Home > Uncategorized > State of Denial

State of Denial

The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward is set to release “State of Denial,” the third in his series of books documenting the inner workings of the Bush administration. Woodward will discuss some notable revelations in the book this Sunday on 60 Minutes. Key highlights:

Bush is covering up the extent of violence against U.S. troops in Iraq:

According to Woodward, insurgent attacks against coalition troops occur, on average, every 15 minutes, a shocking fact the administration has kept secret. “It’s getting to the point now where there are eight-, nine-hundred attacks a week. That’s more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces,” says Woodward.

Intelligence shows Iraq violence will worsen in 2007:

The situation is getting much worse, says Woodward, despite what the White House and the Pentagon are saying in public. “The truth is that the assessment by intelligence experts is that next year, 2007, is going to get worse and, in public, you have the president and you have the Pentagon [saying], ‘Oh, no, things are going to get better,‘” he tells Wallace. “Now there’s public, and then there’s private. But what did they do with the private? They stamp it secret. No one is supposed to know,” says Woodward.

Bush will not support withdrawing from Iraq under any circumstances:

President Bush is absolutely certain that he has the U.S. and Iraq on the right course, says Woodward. So certain is the president on this matter, Woodward says, that when Mr. Bush had key Republicans to the White House to discuss Iraq, he told them, “I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.”

Henry Kissinger regularly advises Bush and Cheney:

Woodward also reports that the president and vice president often meet with Henry Kissinger, who was President Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, as an adviser. Says Woodward, “Now what’s Kissinger’s advice? In Iraq, he declared very simply, ‘Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.’” Woodward adds. “This is so fascinating. Kissinger’s fighting the Vietnam War again because, in his view, the problem in Vietnam was we lost our will.”

Advertisements
  1. Rich from Paso
    September 28, 2006 at 7:59 pm

    Dave, the 800 to 900 attacks a day statistic is irrelavent unless you define what an “attack” is? When I was in Iraq, granted this was 03 to 04, we were attacked every single day we were there. Somewhere in our Area of Operations every day there was an attack. Most attacks are relatively harmless indirect rocket or mortar attacks that the insurgents hastily put on. Either the insurgents are tryng to fire mortars from the trunk of a car (true story – it burned the car to the ground after the launch). Or they set up 57mm rockets on wooden rails, wire them up to a motorcycle battery and a washing machine timer, throw them down on a drainage culvert pointed in the general direction of our camp, set the timer and skedadled out of there. Or they will drive by and fire an RPG in indirect mode (lobed into the air) and hope they hit something. 99% of the time, the indirect attacks are ineefective, but like Bush has said before, they only have to get it right to make the attacks worth while. The indirect attacks would happen in the morning for a while, then for a month they would be every day at 4 pm then they would shift to every day at 9:30pm, but it was pretty much every day.

    If there were 800 – 1000 IEDs going off every day, we wouldn’t be waiting for Woodward to “scoop” the world on that in his book, it would be on the nightly news every night. That would be the thing that gets Rumsfeld fired because that would mean that everything wa totally out of control in Iraq and that just isn’t the case.

    If Woodward counts every round falling randomly out of the sky as an “attack” that would be irresponsible and alarmist. If you were to see the breakdown by type and the number of casualties produced per attack type, you’d see what I saw over there: it’s a dangerous place, but not everything is killing every one all the time. After all, you have to keep in mind that the enemy we are fighting is terroism and the terrorists use indirect attacks, as well as IEDs and car bombs to try to spread terror in that country.

    Finally, I just want everyone to know that I do not dismiss the validity of the “800 -1000 attacks a day” statistic, I call into question the definition of “attack” and would want Mr. Woodward to provide the statistical results of the different forms of attacks to give perspective and context to the argument.

  2. JerryDinAZ
    September 28, 2006 at 9:39 pm

    OK! OK! OK! WE GET IT! SO I WILL ASK AGAIN AND FOR THIRD TIME…
    DEMOCANTS, MOVEON’ERS, SOCIALISTS, GEORGE SOROS FANS, AND ALL YOU BUSH HATERS…THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU HAVE ALL DODGED FOR YEARS NOW…HOW BOUT AN ANSWER INSTEAD OF ALL THIS “WE HATE BUSH” CRAP…EH?
    HERE IT IS…ANSWER IT!

