48 votes for!!!! snicker snort snort snicker-LOL.
Demos are in power now!!!! he haw LMAO.

Next.

48 votes for!!!! snicker snort snort snicker-LOL.
Hey thast's my line, just ribbin' ya.

Democrats latest plan goes down in flames. Again. Snicker Snort Snort.

Damm it. We must have our Vietnam. I want our Vietman. Give me our Vietman. Dead bodies. Give me dead bodies. Lot's of dead bodies.

I just saw my liberal neighbor in her kitchen window, watching the news of this, and her big old head exploded!!

Yeeeeeeeeeeeee Hawwwww!

The Kos Kiddies are going ape shit.

Congratulations! More of those American troops that you "support" will die.

Congratulations! More of those American troops that you "support" will die.
Posted by: Publicus at March 15, 2007 07:41 PM

Well a hardy FU from the mother of an American Soldier who worries every day that my son is overseas. You and your kind are nothin' but cowards. OHHHH fear Bush. OHHH fear whoever. Just not the jihadis who want you dead. COWARDS ONE AND ALL.

Now excuse me while I go put on the beef stew with bread for my love one. We will even say a prayer for the safe return of our heros.

This is the ONLY kind of defeat that I can cheer and find acceptable.

Congratulations! More of those American troops that you "support" will die.

Congratulations! You're an a-hole. Go die yourself, you tool.

Sorry eman if stole your line but could not contain my laughter. My son-in-law was there for over a year before getting wounded. Has been more then a year but he is now back at work in his civil job. Old "pubic hair" is # 1 on the list of _____________ (you fill in the blank)(I got dibs on asshole for the blank.)

The tree of Liberty is watered with the blood of patriots.

Can anyone here who thinks it's such a terrible idea to have the troops come home explain why it's a good idea they should stay?

One word, Iggy, Kampuchea.

Ever again.
==================

Eat shit all you criminal frauds.

"Congratulations! More of those American troops that you "support" will die."

Go to hell Puby, More soldiers died while BJ was strokin his cigars trying to drop the ashes on a moving ash tray duck taped atop some interns head.

We already know Democrats don't support "AMERICAN TROOPS", because they will never be called "DEMOCRAT TROOPS".

One word, Iggy, Kampuchea.

So we are there support who exactly Kim? The Sunni or Shiites?

All that hatred for me all because I want our troops brought home safely now from Iraq. Incidentally, millions of Americans feel the same way...they want our people home now, in one piece, with no missing limbs and NOT in (unphotographable) flag-drapped coffins.

Why don't you go over there and figure that out, Iggy, instead of sticking your head in the sand over here.
================================

It looks like Petraeus confronting the Shia in Baghdad has settled both factions down, at least locally. How about supporting him?
===============================

The hell with pulling troops out, send every damn one we got, along with the brass in the Pentagon, White House, etc. Take off the rules of engagement, let the troops kill em all.

Then Democratic gov't can be installed, (for the ones that weren't killed), then bring the troops home. Mission Accomplished (AGAIN). Hell with all the troops, it shouldn't take long as the VP said they are in their last throes. I mean, the VP wouldn't lie to us, would he about them Muslims almost being done and all?

When you mention that more soldiers died during slicks joke of an administration than have died in the same time period while fighting a war it becomes so quite you can hear the crickets chirping from miles away.

The soldiers should stay in Iraq for the same reason we stayed in Europe, Japan (all of the surrounding islands) South Korea, and numerous other places. It's spelled "freedom' for the people.

The democrat party plan of we have our freedom, the hell with you, doesn't work for me, and evidently for a lot of the members of congress. The left wingers should be ashamed to show their face in public and to let their children know they are such self centered cowards.

Hey "pubic hair" if you were not such an asshole we might hate you so much.LOL Poor wittle lib. If you cannot see the big picture, then there is no need to waste our time trying to explain.

Publius, we ALL want our troops home. We who support them the most want to let them do their jobs first. Leaving before accomplishing the mission (stabliizing Iraq against insurrgents) is surrender; leaving afterwards is victory.

Why don't you go over there and figure that out, Iggy, instead of sticking your head in the sand over here.

Nice non-answer, but I certainly lowered my expectations.

Can anyone here who thinks it's such a terrible idea to have the troops come home explain why it's a good idea they should stay?

No. Nobody can. They've tried. To destroy WMDs. To dethrone a dictator (one of many, many in the world.) To create a democracy. (again, lots of non-democracies in the world.) Becasue Saddam was supporting Al Queda (not.) Oh, yes...to support the mission (wonderfully vague!) or to support our troops (painfully wrong.)

Nobody has ever given an explanation that justifies the deaths and injuries suffered by our men and women in uniform in Iraq. We were attacked by Al Queda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Now, we're in trouble even there...in large part because of this administration's bloody misadventure in Iraq.

All that hatred for me all because I want our troops brought home safely now from Iraq. Incidentally, millions of Americans feel the same way...they want our people home now, in one piece, with no missing limbs and NOT in (unphotographable) flag-drapped coffins.

And just WTF do you think will happen if we pulled out the troops now? Sunshine, lollipops and f***ing bunny rabbits everywhere? We leave and mass sectarian genocide the likes of which makes the last year look like f***ing Christmas happens. No question about it. And do you want that? Really? You want millions dead in a bloodbath? Or to handover a state to terrorists right smack dab in a country with the world's 4th largest oil reserves where they could severely f*** with the world economy? All so you can say "Look how bad Bush is. He did this!" Is that really want you want? Is that your big goal? Hmm, is it?

