Another warmongerer in the White House? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-04-2008, 09:38 PM   #46
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
The occupation and prolonged involvement in Afghanistan is starting to look like a dumb war.

QFT, is, I believe, the 'internet-savvy' response to this.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 09:45 PM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
If you argue the case of the ticking time-bomb terrorist when Bush is president you're a Nazi, if you do it with Obama you're responsible
Er, no, that's bollocks right there. People accused Bush of being a Nazi when he invaded sovereign countries on trumped-up evidence. Whilst only a minority of anti-war people compared the Bush doctrine to Nazism, it is nevertheless an uncomfortable fact for Bush supporters that one thing Bush does have in common with Hitler is that both invaded sovereign states without provocation.

I have never once heard anyone accuse Bush supportets of being Nazis just for making the case of 'the ticking time-bomb terrorist'.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 10:01 PM   #48
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
Sure there was good work done, it's not as if anyone would seriously claim it was all for naught.

I just take issue with how you speak of Bush's plan being "so successful". which requires that you ignore so much of what actually occurred prior to Fall of 2006. Which was a solid 3.5 years and how many unnecessary casualties?
How many wars has the United States ever been in where mistakes were NOT made that led to "unnecessary casualties"?

If everything had gone right, what exactly do you thing the casualty level would be when you invade a country of 30 million people, that has already been torn apart by decades of war, dictatorship, and economic isolation and have to put down a violent insurgency and terrorist movement while rebuilding the entire country?
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 10:03 PM   #49
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
How many wars has the United States ever been in where mistakes were NOT made that led to "unnecessary casualties"?

If everything had gone right, what exactly do you thing the casualty level would be when you invade a country of 30 million people, that has already been torn apart by decades of war, dictatorship, and economic isolation and have to put down a violent insurgency and terrorist movement while rebuilding the entire country?
What is the casualty level, then?
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 10:06 PM   #50
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:09 PM
Quote:
I got a letter from the government
The other day
I opened and read it
It said they were suckers
They wanted me for their army or whatever
Picture me given' a damn I said never
Here is a land that never gave a damn
About a brother like me and myself
Because they never did
I wasn't wit' it but just that very minute...
It occured to me
The suckers had authority
Cold sweatin' as I dwell in my cell
How long has it been?
They got me sittin' in the state pen
I gotta get out - but that thought was thought before
I contemplated a plan on the cell floor
I'm not a fugitive on the run
But a brother like me begun - to be another one
Public enemy servin' time - they drew the line y'all
To criticize me some crime - never the less
They could not understand that I'm a Black man
And I could never be a veteran
On the strength, the situation's unreal
I got a raw deal, so I'm goin' for the steel

They got me rottin' in the time that I'm servin'
Tellin' you what happened the same time they're throwin'
4 of us packed in a cell like slaves - oh well
The same motherfucker got us livin' is his hell
You have to realize - what its a form of slavery
Organized under a swarm of devils
Straight up - word'em up on the level
The reasons are several, most of them federal
Here is my plan anyway and I say
I got gusto, but only some I can trust - yo
Some do a bid from 1 to 10
And I never did, and plus I never been
I'm on a tier where no tears should ever fall
Cell block and locked - I never clock it y'all
'Cause time and time again time
They got me servin' to those and to them
I'm not a citizen
But ever when I catch a C-O
Sleepin' on the job - my plan is on go-ahead
On the strength, I'ma tell you the deal
I got nothin' to lose
'Cause I'm goin' for the steel