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    IS THAT TOO COMPLICATED? OR IS THE ANSWER JUST NOT ON MOVEON OR THE DNC WEBSITES? I BEG YOU…IMPLORE YOU…ANSWER THE FRIGGING QUESTION! QUIT YOUR COPY-N-PASTE BULLCRAP AND HAVE AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT!

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    SCARED? CONFUSED? IT’S OK! JUST JUMP IN AND HAVE AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT! WE WANT YOUR PROPOSAL!

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    A PLAN…AN IDEA…A PROPOSAL…GIVE US SOMETHING OTHER THAN YOUR STANDARD MOVEON BS! WE WANT AN ANSWER! EVEN IF YOU’RE WRONG! JUST TRY IT…

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    AND YOU CAN’T USE RICH’S ISEA! THAT’S TAKEN. YOU HAVE TO THINK FOR YOURSELVES! SO SIT BACK, KNOCK OFF THE COPY0N-PASTE, AND REFLECT, AND THEN ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU HAVE AVOIDED FOR YEARS!

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ!

    ARE WE CLEAR? ARE WE CLEAR?

    HERE…LET ME TRY IT FOR YOU IN LOWER CASE…

    What is your plan for Iraq?

    IS THAT BETTER? CAN YOU ANSWER NOW?
    ALL YOU CHICKEN POOP BUSH HATERS! I DARE YA! PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

    WHAT IS YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ?

  3. Anonymous
    September 29, 2006 at 3:10 am

    The plan is to send all the Republican cowardly blowhards like JerryDinaz to Iraq and bore them to death.

  4. the voice of reason
    September 29, 2006 at 3:49 am

    Hey Jerry

    In light of the recent senate vote

    W W J T?

    give up?

    stands for:

    Who Would Jesus Torture?

    asking what a liberal would do about IRAQ is begging the question. Its simple, we wouldn’t have gone there in the first place. There, there’s your answer, you chickenhawk piece of crap.

  5. Rich from Paso
    September 29, 2006 at 5:14 am

    You can call Jerry a piece of crap all you want, but the fact remains we are in Iraq and you failed to answer the question. Typical liberal response to a question they can’t or won’t answer is to offer a pointless observation that isn’t even relevent to the question at hand. So, given the fact that the milk has already been spilt, so to speak, what would you and the rest of you liberals do about it? Would you cry over it like Dave does every chance he gets with his “I told you so”‘s. Obviously, Voice, you want to be the Monday-morning quarterback with your “I wouldn’t have spilt the milk in the first place”. Well, that is about as worthless, pointless, useless and cowardly a statement anyone can make. If you don’t know, just say so. If there is an original thought in that head of yours, well, let’s hear it. But saying “I wouldn’t have gone in the first place” doesn’t answer the question at all. So, let me ask you again: now that we are in Iraq and have been there for the past three and a half years and since the President’s policies and execution of the war have been so bad, what would you do that is one iota different than what is going on right now? If you have any intellectual honesty, you will either provide an intelligent and relevant response, or you can … JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP! The choice is yours.

  6. Red Neckersniff
    September 29, 2006 at 7:11 am

    well boys even though I’ve got my p.j.’s on I just couldn’t help joinin’ in the friendly campfire sing-along before beddy-bye…Dave I never figgered you for bein such a chowder head! There has probably been at least a ga-frickin-BILLION journalists doin stories about Iraq, in Iraq, imbedded in Iraq, getting kidnapped in Iraq…don’t ya think ONE of ’em besides that numb nuts Woodward would have figgered out that our troops were gettin hit 800 to 900 attacks a DAY (I think that sorta stands out as something of note), and that ol’ Rummy and W. was coverin it all up becuz they are felons or sumthin? Are you outta yer gourd? Woodward’s report is slanted, pure and simple, and Rich’s example is perfect…the press is slanted, as a matter of fact,Dave, and don’t deny it! Look at the bullshit during the Hezbollah conflict! You would think the media wanted the frickin terrorists to WIN and wipe out the jews, by the slanted reporting complete with phoney photos, and why? because America is an ally to Israel, and the left wing, mainstream media are headed up by dope-smokin’ left wing liberals from the 60’s Vietnam era.
    Chaps my ass. But, that’s why yer Air America, NY Times, and the rest is circlin’ the drain, ‘cuz most Americans have more sense than you give em credit for, and that includes Mr. Smarty Pants from Santa Maria. I may not talk as good a game as you buddy, but where I come from, there’s something called horse sense. adios.