If it is, you're a sick SOB.

Leaving before accomplishing the mission (stabliizing Iraq against insurrgents) is surrender; leaving afterwards is victory.

So how close are we to victory then? Is the road to the airport safe yet? Are more schools painted?

How about that oil revenue that was supposed to pay for the war?

Oh, and then there's this little matter with I lost count of how many billions of dollars that went missing.

At this rate, we might leave in 20-30 years.

. It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who still have their heads firmly implanted up there asses when it comes to the Bush administration. They cannot forgive Bill for a blow job but they can forgive this lying, cheating, thieving, murdering current occupant of the White House and his equally lying, cheating, thieving, murdering crew. How is this even possible?

Publius, we ALL want our troops home. We who support them the most want to let them do their jobs first. Leaving before accomplishing the mission (stabliizing Iraq against insurrgents) is surrender; leaving afterwards is victory.

I genuinely appreciate your sincerity. I don't believe ANYONE posting here wants the troops injured or killed. But that is the inevitable result of leaving them in Iraq.

I sincerely believe that Iraq is the wrong war; it is a mistake. We DO need to fight sometimes and sometimes soldiers will die----but I want this to be very rare and only where and when it is absolutely necessary.

I do not begrudge your belief that the war in Iraq is winnable. But I (and many, many others) don't see it that way. We see a civil war. We can't drive the enemy out of Iraq, because a high percentage of those people killing our troops are FROM Iraq. The war is a terrible, terrible mistake. I just want the killing to stop.

I don't hate Bush. I don't hate anybody. But I want to stop people from doing things that I think are misguided, and unnecessarily destructive of human life.

I know most of you think I'm wrong...but this is the way I see it.

Incidentally, millions of Americans feel the same way...they want our people home now, in one piece, with no missing limbs and NOT in (unphotographable) flag-drapped coffins.
Posted by: Publicus at March 15, 2007 08:31 PM

Seems to me ass wipe, You lost that vote it the Senate today. Thanks for playing, now here's a cookie.

By the way. It is estimated that there are 250 pinko commie punks in this country. How do I know. Glad you asked. Just check out the number of "ACTION ALERT PETETION" Sniker Snort Snort. You will see the appx. number.

Now let's look at the flip side shall weeeeee.
There are 1.6 mil employed in the US Military. Another 1 mil as support. Each and every one of these brave Americans has a mother, father, children, extended family, and friends.

Yes my freinds, do the math. The pinko commies may be loud, but the are not the American people.

Off to do dishes now.
Snicker Snort Snort.

Peter F, there will be a bloodbath regardless if we stay or go. Are we supposed to act like some cop in a family dispute? The Saudis are going to funnel money to the Sunni, and the Iranians to the Shiites.
This is tribal redneck feuding that will happen one way or another and it's not as if the US govt didn't know this was going to happen, they just brushed it aside.

The kurds will do their best to stay out, but that's unlikely given how much oil they have under their feet.

We never should have invaded in the first place.

Seems to me ass wipe, You lost that vote it the Senate today.

Yes, but you and I won't be paying for it. And the Senators won't be paying for it.

Some young guy who should be at home with his wife and children will be. He won't be coming home. Ever. And that is the problem.

Our troops have been in Germany, Japan, and Korea for decades after the end of hostilities. We well may be in Traq for 30 years. however, if we leave before the job is done, the problems won't be over; they'll just be more difficult and expensive to fix.

ome young guy who should be at home with his wife and children will be. He won't be coming home. Ever. And that is the problem.
Posted by: Publicus at March 15, 2007 08:54 PM

WEll lookie there pub, you don't even understand the basics of military life. The discussons been had my stupid idiot. Wot A riot. Snicker Snort Snort.

The pinko commies

What decade are you living in? Or perhaps I should clarify, what decade are you stuck in?

Snickers is a great candy bar btw.

Peter F. --

My motive isn't to increase the carnage in Iraq. We have no control over the chaos there. There is going to be a bloodbath whatever we do. The damage was done when we took out a bloody dictator and created the conditions for a bloody civil war.

My motive is, as I've made clear, to bring our people home quickly and safely.

Its a blood bath. A Failure. Our dearest resources being wasted on a lunatic mission!

Its time to stop this anti-war movement disaster! Before more of our best and brightest Democrats go down in flames! Somebody must stop the carnage now!

Iggy...

I don't get the "pinko commies" thing either...

It's a measure of your naivete, iggy, that you expected an easy answer to a question you can't answer from here, or if you didn't really expect an answer, of your disingenuity.
=======================================

It's shocking that the Democrats have the nerve to vote to pull our troops from Iraq when members of al Qaeda who are just as brutal and evil as KSM are trying to take it over and turn it into a terrorist safe haven.

Message to Kim: Nobody is calling for a pullout form Afghanistan----which is where Al Queda and the Taliban were operating from when they attacked us. (NOT Iraq...or Iran, for that matter...) And now, we're losing control of Afghanistan...

"Can anyone here who thinks it's such a terrible idea to have the troops come home explain why it's a good idea they should stay?"

Why don't you just honor the request of our troops and just STFU? All of you.

"STFU"?!

Oh, yes. No opposition allowed. This is America!