You know I caught a C-O
Fallin' asleep on death row
I grabbed his gun - then he did what I said so
And everyman's got served
Along with the time they served
Decency was deserved
To understand my demands
I gave a warnin' - I wanted the governor, y'all
And plus the warden to know
That I was innocent -
Because I'm militant
Posing a threat, you bet it's fuckin' up the government
My plan said I had to get out and break north
Just like with Oliver's neck
I had to get off - my boys had the feds in check
They couldn't do nuthin'
We had a force to instigate a prison riot
This is what it takes for peace
So I just took the piece
Black for Black inside time to cut the leash
Freedom to get out - to the ghetto - no sell out
6 C-Os we got we ought to put their head out
But I'll give 'em a chance, cause I'm civilized
As for the rest of the world, they can't realize
A cell is hell - I'm a rebel so I rebel
Between bars, got me thinkin' like an animal
Got a woman C-O to call me a copter
She tried to get away, and I popped her
Twice, right
Now who wanna get nice?
I had 6 C-Os, now it's 5 to go
And I'm serious - call me delirious
But I'm still a captive
I gotta rap this
Time to break as time grows intense
I got the steel in my right hand
Now I'm lookin' for the fence

I ventured into the courtyard
Followed by 52 brothers
Bruised, battered, and scarred but hard
Goin' out with a bang
Ready to bang out
But power from the sky
And from the tower shots rang out
A high number of dose - yes
And some came close
Figure I trigger my steel
Stand and hold my post
This is what I mean - an anti-nigger machine
If I come out alive and then they won't - come clean
And then I threw up my steel bullets - flew up
Blew up, who shot...
What, who, the bazooka was who
And to my rescue, it was the S1Ws
Secured my getaway, so I just gotaway
The joint broke, from the black smoke
Then they saw it was rougher thatn the average bluffer
'Cause the steel was black, the attitude exact
Now the chase is on tellin' you to c'mon
53 brothers on the run, and we are gone
'Black Steel in the Hour of Chaos', copyright Public Enemy
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2008, 10:29 PM   #51
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

the major difference is the "set timeline" for "withdrawal." this was never the Bush position until he came around to adopt it shortly after Obama visited Iraq in June and Maliki endorsed his position. we'll get spin saying that this was always the Bush position, but it wasn't.
The Bush administration already had a time line for withdrawal in 2002, but it was CONDITIONS BASED. Provided conditions were right, more the half of all US troops would be out of Iraq by the end of 2003. By the end of 2006, the force level was supposed to be down to 5,000.

Quote:
the Bush position was to abdicate all control and command and responsibility to the generals and let them run the whole damn thing and with no timeline for a withdrawal.
Again, if you look at the actual National Security Documents that have been declassified the first withdrawal plan was already on the books in 2002.


Quote:
the distinction is that Obama redefined the terms to put an 18 month withdrawal as a goal, but one that obviously could shift based on conditions.
It was a 16 month withdrawal plan that he drew up in January 2007 as an alternative to the surge. There was NOTHING conditions based about it. You can read the plan in foreign affairs article he wrote on the issue or in the bills he sponsered in congress to begin an IMMEDIATE withdrawal of US forces with no pre-conditions to be met first for security and the rebuilding of the country.

Obama directly opposed the Surge which has been so effective in helping to rapidly defeat the insurgency, bring security, rebuild infrastructure, rebuild the military and police force, and allow the Iraqi government the time it needs to reconcile different factions in the country and build a stable government.


Quote:
the creation of a clear endpoint is much, much different from the Bush/McCain position of "stay the course" no matter the consequences.
Thats simply your fabrication of their position. Their position has consistently been to NOT withdraw prematurely causing the country to fall apart and eventually the need for the United States to re-invade under worse circumstances.

Obama's position as stated in his Foreign Affairs article, in the bills he tried to help pass in congress was to IMMEDIATELY begin withdrawing troops on the ground with all combat brigades to be out in 16 months REGARDLESS of the consequences since according to him it was not in the USA interest to be inside Iraq under any circumstance. Obama stated that he wanted all combat brigades out of Iraq by March 31, 2008!


Quote:
what's interesting is how moderate Bush has actually been in his Iraq policy since firing Rumsfeld and naming Gates. the Republicans swung to the left and adopted a much more moderate, centrist Iraq policy once Rumsfeld was ousted.
WOW! So you consider Bush's moves after "firing" Rumsfeld like increasing the number of US combat troops in Iraq by 33% to be a more "moderate Iraq policy"? Do you really think the Surge strategy was a move to the left? A more moderate, centrist Iraq policy?