  7. Red Neckersniff
    September 29, 2006 at 7:16 am

    correction;…before any of you crawl up my ass I meant to say eight or nine hundred attacks a week…I’m tired. It’s been a long day.

  8. Bob from San Luis
    September 29, 2006 at 8:02 am

    A Plan For Iraq.
    Immediately stop the building of all military bases for the U.S. in Iraq.
    Bring in the International Red Cross to the prisons that the military is running in Iraq to address any appearance of cruelty or torture and start training Iraqi security forces to take over the running of the detention facilities.
    Move any U.S. military forces out of any of the former Saddam palaces.
    Cancel every single no bid contract that is in place for the rebuilding of any services, deliveries of goods or services or production of goods or services by any company that has not delivered what it was paid to do and has not done yet.
    Allow any canceled contracts from the last point to be awarded to any company that can do the work, with preference given first to any Iraqi company, then to any other company with the provision that some 90% of the labor has to be offered to Iraqis first. All new contracts will be directed by the Iraqi government.
    Any remaining U.S. firms that are fulfilling their contractual obligations will need to provide for their own security needs. Those security forces will have to operate under Iraqi laws, no exceptions. Any firm that does not want to finish the work they contracted to do under these new terms will have their contract cancelled immediately and will be escorted out of the country. The unfinished jobs left behind by vacating companies will be bid out by the Iraqi government.
    With no U.S. military bases being built, and no U.S. firms needing U.S. military protection, there is very little left for the U.S. military to do in-country, other than what the Iraqi government requests that the military do. As the Iraqi military takes over for more and more of the security needed in Iraq and the military takes over the operations of the prisons, there will be less and less for our military to be needed for, so we start withdrawing our forces. The best place, close by? Afghanistan. Finish the job we started there, regardless of what Rumsfeld said about “there are no good targets in Afghanistan”, that country is were we “cut and ran” (yeah, I know we didn’t completely leave), but that is where we dropped the ball in the fight on terrorism. We dropped the ball in Afghanistan so we could invade Iraq; Iraq never had any terrorists attacks prior to our invasion, but it has so many now because we are there, we are being viewed as corrupt, that we torture and kill, and any U.S. firm that is operating there has no U.S. law or Iraqi law that they have to follow.
    The very best “plan” for Iraq however has to start with the removal of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, period. We need someone running that department that will listen to military planners and the experienced leaders of the military who know what is needed to be done, not some “yes” men who when told “the next person who mentions that we need plans will be fired” will not sit on their hands, but will stand up and say what needs to be said, insist on what needs to be done for the good of the country and not just worry about protecting their job.
    This list or plan is by no means complete, but it is a start.

  9. JerryDinAZ
    September 29, 2006 at 3:06 pm

    WELL THERE YA HAVE IT…MOST WONT ANSWER THE QUESTION, BUYT THE ONE THAT DOES IS A TYPICAL “CUT-N-RUN” DEFEATOCANT VERBAL VOMIT!
    CUT-N-RUN? THAT’S IT? THE BEST ALL YOU BUSH HATERS CAN COME UP WITH!
    WELL CUT-N-RUN HAS BEEN USED BEFORE AND NO ONE WITH ANY COMMON SENSE WOULD DO THAT NOW…SO HERE WE GO AGAIN ALL YOU “COPY-N-PAST” BUSH HATING, GAY MARRIAGE LOVING, CODDLE THE TERRORISTS, PINKO, TREASONIST, MOVE0NERS, LIBOCRAT LOCK STEP IDIOTS!
    ANSWER THE FRIGGIN QUESTION YOU COWARDS!

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    WHAT’S WRONG? NUTING TO COPY-N-PASTE? AWW POOR LIL LEMMINGS! THINK! FOR ONCE IN YOUR 7 YEARS OF BITCHIN AND MOANING…THINK! AND ANSWER THE QUESTION!