Yes, let's be quiet. Because many of the troops are just kids in their twenties, and they think they can do anything and that they're immortal. We shouldn't disturb their youthful illusions. We should just STFU and let them die.

Unfortunately, I can't save them and the Senate just voted to let them die. But I won't "STFU".

No, please don't shut the piehole up; continue to be hyperbolic if not hysterical.
================================

Congratulations! More of those American troops that you "support" will die. Posted by: Publicus at March 15, 2007 07:41 PM

The American People have spoken douchebag...

Steve ... the Senate isn't "the American people". But you can relax now. They did vote to continue your beloved war.

Kim, I expected an answer, that's all, but instead you told me to go bury my head in the sand. That's not an answer, so I'll try again.

Why should the troops stay in iraq?

I don't expect an essay, just why you think they should stay.

Why don't you just honor the request of our troops and just STFU? All of you.

That doesn't make any sense. I am against the war, what possible motivation would I have to go fight it?

The request of our troops? What are you talking about?

Iggy...I don't agree with them, but I think I understand why they think we should stay.

They think that we can stabilize Iraq and make it a stable democracy and that this would be worth all the blood and treasure expended to achieve that goal.

Did I get it right, Kim?

Flatly, who give a shit what you Iggy and the idiot publicus say or think. If you could think, you surely would not say the things you do. What part of "they want to kill us" is it that you fail to grasp? Is Afghanistan the only place al Qaeda operated? Can not think of any? When did the war on terror change, at least in your mind to the war on al Qaeda? Since until 9/11 Hezbolla was responsible for the deaths of more Americans than any other terrorist organization, should they get a pass because we must limit our fight to al Qaeda? If, and this is a tough history question so consult the eneyclopedia if you must, we were attack by Japan in 1941, why did we fight in Europe? If you can figure the answer out to that question. Expand on that thought and apply it to the current situation vis a vis Iraq. That is quite a stretch, but with the help of your parents I am sure you can figure it out.

Pub and Iggy,
I'm with you. Let's turn tail and run from this one. If a million or so Iraqis go up in flames when we leave, who cares? ha. After all, it's just Iraqis. Those purple-fingered idiots bought into the whole democracy deal when they knew the Schumers and Boxers would pull the plug ASAP. They should face it: they screwed up, they trusted us!

So much for that mandate, eh?! : )

Steve ... the Senate isn't "the American people". But you can relax now. They did vote to continue your beloved war. Posted by: Publicus at March 15, 2007 09:29 PM

See, this is why you guys never make sense to me. You regurgitate your insipid talking points, throw out more invective than any right-winger would ever dream about, claim to have the backing of the American People because of 11/7/07, but now...no,no,no...the Senate ain't us says the leftist cockroach. It's your bloody war he says...

You guys will NEVER be trusted with national security...no matter what Howard Dean thinks he can do.

elsdorf Ragshaft III --

I love your name, but I disagree with your argument.

I don't believe that there's all that much in common between WWII and Iraq today.

Of course it's true that lots of people around the world pose a danger to the U.S. For example, China has a large number of nuclear missiles that could do some real serious damage.

But, as a practical matter, we are not able to invade every country that doesn't like us and install a friendly democracy. We have to find a smarter way to deal with the situation...brute force alone won't do it.

Which probably explains their increasingly frantic efforts to pick-off the Dickster before he drives young George all the way to Armageddon....and abandons him there, the victim of another one of those "Iranian" EFP-type IEDs. Somebody, maybe it was Hunter S. Thompson, warned the Bushes way back when Cheney chose himself to run Dubya....uh, that is, run WITH Dubya. (Or is that just two different ways of saying the same thing?) Anyway, somebody, it might've been Maureen Dowd or even Ellen Goodman, wrote at the time, "Be afraid, Bushes, be very afraid!"
Well they sure as hell are, staring into a big black hole of "nothin'" right this minute that's about to swallow-up the whole damned barrio-bombing, election-stealing, Lady Liberty-fucking bunch. But these gangbangers can screw-around with the roster at the "Justice" Department all they want, trying to make sure it's packed with "team players." Justice Herownself will see the theft of her sister Liberty's honor and virtue does not go unpunished....to the full extent of Nature's unbreakable (because they are completely self-enforcing) laws.

See, this is why you guys never make sense to me. You regurgitate your insipid talking points, throw out more invective than any right-winger would ever dream about

Ive just been called and asshole (and more) and been told to die----all because I said I wanted the troops to come home safely now! And you're raging at MY invective!

LOL!!!

Zels, that 'they want to kill us' line is for simpletons who need soundbite style answers to complex problems. That may work for you, but not for me.

The quuestion should be ,why do they want to kill us? Sure, they hate us, but why do they hate us? Maybe it has something to do with our foreign policy, maybe it has something to do with our support of Israel, maybe they are madmen who don't think right.

And they don't hate us just for our freedoms, because if they hate countries exclusively based on that ideal, then the Netherlands and Sweden would have been reduced to rubble years ago.

Afghanistan certainly isn't the only place AQ is active, however since there's no govt there then AQ can operate rather freely. In Pakistan they seem to get assistance from the govt. And Saudi Arabia doesn't seem to be doing too much to combat AQ either.

Hezbollah didn't attack us on 9-11. Well educated Saudis did.

