics, I disdain the Dems as much. I think FRPLG is right in that the Dems keep criticizing Bush (which is easy and scores a lot of points with the public), but none of them, when pressed, can articulate what they would do differently. Sometimes they speak in platitudes to avoid being held to those statements, but none of them offer anything of substance. IMHO, if you can't offer an alternative, you should probably be quiet. I strongly disagree with those who are calling for an immediate withdrawal, but I can at least respect them for presenting Plan B.

Well, it's not like the Dems are the only ones critizing Bush. His own party has had harsh critism of both invading and exiting Iraq.The fact of the matter is each day that goes on makes an exit strategy much more complicated. There are bad options and worse options at this point.

[FRPLG]

That's politics.

This type of reasoning seems to assume the Democrats all had a big meeting somewhere and decided they would espouse opposing views despite their negavtive effects. I am sorry but I don't believe that. I think there are politicians in Washington DC, both Dem and Rep, who are there just for power and will do anything to keep it. But I don't any entire party of people is made up of these people. Dems, I feel, honestly believe their views are right. Just like Republicans. My guess as to why the Dems "seem" to have no ideas is that the Reps ideas are often so black and white and built on logic(faulty or not) and the Dems views are built largely on emotions. Sometimes it hard to argue on emotion. Even if it is sometimes right. That isn't probably stated very well but I don't feel like spending 20 minutes writing a more complete response. Essentially I think you are wrong. Dems aren't the evil opposite decrying the conservative ways for no benefit other than their own. They simply disgaree and seem to have no solid ideas. At least on terrorism.