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    STOP ALL YOUR DIATRIBING BS…AND ANSWER IT…TAKE A DAY AN HOUR AND DEVELOP A PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE! YOU WON’T FIND THE ANSWER ON MOVE-ON’S WEBSITE…NOR THE DNC, NOR ON ANY DEMOCANT CADIDATES WEBSITE. ON THIS TOPIC YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO THINK…SO PUT DOWN YOUR “MEDICAL MARIJUANA BONG”…YOU LIBERAL TREASONIST RAGS, AND YOUR SOUND BITES FROM THE SOROS LEFTIES AND THINK…THEN ANSWER THIS!

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    YOU COWARDS! YOU TWO FACED DEMOGOGS! WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU AND YOUR PARTY OF SMEAR? CAN YOU NOT THINK? IF SO…ANSWER THIS:

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    SHHHH…STOP ALL THE ANGER AND RESENTMENT THAT WE HAVE THE WHITE HOUSE, THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND THE SUPREME COURT…THE VOTERS MADE THAT HAPPEN…STAY IN THE PRESENT…RIGHT NOW…TODAY! AND ANSWER THIS:

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    I EXPECT 2 THINGS…ANSWER AND LET US DEBATE IT…OR SHUT YOUR STINKY PIE HOLES AND LET US CONTINUE TO RUN THE GREATEST NATION IN THE WORLD…OR I GUESS YOU CAN ALL GO BACK TO YOUR TAX SUPPORTED JOBS AND HIDE OUT. I SUSPECT THE LATTER.

    ONCE AGIN FOR THOSE WITH A.D.D.

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

  10. Rich from Paso
    September 29, 2006 at 3:14 pm

    Immediately stop the building of all military bases for the U.S. in Iraq.
    (Why don’t you believe in improving the standards of living of our soldiers in Iraq? Besides, they get turned over to the Iraqi Army when we leave the area, which we have done numerous times already)

    Bring in the International Red Cross to the prisons that the military is running in Iraq to address any appearance of cruelty or torture and start training Iraqi security forces to take over the running of the detention facilities.
    (Already happened)

    Move any U.S. military forces out of any of the former Saddam palaces. (Why? What does it matter whether or not US forces are in Saddam’s palaces? Did we forget to get his permission first?)

    Cancel every single no bid contract that is in place for the rebuilding of any services, deliveries of goods or services or production of goods or services by any company that has not delivered what it was paid to do and has not done yet. (Sure, why not.)

    Allow any canceled contracts from the last point to be awarded to any company that can do the work, with preference given first to any Iraqi company, then to any other company with the provision that some 90% of the labor has to be offered to Iraqis first. All new contracts will be directed by the Iraqi government. (Um, Bob, most of the work is SUBcontracted out to either Iraqis or Pakistanis; there are very few AMERICANs doing the work in Iraq, for the most part it’s IRAQIS)

    Any remaining U.S. firms that are fulfilling their contractual obligations will need to provide for their own security needs. (They do that now anyway, firms like CusterBattles and BlackWater YOU have cited for abuse would be the firms left to secure the contractors. Brilliant!) Those security forces will have to operate under Iraqi laws, no exceptions. Any firm that does not want to finish the work they contracted to do under these new terms will have their contract cancelled immediately and will be escorted out of the country. The unfinished jobs left behind by vacating companies will be bid out by the Iraqi government. (You are INVITING corruption with that point. Keep in mind that patronage of contracts was a hallmark of the Saddam regime)