We fought in Europe because Germany declared war on us on Dec 11 1941, Zels. There was this little organization known as the Axis Powers comprised of Italy Japan and Germany that all shared a common goal, and it did take Pearl Harbor to get us in the fray.

Mike in Oregon --

So, I see you believe that there won't be a bloodbath if we stay, but there will be a bloodbath ONLY if we leave.

Did you also believe in the WMDs? The last throes of the insurgency? Do you believe everything the administration tells you? Even now?! Why?

I'm glad the vote failed and I'm glad the politicians who voted for this.

Can anyone who's advocating the premature withdrawal of the troops from Iraq explain why we're still in Afghanistan ? That is, why after toppling the Taliban didn't we just leave ?

(should have read)
..who voted for this are on the record.

Ive just been called and asshole (and more) and been told to die----all because I said I wanted the troops to come home safely now! And you're raging at MY invective!

But just remember, Publicus, it's the left that's unhinged and angry.

Iggy , the fact that you haven't a fricken CLUE shows you don't give a damn. Have you even talked to a single service member that has completed two tours?

What possible motivation would you have for being against those who willingly volunteer to take the fight to those who "HAVE VOWED TO DESTROY AMERICA"?
When your done answering , do me a favor Iggy , Pop.

it's highly unlikely anyone here would entertain this, but you should go read this from Rolling Stone.
It examines the best case, most likely, and worst case scenarios regarding Iraq. Spare me your rage about Juan Cole and Richard Clarke being in the roundtable, just read it for what is says, and not who is saying it.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13710030/leaving_iraq_the_grim_truth/print

Iggy...

Hate to tell you this but...I think everyone stopped reading when they saw the words "Rolling Stone".

Rob, i am not against anyone serviing in the military. I just said why would I go if I don't agree with the policy?

The soliders dont make the policy, they just follow orders.

I love how you wish harm on those who disagree with you. That's telling. I may vehemently disagree with you Rob, but the last thing I would do is to say something like that. Then again, that's what seperates you and I.

I don;t take it personally, Rob in LA, you shouldn't either.

Iggy Iggy Iggy, Step away from the bong my dear. You are just embaressing yourself now( bongs, not that there is anythig wrong with it) Snicker Snort Snort.
Rolling Stones Bwhahahahahhahahhahaha!

Pub, you may be correct. Maybe if I said it was from Insight Mag or Fox News, that would have worked.

I don't take joy in the troops staying in Iraq, but I do believe that they need to stay for now. While many people can disagree on whether the US should have gone, the fact is we went, and owe it to all parties to work towards a secure and safe, and maybe that is by regional standards, Iraq.

Very few like this situation, but at the present time, there is really no choice. Hopefully the change of tactics, along with the increase in forces, will lead to stability. If they do, we owe a great deal to General Petraeus, Congress - if they continue to fund the soldiers, and of course to those who are there - the troops.

Eman, if I am embarrasing myself, please tell me what it is you consider embarrassing. Or like most who can't calmly debate the points, you just deflect the issue at hand and attack the messenger. Nice.

I'll step away from the bong if you quit doing too many lines.
Is that what is making your snort too much? :)

Well Rob, Mike, and all the others who believe what the two fore mentioned gentlemen have posted, I have one question, Why aren't you enlisting? Just think, you could be part of the surge and have all kinds of war stories to tell your family and friends.

It's common knowledge that the Army needs more troops, so RUN not walk down and enlist. Or be like our VP, 5 deferments (read fucking coward). Your choice, love to hear your excuses why you can't join up as the Army really needs you.

Ive just been called and asshole (and more) and been told to die----all because I said I wanted the troops to come home safely now! And you're raging at MY invective!

Maybe so Publicus and it is true that there are a few conservatives who can dish out invective like no other. But I don't think you would last one thread over at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler without experiencing a total smackdown at an intellectual level. The level of Nutroot clue-batting over there is an amazing thing to behold.

Just sayin'

Pub,
I say give the new general a chance. We KNOW there will be a bloodbath if we cut and run. And we KNOW we'll be sending the worst kind of message to AQ and their buddies. Their strategy is to outlast us. If you and Teddy and Barb have your way, they will do just that. And they'll believe that just like in Beirut, Mogadishu, WTC I, etc., we will have shown no stomach for taking them on long term. Do you think if we bail out they'll leave us alone?

As for WMD's, I believed Bill and Al, I believed W and Dick. And for all I know they were right. Saddam did, after all, use WMD's on his own people. But that's all moot now, isn't it? We're in Iraq. We can choose to declare defeat and sell out the Iraqis that risked their lives to vote for democracy. Or we can try to win. History will judge us on the choice we make.

AVoiceofReason --

I have a friend who is a Democrat who would (somewhat) agree with you. They would say: we broke it, we bought it...that because we removed the government of Iraq, we have the responsibility to put it back together again.

You present your side admirably and clearly.

I disagree with my Democratic friend because I don't believe we CAN fix it. Also, I don't believe the people who would be making the sacrifices are the ones who "broke" it.

Since it looks like (at least for now) the policies you favor will continue to be followed, I hope you are right----that we can and will win, and that it will be worth the blood and treasure.

But I truly believe that that is not the case.

Iggy & Pub,

There are some that think that if we leave the civil war will escalate but nothing really bad will happen.

There are others who think that the civil war will spread throughout the region, many more will die with global implications.

Fair enough?

If the right is wrong, we will lose 500 lives a year and 100 billion.

