and Bush's disapproval rate of the handling of Iraq keeps on slipping...

AND

war is costing us a cool 187 billion. Wow

http://costofwar.com/

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gunmen kidnapped a senior Iraqi Interior Ministry official Wednesday and the U.S. military reported the deaths of five more U.S. service members, the latest violence as Iraqi politicians struggled to meet a deadline for drafting a constitution.

A day after a group meeting of Iraqi political factions reached no consensus, representatives met privately on Wednesday to discuss the deadlock over the charter, less than a week before a deadline for parliament to approve it.

The kidnapping occurred in Baghdad’s Andalus Square. Gunmen stopped Brig. Gen. Khudayer Abbas, who heads the administrative affairs office at the Interior Ministry, as he was driving, forced him into another vehicle and sped away, police Maj. Abbas Mohammed Salman said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8870403/

So whadda ya wanna do, cut and run?

So whadda ya wanna do, cut and run?

What would I do? Beg like hell for some assistance from every country in the world to help us.

Quagmire.

What would I do? Beg like hell for some assistance from every country in the world to help us.

Quagmire.

Help us WHAT? Turn Arabs into Westerners? It’s not going to happen. These people do not WANT Democracy. We should not GIVE it to them, never mind ram it down their throats.

Yes - CUT AND RUN. When one makes a horrendous, near-slapstick blunder one does not ENDEAVOR TO SEE IT THROUGH TO ITS ODIOUS END.

Cut and run might be the smart play but it would not be an honorable solution.

Appeasing Islamofascists is not an option.

What would be the result of leaving? Abandoning a fledgling democracy to terrorists > giving Terrorism a state sponsored base of operations and logistical support > fortification of the terrorists sense of mission & weakening the U.S. and the West by being seen as punters when the going gets tough > escalation of attacks on The West

RIP Men....

Appeasing Islamofascists is not an option.

What would be the result of leaving? Abandoning a fledgling democracy to terrorists > giving Terrorism a state sponsored base of operations and logistical support > fortification of the terrorists sense of missions & weakening the U.S. and the West by being seen as punters when the going gets tough > escalation of attacks on The West

ROFL

Appeasing Islamofascists! We made an IDIOT mistake. There is no "fledgeling democracy". No matter when we leave it will get buried, and building democracies where they're not wanted isn't the business of the US Military. Terrorism already HAS state sponsored bases - in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. They don't need Iraq. The terrorists sense of mission cannot be further fortified, and the attacks on the West are escalating PRECISELY BECAUSE WE ARE THERE.

^ Drank the Koolaid then crumpled up the paper cup and ate it too.

You forgot to accuse me of being gay. Your bot is on the blink.

^ Drank the Koolaid then crumpled up the paper cup and ate it too.

You forgot to accuse me of being gay. Your bot is on the blink.

Neocon projection. How typical - can't defend the baseless talking points they regurgitate so they resort to this sort of copout. How very boring.

There is no point. The facts that Iran held a successful provisional election earlier this year (which the terrorists tried to disrupt), that a Constitution is being drafted, and that the formal elections are targeted for December/January are completely ignored by you and Your (Gay-Not Gay) Comrades. You are so focused on your hatred of Bush, that you want democracy to fail in Iraq. It's sickening.

Cut and run might be the smart play but it would not be an honorable solution.

Regardless, both of our opinions share a commonality: seeing the troops come home.

And both of our methods to acheive this are at odds to what's being done now.

^ My post up top: Actually,my comments were in reference to The General's post # 4 and not 86 Dude.


Moreover, I've even heard we should re-install Saddam as dictator, have him do a lil "house cleaning" (cause he know's who the insurgents are) and live happily ever after. That is - with Saddam back in power.


RIP Men....

What does that mean?

Moreover, I've even heard we should re-install Saddam as dictator, have him do a lil "house cleaning" (cause he know's who the insurgents are) and live happily ever after. That is - with Saddam back in power.

Good idea. I suppose with Stalin being dead Saddam is the only alternative.

There is no point. The facts that Iran held a successful provisional election earlier this year (which the terrorists tried to disrupt), that a Constitution is being drafted, and that the formal elections are targeted for December/January are completely ignored by you and Your (Gay-Not Gay) Comrades. You are so focused on your hatred of Bush, that you want democracy to fail in Iraq. It's sickening.

:D

The General just got here and even he realizes your debating skills are primitive...well maybe he's been here a while. Same truth applies though.

:D

The General just got here and even he realizes your debating skills are primitive...well maybe he's been here a while. Same truth applies though.

^ Personal Attack.

The General has spammed the board with disgusting Anti-Gay threads. It's not surprising that you and he are bonding.

^ Personal Attack.
The General has spammed the board with disgusting Anti-Gay threads. It's not surprising that you and he are bonding.

So what. He still figured you out rather easy. :(

So what. He still figured you out rather easy. :(

No. He just fell into line with the other Lefties on the board and added his voice to the Greek Chorus of moveon.org sloganeering.

Good idea. I suppose with Stalin being dead Saddam is the only alternative.

What we should have done in the first place was maintain free trade with Hussein.

No. He just fell into line with the other Lefties on the board and added his voice to the Greek Chorus of moveon.org sloganeering.

I hate moveon.org and in general would take a conservative over a liberal any day. I would choose Pat Buchanan over Bill Clinton (or FDR, or JFK, or LBJ, or Truman, or Carter) any day of the week. I am far more anti-left than I am anti-right. I am somewhat a proponent of the Old Right - who stressed military might, cultural unity, balanced budgets, nationalism, small gov't, low taxes, states rights, the 2nd Amendment and non-interventionism (before the Soviet menace). That doesn't mean I support neoconservatism, i.e. big-spending big-government expansionism and rampant interventionism, nation building and globalism - neoconservatism is the antithesis of True Conservatism.

General you really sound familiar to me. What was your former user name?