    With no U.S. military bases being built, and no U.S. firms needing U.S. military protection, there is very little(?) (Oh, you mean that fighting insurgents is not part of the fight but securing of contractors is? Stop listening to Airhead America, Bob. It’s rotting your brain) left for the U.S. military to do in-country, other than what the Iraqi government requests that the military do. As the Iraqi military takes over for more and more of the security needed in Iraq and the military takes over the operations of the prisons, there will be less and less for our military to be needed for, so we start withdrawing our forces. The best place, close by? Afghanistan. Finish the job we started there, regardless of what Rumsfeld said about “there are no good targets in Afghanistan”, that country is were we “cut and ran” (yeah, I know we didn’t completely leave) [correction, Bob: we never left, but the enemy did regroup as they are prone to do from time to time], but that is where we dropped the ball in the fight on terrorism. We dropped the ball in Afghanistan so we could invade Iraq; Iraq never had any terrorists attacks prior to our invasion, but it has so many now because we are there, we are being viewed as corrupt, that we torture and kill, and any U.S. firm that is operating there has no U.S. law or Iraqi law that they have to follow [now you need to stop watching al Jazzerra because that too is rotting your brain].
    The very best “plan” for Iraq however has to start with the removal of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, period. We need someone running that department that will listen to military planners and the experienced leaders of the military who know what is needed to be done, not some “yes” men who when told “the next person who mentions that we need plans will be fired” will not sit on their hands, but will stand up and say what needs to be said, insist on what needs to be done for the good of the country and not just worry about protecting their job. (so, a guy that everyone says listened to them (Generals Franks and DeLong in particular and Swannack and Batiste, who were not in on the planning in the first place, as the exceptions) should be fired because he listened to them? Your statement is out of whack with the established facts.)
    This list or plan is by no means complete, but it is a start.

    Assessment of your plan: D+; you are too worried about who is making money in Iraq, who is doing what to whom, repeating terrorist talking points except on who to WIN, which you obviously still don’t know how to do. It is a plan, I’ll give you that. Not a very good one, but a plan none the less. I give you credit for trying.

    You may continue to speak on the subject. Next!

  11. Bob from San Luis
    September 29, 2006 at 5:25 pm

    “Perception becomes one’s reality” If those companies in Iraq that are supposed to be doing the rebuilding are perceived by the Iraqis as being corrupt, that is what the Iraqi people will believe. If the Iraqis perceive that our armed forces are arresting innocent people, abusing them, torturing and killing them without any due cause, without any oversight, that is what they will believe. My “plan” simply starts to remove many of the perceived injustices and taints of corruption that colors Iraqis view of what we are doing there, why we are there, and shows that we can step back and make a good faith effort to address concerns that we are no better than Saddam was when he was in power. That is why we leave any and all of his former palaces, that is why we stop building permanent military bases (not just stop building them, but abandon them as well) and that is why we require that all non-military U.S. citizens in Iraq have to follow the laws of the country they are in. We do have to address the Iraqi people’s perception, because if we don’t, we are simply reenforcing their beliefs about what it is we are doing there, right or wrong.

  12. JerryDinAZ
    September 29, 2006 at 7:22 pm

    HMMMM…SEEMS LIKE IF THE LEFTY LIBERAL MEDIA WOULD JUST SHUT THE HELL UP THE IRAQI PEOPLE WOULD BE DOING JUST FINE…SADDAM AND THE TERRORISTS HAVE AN ALLY IN THE LEFT LEANING MEDIA AND THE DEFEATOCRATS!
    WHY DON’T ALL YOU “NANCIES” JUST SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET US DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO KEEP YOU PINKOS SAFE!
    WE ARE GOING TO WIN IN ’06 & IN ’08…DOES THAT MEAN YOU WHINNEY LIBS ARE GONNA BITCH FOR ANOTHER 12 YEARS?

    NOW…ANSWER THE FLIPPIN QUESTION YOU EGG HEADS!

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    WHAT’S THE MATTER? NUTTIN TO CUT-N-PASTE? WELL THEN…DO SOME THINKING ON YOUR OWN! AND ANSWER IT! OR SHUT UP AND GO SAVE A WHALE!