If the left is wrong, the Saudi's and Kuwait have promised to come in behind AQ, but Iran will probably win in the end.

If so, Iran will become stronger and, after our loss we are weak and then have no leverage against anything they do.

In any case, if we have Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and Iran all bombing each other's oil fields the oil shock alone will crush our economy. The terrorists will get stronger. The Kurds go nuts, Turkey gets in.

If I am wrong we continue to lose lives and money with the possibility of things getting better.

If you are wrong we could lose everything. Imagine what would happen if oil went from $60 to $200.

Mike in Oregon --

How many more chances do we give them? We were told the insurgency was in it's last throes in 2005. We were told we would be greeted as liberators.

Do we give them 2 more years? 20 years? 2000 years?

You KNOW that there will be a bloodbath if we leave. If we stay, there will be a bloodbath WITH OUR SOLDIERS in the middle of it. I think we should avoid that.

I think the administration has made mistake after mistake and our soldiers keep dying while the administration says "we just need more time." Well, a lot of people believe the administration when they raised the specters of Saddam's nuclear bomb hitting an American city. And none of us believe that we are safe from attack.

But many of us----I would say the majority, but I expect you will disagree with the polls----think that staying in Iraq is making a very bad situation even worse. And that's where I stand.

The war in Iraq, before most people realized was fed by lies, supported it. And yes there were lies made by this Administration. But I give Bush credit for taking the fight over there instead of here. Agree with me or not, I don't care.

But what pisses me off is the mistakes made from the beginning, Bush and Co was told that to do the job correctly, 500 to 600K troops would be needed. Rummy, who should have been, along with a few Senators and Congresspeople, put out to pasture along time ago.

Remember "Doing a heck of a good job Browine" BS. That is what this Administration has been doing in Iraq. Losing all the Billions of dollars, our taxpayers money, right. Well, this Administration created this mess, and they need to fix it. The rules of engagement need to be loosened, start unleashing unlimited firepower on the terrorist and those who support them.

Tell Iran and Saudi Arabia that the funding, help they are giving their sides is over or we will make glass parking lots of their country. This fucking war of piece meal ways has to end.

If I wasn't a disabled vet, now drawing Social Security, and quite a few years younger, I would join to go over there. But it's very evident that both righty's and lefties, posting on this web, are physical able and young enough to go. Why in the Fuck aren't you going. Same reason that Bush's twins aren't, right? You support it as long as you don't have to go, or you want the troops home right now, well if we had a real surge, everyone could come home. So what is stopping most of you?

robert the original --

That's the best argument I've heard from the right in a long time! Indeed, you could be right!

However, I am also a little (well, maybe more than a little) dubious of predicting the future...or limiting it to the 2 possibilities you cite.

We, of course, got into this situation by removing that sonovabitch Hussein...and replacing his evil but stable dictatorship with chaos. And I think that the Bush administration has made so many mistakes that I wouldn't trust them to manage anything. So, I am more than very dubious of the administration succeeding----in fact, I fear that the more time they are given, the more damage they will do.

But that leave me with an interesting question: if someone I trusted and thought was competent was in charge, would I favor continuing the war to try to stabilize Iraq? The answer is: I might. I wouldn't like it----we shouldn't be in this situation at all, and our people are dying for that mistake. But, if we had someone as competent in military affairs as say Eisenhower...I'd certainly trust him more than Bush.

I just find it so hard to watch troops die in Iraq. It hurts when they die in Afghanistan too...but I can understand that. But Iraq is such a painful mistake for me...

Robert, and Mike in Oregon, you've got it. These leftists are regurgitating already out of date talking points. You gotta adapt to the situation on the ground, boys. Oh, I suppose you think wars should be planned.
=================================

Allen, in all my years of posting I've run across one person using the chickenhawk argument who wasn't a chicken himself. Most claimed to be disabled vets. What did you do to stop the last holocaust in Kampuchea, and what are you doing to settle the Middle East?
=======================

Pub,
What do you think the polls would reflect if worded like this:
"Which do you prefer:
1. that the U.S. declare defeat, cut and run from Iraq, and open up the Iraqi killing fields; or
2. that the U.S. give the new general's surge strategy a chance and decide what to do in six months?"

Do you really think a majority of Americans would go for the first option? Polls are very easily manipulated. Change a few words and you get new results.

And by the way, I believe you are sincere in your belief that it is in America's best interest to get out now. I just think you're wrong. And how would you vote if a poll were taken with the above wording?

Mike in Oregon--

Well, to evaluate a poll, we need to look at the wording of the questions, of course...

If I was asked the question, as you worded it, in a poll, I would answer with another question: "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

Which polling questions that have been asked do you think are that slanted? I might agree with you...

Here's a site that publishes lots of polls from all sources:

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

You Iggy and Publicus and a few others are pathetic. Where did you get the idea that the problems with Iraq started with this Bush administration? Someone said this war is based in lies. What lies. WMD? Over 700 plus artillery gas projectiles have be found. 700 is a long way from none. If Afhanistant has no government, you better tell that to the President of that country. No ties between Saddam and al Qaeda? Better check why Clinton fired missles into the Sudan. Seems that then Governor Bush, convinced then President Clinton Saddam was teaching Bin Laudin how to make poison gas. No doubt the idea of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. I suppose it would not be so bad if you were just stupid but the fact is you are subversive. You are so indoctrinated into the lying web of leftist thinking you would not know the truth if you observed it first person up close and with witnesses.