Consider the fact that MAJORITY of congress opposed the surge, especially everyone with a big D or a little d next to their name!
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 04:24 AM   #52
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,562
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
How many wars has the United States ever been in where mistakes were NOT made that led to "unnecessary casualties"?

If everything had gone right, what exactly do you thing the casualty level would be when you invade a country of 30 million people, that has already been torn apart by decades of war, dictatorship, and economic isolation and have to put down a violent insurgency and terrorist movement while rebuilding the entire country?
I am certain there have been mistakes throughout each and every war the U.S. has fought, there were even friendly fire deaths and untold civilian deaths in the nearly flawless (as flawless as any way could be) Gulf War of '91.

It's not a question of everything haven gone right, it's a question of accountability.

This President, his administration and many of the loyalist Bushies who helped re-elect him in 2004, didn't want to hold them accountable for these mistakes. So much so, that they continued down this path after the writing was on the wall.

It's not a matter of conceding that bloody pointless battles (like arguably Okinawa, which happened to be a war justified by all sane counts) were mistakes, when the bigger picture was a success. It's having the accountability to stand up and admit incompetence. From the rationale for the war, to disbanding the Iraqi guard to Abu Ghraib, this laundry list is a mile long and yet NEVER did they change course until the '06 elections went against them . THAT IS A FACT.

And to answer your question about what the casualty level would have been, had some of these grave mistakes been righted, either sooner or before the fact (not existed at all) any objective person would claim that it would be certainly less than what it was, across the board.

The loyalists as yourself are dwindling by the day.
I think Bush has taken small steps towards his Mea Culpa.

I replied in this thread to your characterization of things.

With all due respect, you continue to be deluded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
'Black Steel in the Hour of Chaos', copyright Public Enemy
The best rap album ever. Takes a Nation of Millions....
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2008, 07:11 PM   #53
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
I am certain there have been mistakes throughout each and every war the U.S. has fought, there were even friendly fire deaths and untold civilian deaths in the nearly flawless (as flawless as any way could be) Gulf War of '91.

It's not a question of everything haven gone right, it's a question of accountability.

This President, his administration and many of the loyalist Bushies who helped re-elect him in 2004, didn't want to hold them accountable for these mistakes. So much so, that they continued down this path after the writing was on the wall.

It's not a matter of conceding that bloody pointless battles (like arguably Okinawa, which happened to be a war justified by all sane counts) were mistakes, when the bigger picture was a success. It's having the accountability to stand up and admit incompetence.
The alternative proposed by the opposition to the President was to abandon Iraq starting immediately with NO pre-conditions. While mistakes were made in policy after Saddam was removed, the policy was still vastly superior to what the opposition was proposing.

Relative to the more bloody and costly mistakes of Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, just how exactly should the current president "be held accountable"?


Quote:
From the rationale for the war, to disbanding the Iraqi guard to Abu Ghraib, this laundry list is a mile long and yet NEVER did they change course until the '06 elections went against them . THAT IS A FACT.
I have yet to see anyone successfully defend the idea that the security of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Persian Gulf would somehow be better off if Saddam were left in power. There are serious reasons why Saddam had to be removed. Saddam's violations were more than enough to justify his removal, especially given the fact that the United States had tried everything short of war from 1991 to 2003 to successfully resolve the problem. Ultimately, the only thing that actually did work and finally enforced the resolutions was Saddam's removal.

The idea that the administration did not change any of their policies or plans as the situation changed on the ground in Iraq, or until the Democrats gained control of congress, is false. While the most significant changes came with the surge, the planning for that phase started in the middle of 2006, BEFORE the November 2006 elections.


Quote:
And to answer your question about what the casualty level would have been, had some of these grave mistakes been righted, either sooner or before the fact (not existed at all) any objective person would claim that it would be certainly less than what it was, across the board.
One could say the same thing about the more bloody and costly mistakes of Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, LBJ, and Nixon.