  13. Red Neckersniff
    September 29, 2006 at 8:18 pm

    Pres. Bush was right – the party of FDR and Truman has become the party of cut and run. My grandparents wouldn’t recognize the democratic platform now, and would be ashamed of the likes of Pelosi and Reid.
    Perceptions my ass! What the left refuses to acknowledge, is that war is an ever-changing, complicated, ugly, beast. War, no matter how hard you try to avoid it, destroys innocent life. Property gets destroyed. So we gave this murdering, raping, dictator, who EVERYONE, EVERYONE, thought had WMD (and he probably DID at one point) more than one chance to come clean and comply with AGREED UPON U.N. DEMANDS!!!
    He birds us off, we go in and kick his ass, and guess what? the beast takes an unexpected turn! The terrorists come out from under their rock and start a campaign of terror, killing MOSTLY, to this day, fellow Muslims! Gee I wonder how long that’s gonna last…If you read the entire released portion of the intell report, you know, the part the liberal press didn’t pick up on at first, you would note that the entire intell community agreed that if we continued to kick the terrorists ass in Iraq, they would eventually get tired of it and go home!
    Let me ask you, do you see or hear any of our troops coming back from Iraq organizing protests? Going in front of Congress like our lying traitor friend who would be president, throwing their medals in the trash for the media, you know, the typical Vietnam style protest we saw…you would think that they would all be so upset about this “quagmire” we are in…all you see is one poor mentally disturbed bastard that Michael Moore the enemy of our country managed to rope in for his propaganda flick (that the French gave him an award for).
    And since we are on that, why do you people keep shoving that crap about how we are “perceived” in other countries down our throats? We have liberated most of those countries, so they can kiss my ass! Anyone can see what cowardly yellow bastards they are when it comes to a fight, so who cares what they think? Go on vacation to a country that likes us, like Poland.

  14. Anonymous
    September 30, 2006 at 12:31 am

    All you flaming Bush haters seem annoying silent on the question of your own solution to the mess Bush made? Will ever see or hear one? Or is whinning the marching orders for the day.
    I for one would like to see what all you libs have to say…
    so…?

  15. Bob from San Luis
    September 30, 2006 at 3:54 am

    red neckersniff: You questioned as to what the returning military are doing in regard to if they are protesting or turning in their medals; some are protesting, but the SCLM is not reporting on any protests, especially if there are any veterans participating. Another interesting turn of events is that there have been many Iraqi/Afghani era Vets are running for elective office. After the primaries fleshed out the major candidates, six novice politicos who are veterans are in the running in November. Of those six, five are running as Democrats and one as a Republican. As for the Democratic Party being the party of “cut and run”, who was in charge of the failed attempt to catch bin Laden in Afghanistan? Was the job finished there, or were troops, equipment and planning diverted in the ramp up to invading Iraq? If the job in Afghanistan wasn’t completed and our troop numbers were drawn down, is that not “cutting and running”? I for one am proud of being a Democrat, of having leaders in Congress who voted against handing President Bush even more power, in effect granting the President the power to determine who is an enemy of the United States, and giving him the power to have them detained forever with no recourse and no means of legal redress or defense. The only thing else that I wished had happened would have been for one brave Senator to have had the courage to step up and fillibuster the horrible bill that was just passed. The President also has the ability to interpret the Geneva Conventions as to what constitutes torture. All of you Bush supporters must be so proud that our country can now torture anyone in any manner we choose, arrest and detain indefinitely absolutely anyone, anywhere, anytime for any or no reason at all. What a sad day in America.

  16. JerryDinAZ
    September 30, 2006 at 4:58 am

    TORTURE? HELL YES TORTURE! YOU PANSIES! GET A FIRM GRIP! THESE RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS WANT US DEAD! STARTING WITH INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN! NOTHING SHORT OF DEATH IS FINE WITH ME IF THEY CAN PROTECT MY WIFE AND CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN! BUT NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT…DEATH WOULD BE OK TOO!
    SO WHAT IS IT WITH YOU LIBS? LOSE YOUR BACKBONES? OR LOWER?
    WAKE UP! ITS A WAR AND COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION FOR THEM AND IT SHOULDN’T BE FOR US!

  17. Rich from Paso
    September 30, 2006 at 5:35 am

    Again, Bob, you get it wrong. Bush wanted Congres to define what was torture so that guys interogating a terrorist would know where the line was so they wouldn’t cross it. By the way, (I hate internet shorthand), all of our pilots and Special Operations forces go through SERE training. SERE stands for Survive, Evade, Resist, Escape training. I have never been through it, but let me tell you from the people who have been through it… They get tortured by our people. Why? Because the enemies we face torture our people when they get captured. Bob, in case you didn’t realize this, but the terrorists are the ones who have tortured our people, they behead our people, they burn and desecrate our people. We do not torture. We may make them uncomfortable. The people I have talked to about waterboarding have said that yes, it is very unnerving to think you are drowning, but they were in no danger of death. Wouldn’t be it be nice if those interogating the piece of crap terrorists know what the rules of the game are so that people like you and the ACLU are not able to sue them for doing their job? Or is that what you want, for our soldiers and CIA agents to be sued for doing their job?