You Iggy and Publicus and a few others are pathetic. Where did you get the idea that the problems with Iraq started with this Bush administration? Someone said this war is based in lies. What lies. WMD? Over 700 plus artillery gas projectiles have be found. 700 is a long way from none. If Afhanistant has no government, you better tell that to the President of that country. No ties between Saddam and al Qaeda? Better check why Clinton fired missles into the Sudan. Seems that then Governor Bush, convinced then President Clinton Saddam was teaching Bin Laudin how to make poison gas. No doubt the idea of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. I suppose it would not be so bad if you were just stupid but the fact is you are subversive. You are so indoctrinated into the lying web of leftist thinking you would not know the truth if you observed it first person up close and with witnesses.

Kim,
If I sent x-rays of my knee replacement, and the VA papers showing 60% disability, would that sooth your asshole comment?

The Army also accepts women, you know equal employment, etc. I got fucked up in Cambodia, where our President Johnson, & Nixon denied any Americans troops ever being there. You know, the Viet Nam war era, which is what this cluster fuck in Iraq is becoming.

Where in the fuck was you in the Nam era? Care to enlighten your readers?

Zelsdorf Ragshaft III --

What you had to say was interesting, but I'm not sure it bear repeating...

Nixon didn't deny that we sent troops to Cambodia; he sent them. That crack was more revealing than an x-ray. Say, are you missing a hat?
===============================

You Bushies not only do not speak for America, you don't even speak for the Republican party any more.
Ohhhhh, that's gotta hurt.

Kim...

Allen is right; Nixon started a secret war in Cambodia.

Kim,
Nice job of blowing smoke, but you didn't answer the question of where you were in the Nam era, same as another question I asked you several days ago. I know, ignore the question, blow smoke, and think you are the greatest.

And for your information, yes Nixon did deny we had troops in Cambodia, until his bombing program of that country became known, them he said hell yes, he was taking the war to the commies.

I was out of the service before Nixon became President, but I remember what was going on, it's evident you don't. SO WHERE WERE YOU DURING THE NAM ERA? A gleam in daddy's eye, or what?

Publicus,

You're correct on that, however; Kim and her ilk will not acknowledge the fact. Hell, somehow they will end up blaming Clinton for it. That is their best excuse so far on many things.

Want to make a bet if she answers the question? 10 to 1 she won't. Bruski at my watering hole if you win, same as if you lose, just depends on who is paying. Also, I will even invite Kim for her drink of choice, bet she wouldn't show up for that either.

Kim is probably young and Vietnam was a long time ago. She doesn't remember and her knowledge of history is...maybe not so good.

I think people like you, who know war directly...and especially soldiers who were on the ground...appreciate how serious a business war is.

"Did you also believe in the WMDs? The last throes of the insurgency? "

Publicus, do you believe in the tooth fairy?

It doesn't make a bit a difference if their where any WMD's or not , Sadam had to go. It was the democrats who had been crying about Sadam and WMD's long before Bush took office.

And yes Cheney was correct when he made that statement about "The last throes of the insurgency". That is when the Democrat Media showed their true colors and provided free advertising for the enemy , reading their desparate call for jihad and were more than happy to repeatedly air there every plea for more to join their streuggle as they aired their many successful bombing attacks. They even aranged for the Media to at the right place at the right time to get the best shot of their killing our Troops. And the sick basturds claimed they were journalist's first , not Americans. Fuck them traitor democrat journalists.

More proof was the fact that they were forcing their newly brainwashed idiots to blow themselves. They had to travel in three vehicles , one in front and back of car packed with explowsives with the third car holding the detonator should the idiot have second thought and some did. Those that veered off course of their intended target got blown up anyway .

This bullshit could have ended years ago but the MINORITY TRAITOR DEMOCRATS saw their incompetant party sinking deeper into irrelevance, because they were. That fat fuck drunk Ted Kennedy and the rest of his lying pack of cry babies should all be brought up on charges of treason. They and their propaganda spewing Media are responsible for give the terrorist's hope to continue and aided in the spread of enemy propaganda and recruitment while here at home stupid shit for brain democrat commies attack our military recruiters at college campuses throwing bottles and rocks as they were forced to flee for their lives.

"Ive just been called and asshole (and more) and been told to die----all because I said I wanted the troops to come home safely now!"

You are a cowardly liar. You are called an asshole because you are an asshole. I do not neccessarily want you to drop dead but would rather you have the balls and the guts along with the rest of the democrat faggots and frauds and state your "TRUE" intentions. The way your Commy Professors and teachers do as they indoctrinate rather that teach.

I wait for the day that TRUE AMERICANS can look you in the eyes of you immoral Un-American Frauds as you shit your pants running for your lives and for the way you treated our Military Recruiters , Soldiers ,President and his Administration and my Country. One of you asked why do they want to kill us? They want to kill Americans because of immoral disgusting behavior and attitudes of the Democrat Liberal Left.

Religious Extremist's want to kill Americans because of you.

Americans want to kill them first in spite of you and your incessant malignancy.

Now that should explain why I say "JUST STFU!"

Rob LA ca.,
You are correct in that bullshit could have ended long ago, and I also agree with you about Kennedy, and the rubber stamp congress we had for six years.