Quote:
The loyalists as yourself are dwindling by the day.
Actually their increasing as the casualties drop in Iraq and the overall situation improves. That leaves loyalist opposed to the removal of Saddam defending the idea the the region would be better off with Saddam in power today.


Quote:
I think Bush has taken small steps towards his Mea Culpa.
Like what Bush said today?

Quote:
"In a world where terrorists armed with box cutters had just killed nearly 3,000 people, America had to decide whether we could tolerate a sworn enemy that acted belligerently, that supported terror and that intelligence agencies around the world believed had weapons of mass destruction,"

"It was clear to me, it was clear to members of both political parties, and to many leaders around the world that after Sept. 11, that was a risk we could not afford to take,"


Quote:
With all due respect, you continue to be deluded.
The only people who are deluded are those who can't detach themselves from the presidential politics that surrounds the issue and look at the issue objectively from the interest of the United States and the world as well as understanding the history of the region, Saddam, and the details of what actually occured prior to George Bush coming to office and understanding why the Persian Gulf has been so vital to US and global security for decades, and how and why Saddam threatened that, not just in 2003, but for much of his time in power.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 01:19 AM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,562
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Relative to the more bloody and costly mistakes of Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, just how exactly should the current president "be held accountable"?
He should be held accountable relative to the truth.
Currently, you fall short of that mark.
That makes you part of the moronic lower quarter.


Quote:
There are serious reasons why Saddam had to be removed.
You don't say? Really? This is a novel argument. And this is also sarcasm.


Quote:
The idea that the administration did not change any of their policies or plans as the situation changed on the ground in Iraq, or until the Democrats gained control of congress, is false. While the most significant changes came with the surge, the planning for that phase started in the middle of 2006
Even accepting your 'data', that leaves a solid 3 years prior.
Don't cry, I am not impervious to truth, your 'charges' don't work very well outside of partisan exchanges. So, would you like to talk about the first THREE years of the war or NOT?

You may make 'hay' talking to simpletons but recharge your batteries, dude.

Quote:
The only people who are deluded are those who can't detach themselves from the presidential politics that surrounds the issue and look at the issue objectively from the interest of the United States and the world as well as understanding the history of the region
Quite possibly (and this is saying a LOT) the most ironic post in FYM history
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 01:23 PM   #55
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 06:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
He should be held accountable relative to the truth.
He has been, probably in more ways than some previous Presidents have been.



Quote:
Currently, you fall short of that mark.

That makes you part of the moronic lower quarter.

You don't say? Really? This is a novel argument. And this is also sarcasm.

Don't cry, I am not impervious to truth, your 'charges' don't work very well outside of partisan exchanges.

You may make 'hay' talking to simpletons but recharge your batteries, dude.

Quite possibly (and this is saying a LOT) the most ironic post in FYM history
I have and continue to be interested in talking about something that is at least remotely related to the topic of this thread. Your above statements indicate that you would rather talk about someone or something else though.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 04:31 PM   #56
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,725
Local Time: 01:09 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
It's not a question of everything haven gone right, it's a question of accountability.

This President, his administration and many of the loyalist Bushies who helped re-elect him in 2004, didn't want to hold them accountable for these mistakes.
That's why the entire body of voters decide accountability, not just Bush supporters. And voters have been pretty clear the past two election cycles.

I'm not sure what you reasonably expect a sitting president to admit, except that he wishes some situations had played out differently. It's not exactly in a politician's DNA to admit absolute fault.
__________________
Bluer White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 04:34 PM   #57
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Flyover country
Posts: 12,768
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
He should be held accountable relative to the truth.
Currently, you fall short of that mark.
That makes you part of the moronic lower quarter.
The point could be made without resorting to insults.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
I'm not sure what you reasonably expect a sitting president to admit, except that he wishes some situations had played out differently. It's not exactly in a politician's DNA to admit absolute fault.
Well said.
__________________

__________________
My business! | My hobby!
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com