    Ooooh! A whopping FIVE democratic Iraq veterans are running for Congress this year! Well, there’s all the proof a liberal needs that EVERY ONE of the Iraq veterans, I guess myself and the one Republican candidate aside, are against the Iraq War. Yep, that’s liberal logic for you: 8 months = 8 years, 5 democrat anti war veterans = the entire military against the Iraq war.

    As for “cutting and running” from Afghanistan… what a load of crap! We never had more than 17,500 troops there anyway. That was more than enough troops to handle the mission, until the Taliban reorganized in Pakistan and began to counter-attack. No one sid that wasn’t enough troops until they needed some shit to talk about Iraq with so the libs try to say that the mission in Afghanistan was harmed because, your words here, were drawn down to fight Iraq. That is just patently untrue. With the two+ brigades of US troops and the expanded NATO role in Afghanistan, that mission is, and has always been, in good hands. Iraq had nothing to do with what is going on in Aghanistan.

    Do you want to know why bin Laden has evaded capture? bin Laden and associates use the Afghan custom of Nanawatai. Nanawatai, when the word is invoked, obligates that person to provide sanctuary against all people who would harm that person. According to natioanl Geographic, bin Laden and his al Qai’da pieces of human filth have been going from village to village using Nanawatai to avoid capture. That’s why we haven’t caught him.

  18. Dave Congalton
    September 30, 2006 at 12:22 pm

    I understand Rich’s concern about we can’t “cut and run” and his constant question, “What’s your plan for Iraq?”

    But those questions, however legitimate, don’t detract from those of us who opposed the war from the beginning. Rich and Jerry can’t keep dismissing us. The Woodward book and the NIE stuff underscore everything we’ve been saying for years: (1) This White House is totally clueless about the war and (2) We are only making things worse in Iraq with our presence. We are increasing the levels of terrorism throughout the region.

    Add all this on to the other screwups of this administration and get ready for the new book about Colin Powell that will show he was FIRED by Bush and forced out. Powell warned that all this stuff was going to happen and no one listened.

    So Rich, I truly thank you for your service and I know your intentions are honorable, but Iraq has changed in the years since you were there and I submit that your perceptions are outdated. There is way too much evidence to the contrary piling up.

    Bottom line: Sure, we can debate plans for Iraq and the merits of cutting and running, but those of us opposed to this war have been right all along and we’re now just beginning to see how right we were. We can’t debate how we get out of this mess until you and others acknowledge IT IS A MESS and a mess THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED, especially under a Gore presidency.

  19. Rich from Paso
    September 30, 2006 at 3:00 pm

    Then show some balls, Dave, and tell Iraqis that we were wrong for invading their country. Then you can apologize for making their lives worse than they were under Saddam. Until you are ready to do that, I submit to you that you are showing intellectual cowardice: you are willing to tell your blog what you think, but unwillilling to go outside the safety of this blog and tell real Iraqis what you think puts YOUR butt on the line and you are unwilling to do that. They have personally thanked me for the US invading their coutnry. Where is your Iraqi “Marilyn” to bad-mouth the Bush Administration on Iraq?

    What a piece of spin your reliance on that one sentance of the NIE is, Dave. Talk about cherry-picking intelligence. You take the one sentence out of an illegally obtained classified document that says that the Battle for Iraq is creating new batches of terrorists and that it the “cause celeb” of the Jihadist movement, post it on your blog and start running around, like Pelosi and the rest of the desparate libs screaming like Chicken Little “Iraq is failing, Iraq is failing”. How pathetic. Then when the President releases the entire 4-page “key findings” portion from the NIE that clearly states (and all 16 intel agencies agree on this, too) that terrorists will be emboldend by a retreat from Iraq, that victory in Iraq will deflate the recruitment of future terrorists, and that democratization will blunt the fundmentalism in the region, (in other words, everything President Bush has been saying since January 2004) you libs want to dismiss that saying that the President is the one doing the cherry-picking the report, one that has been seen since April by members of Congress, by only declassifying the key findings portion. What sophistry! You libs are so desparate to be right on Iraq that you will say anything, no matter how rediculous or misleading, so long as it countermands what Bush happens to be saying. You and your party, Dave, have become nothing more than negative, pessimistic, defeat seeking, terrorist enabling contrarians. You seek our defeat in Iraq so that you can try to regain power at home. Maybe that is treasonous, as some have said, or not, but it does make you all pretty sorry in my book.