If Bush would have listen to the Chairman when he said 500 to 600K troops, yes it would have been over several years ago. But that is now history. Both the lefties and righties will shit your pants when, if ever, the whole truth comes out.

But you must agree we have a President that is taking the war to them, and we should support that. However; I damn sure don't like the mismanagement of the war. And can you honestly say this war has not been mismanaged? Billions of lost money, incorrect armour for the troops, etc. Blow smoke if you want, but it is the truth.

But fuck it,if all else fails, blame Clinton.

There is no logical reason whatsoever to want us to stay in Afghanistan and leave Iraq. In fact, leaving Afghanistan would do less damage, if one is figuring overall human suffering. It's always been a hell-hole and so it stays a hell-hole. We were absolutely entitled to turn it into a bowl of glass so anything we do other than that is a plus for us, investment in the bank of moral suasion. We've no obligation, moral or otherwise to do dink with Afghanistan.

But finally, after so many years of idiotic short-sighted foreign policy, we've come to understand that it's not a matter of compasion but of self-interest. Liberty and prosperity for others is our best defense against future war.

The ONLY reason we should stay in Afghanistan applies over and over and over to Iraq.

We've no moral obligation to support Afghanistan and no moral obligation to support Iraq. Oh, sure, people have put their lives on the line from trusting in America to back them up. They've made decisions that mean a horrible death for them if they've trusted us unwisely. But nevermind that, huh?

And *obviously* death and horror aren't any of *our* concern. It's just up to them. We can't feel responsible if we leave and they kill each other. We don't even have to watch if we don't want to.

The reason to stay is that liberty and prosperity for others is our best defense against future wars. If what we're doing in Iraq isn't working we need to do what *will* work. If it takes 20 years then we need to take 20 years. If it takes more troops we need to send more troops. If it takes a generation for children to grow up with the assumption that *of course* the police and courts should treat everyone equally, at least as an ideal to shoot for, and *of course* they can vote out a president they don't like, then we need to take a generation.

The *worth* of it has exactly nada to do with the rightness or wrongness of our invasion of Iraq and deposing of Saddam. Nothing at all.

Allen, for any generals saying it would take a huge force there were others who disagreed. The military is at heart conservative and huge forces were what they'd always known. If the choice to keep our footprint as light as possible was the wrong choice the reasons that choice were made were good ones. We'd have had better control sooner with a huge force but the political fall-out may have been worse as well.

With a smaller force we could maintain that *we* did not want Iraq. We wanted Iraq to have Iraq. It seemed important at the time. Was it? We can't try it the other way so we can't know.

And while you can make claims about Vietnam, I can make them about Clinton because I served during his gutting of the military. I have the right to bitch about him because I dealt with the reality of people leaving my shop making us thinner and thinner while no one transfered in again to take up the slack. I was there, trying to keep all our work shifts covered while our military training was neglected, our continuity files unkept, because we didn't have enough people on duty to keep them.

Where you there?

I finally took an early out in favor of motherhood without the smallest bit of guilt. Airmen were getting bonuses to leave. Clinton got rid of me for free.

But we aren't supposed to blame Clinton for the military that Bush inherited? Why? Because it's too *easy*?

Allen , first of all thank you for your service , asshole. Now that that's out of the way and without wasting another second questioning whether you served or not , how can you possibly know the following?

" But it's very evident that both righty's and lefties, posting on this web, are physical able and young enough to go."

And Mike, you trout mouth heathan

"5 deferments (read fucking coward). Your choice, love to hear your excuses why you can't join up as the Army really needs you."

By your standards he wasn't coward enough , or Commie enough , anti-American/War enough for ya right? Unlike the poster child for Cowardice and fleeing the Country like a true Commy loving DRAFT DODGING" non inhaling pinky nail coke sniffing pussy. The jerkoff of all jackoffs BJ Clinton.

"They cannot forgive Bill for a blow job"

When are you limp dicks going to get it through your deluded heads? It had nothing to do with having some chubby chick giving his tally a wack you mule headed jackasses. It's no wonder democrats are jackasses.

Synova,
No, I wasn't there, I was discharged in Dec. of 64. And yes, we were in SE Asia then, and their is plenty of proof out there if you want to look it up. Ike put advisor's in Nam in 59.
I also agree with you about Clinton gutting the military. A good friend of mine got early retirement because of Clinton.

And good old Hillary will do the same damn thing if she is elected. Our country needs a strong military, if for nothing else, securing our borders, which every president has never tried to do. Wonder why that is.

Almost every one that has served can tell the horror stories about the politicians in charge when they were serving, and about 99.9% are correct. But what pisses me off is that some who refuse to take their heads out of their asses, think bush is 100% correct on all things, and lip service on how they support the war, etc. Why in the hell aren't they signing up? Same reason the Bush twins aren't. It isn't their war. That is BS, it is every American's war.

If we pull out of Iraq, (may take a couple of years) 9-11 will happen again. That is why I keep saying all the people who post here supporting the war should put their asses where their mouths are, and take the twins with you.

Rob,
I never called you those names, but you know, it takes one to know one. How do I know that some lefites or rightys on this post could serve? It's real simple, the law of averages. Or do you think everyone posting here is over 42?

And your comment to Mike about the 5 deferments, I don't understand. He did, didn't he have 5 deferments? Or was it 4 deferments, I can't remember in my old age.

Allen, both my commanders when I was in AFROTC (I didn't complete it and get commissioned, I enlisted a few years later) served in South East Asia. One was a C-130 pilot who got shot at regularly. One of them was a helicopter pilot who flew in the spooks and never got shot at. If he had, he said, it would have meant the mission failed because he wasn't supposed to be where he was. It wasn't Vietnam.

I don't know what it has to do with Iraq, however.

I don't know anyone who thinks Bush is 100% right on everything. I probably think he's been right more than most think so. Still in the face of the riddiculous claims about how everything he's done is worse than 100% wrong I can't blame anyone for doing some cheerleading.

He's right about the threat. That means a lot.

He's right about the common humanity of all people everywhere who want just what we want from life and deserve just what we deserve, which is something other than tyranny and oppression. If he was wrong about just how destroyed the psyche of Iraqis was and how unprepared they were to accept this new thing, it doesn't make him wrong about our common humanity or need for freedom.

The big force vs. small force question isn't something that I can say he was wrong about, considering what we hoped to accomplish, though it may have been it's not *obvious* at all. And we *can't* go back and try the other way and compare them.

The question of going into Iraq is one I've always considered necessary as a matter of statesmanship rather than because Saddam was a personal threat to us. It could possibly have been some other country but it needed to be somewhere and Saddam rather deserved it. Sort of a two birds with one stone concept. And yes, it's hard, but that doesn't mean it didn't need to be done.

We're not fighting a war with nations yet we have to fight the war with nations. I don't see any way to directly attack the enemy because the enemy is an ideology. We can pick off the soldiers of that ideology here and there, dealing with them like criminals for the crimes they commit, but the ideology isn't impacted by that in the least. How do you change how people think? Operation Iraqi Freedom has the potential to accomplish a great deal and I believe it was a good choice.

Was it the only choice? Is anything?

The only way to avoid making mistakes is to make no decisions and take no action.

More Troops! More Troops! what the hell are you taling about more troops when bagdad fell with just a hand full of soldiers , a tank and some bradlys?

Does anyone think or even take into accout that the Democrats and their Media were going to betray our Commander in Chief , Soldiers and our Country and behave like rabid malicious infants? A trapped animal with chew off its limb to free itself , for its survival.

I know for a fact the Democrats would never engage in such a sacrifice , however being the shiesty low down fiends starving for what they can only acheive through LIES , SMEARS , FRAUD , DECEIT , CORRUPTION , INCESSANT BEGGING AND WHINING , TANTRUM THROWING , FLOOR POUNDING , KICKING AND SCREAMING , we are whitnessing the most grotesque display of scheming debaucheries , frenzies of desparation for "POLITICAL POWER" known to man.

Democrats are like a vampires in restraints unable to feed who will use every emotion , trickery and SAY ANYTHING and DO WHATEVER IT TAKES to seduce you into setting her free and when you finally do succumb or accede to her incessant begging , it's you that is attacked first drained of blood. It matters not that you set her free.

Democrats continue to be these vampires and President George W Bush is all that stands in the way of a political lust for power ,a feeding frenzie filled with bouts uncontrolable obsessive desire as they covet the office of the Presidency.
They cannot wait for the election for one of their own to take over the deeply wounded stabbed in the back Rebublican Party, They want their ORGY NOW!

"Or do you think everyone posting here is over 42?"

Pretty Damn Close.and your getting pretty chummy there with some dishonest and disgraceful to our Country idiots.

"I don't know anyone who thinks Bush is 100% right on everything. I probably think he's been right more than most think so."

Synova is better than 100% right on this one. It has never been said by anyone yet it is the Democrats that infer such shameless baseless claims to the point that they are nothing more than a criminal party of lying frauds. Starting with the drunken murderous expelled for cheating Ted Kennedy barking out Lies , Quagmire and howling like a baboon "Sadam had nothing to do with 9/11!". They should have taken his lard ass to the Funny farm for talking to himself along with every other moron making that claim.

I don't agree at all with his Immigration policy one fucken bit and my entire family are of Latino decent however the more the democrat and even some Republicans attack and Criticize President George W Bush for their own selfish political gain and cowardice the stronger I will support him and tell the Scmuck Schumers , Hilary Rottens , Fraud Kerry , Dean , Durbin , Chafee Hagel all the rest to go fuck themselves. And to top it all off I registered Democrat-ic and it stings me little to say it and for more years than I wish to admit. I have already numerous times admited my past ignorance and look forward to reregistering to vote it the moved up Republican Primary because I will never vote Democratic again and haven't since Nov 2 2004.

Allen said and I quote: "Nixon denied any troops ever being there" about Cambodia, and that is wrong.
===================================

He also claims to have served in Cambodia and to have separated from the military in 1964. Now this may all be true, but here's a clue. Soldiers almost never use the chickenhawk argument. Just why, I'm not sure, but the combination of the chickenhawk argument with the claim of veteran status is so hackneyed as to almost be a giveaway to some sort of summer soldier. Then you just have to get them telling war stories, and soon the evening's entertainment at the American Legion, or VFW, is in full swing. That's why Kerry was such a putz. All those veterans had been through the drill about debunking 'war hero' stories.
===============================

Maybe Publicus with his great knowledge of history will chime in on the odds of American servicemen being in Cambodia prior to 1964. Or maybe he won't.
============================

Something stinks , wouldn't ya say kim?

Cheers.
======