    As for my perceptions being dated…if my perceptions are dated as you say, then what does that say about your’s? I’ve said it before, Dave, all you know is what you’ve read in the NYT or the Wash Post or have heard from guys like me, the one’s that have actually been over there. You don’t know how hot is over there; I do. You don’t know what it’s like to be in a convoy stuck in bumper-to-bumper taffic in downtown Ramadi hoping that there are no insurgents around; I do. You’ve never talked to any Iraqis on subjects like what Saddam was like, how do Iraqis feel about Israel and Kuwait and the US presence in Iraq; I have. Furthermore, I still talk to my friends and people I run into about Iraq and ask the poeple who have been on the ground recently (since that is so important to you) what they think about what is going on. A First Sargeant that I talked to recently said that Ramadi looks to be becoming the next Fallujah because it is becoming a terrorist stronghold again. Have you read that in the NYTs, Dave? I submit to you all that my outdated perceptions are more real and pertenant today than your agenda driven, NYTs gleened perceptions will ever be. You can dismiss me and my time on the ground all you want, but the fact is that I am the closest thing to an Iraqi expert you will probably ever will have regular access to.

    The problem with debating the “should we have or not invaded Iraq” argument is that it provides a distraction from the intellectual vacuum that you libs possess when it comes to you producing a forward thinking vision of how to win in Iraq. Bob’s attmept at a plan (I’m being generous) was obsessed with how much money contractors were making off of Iraq and not how to actually WIN the fight there. Why? Because he doesn’t know what tactics to use or what tactics has failed. My point is that none of you nay-sayers have any clue what it takes to win a war, so you hide in the comfortable position of retreating so we don’t have to fight and you get to claim you’re right. Why don’t you all try practicing what you claim Bush didn’t do and listen to the military experts and let us win in Iraq? Never happen because that would necessitate you all shutting up for a good long period of time, and with an election around the corner, that isn’t going to happen. Gotta keep talking down the Iraq War, don’t you?

    I will debate on air any Iraq veteran (you know, the ones that have actually been there, unlike our friend Jose) that thinks our being there was a mistake.

    Sorry for being so long winded (some are saying “as usual”) but you are iritating me with what you said and I had a lot to say.

  20. Red Neckersniff
    September 30, 2006 at 7:53 pm

    Sometimes you fellas on the left start to sound exactly like al-Zawahri when he is on a tirade about how our President is a failure, and a liar. That’s nice that you guys, and the Pelosi crew, and al Qaeda, all see it the same way… and as for you Bob, you really have a pretty naive concept of what our country is doing to protect your ass.
    You sound like a real nice guy, Bob, but guys like you have got to come to the realization that these people that we are fighting are intent on killing all of us – President Bush is not your enemy! Bush did not start Jihad! That started many, many years ago! The jihadists will kill you just because you are not of Islam – it doesn’t matter if you are from America or Denmark. They are getting more recruits because their leaders convince the young ones that we are weak! They hate the Pope, they hate Catholics, they hate Jews, they hate Muslims who oppose jihad, they hate YOU! They want you DEAD!
    I think Rich can testify as an expert under cross examination on the witness stand on all things Iraqi war. Me, I’m just a good ol’ boy pluggin along. Probably not as smart as you Bob, or you, Dave. What I do know is that all this anti-Bush BS is nothing more than a distraction from getting the job done. So everything doesn’t go perfect. Tough. But there are no grand conspiracies…did Clinton have six chances to kill UBL, or ten? WHO CARES? It is a done deal now, and it does not matter, because he is alive and well. And if you say that President Bush would not want him deader than a doornail, you’re nuts. If he were shot tommorrow, I think Pelosi and Reid, at the least Howard Dean, would be implicating that it was just a conspiracy to raise Bush’s ratings in the polls.
    The next President, whoever he is, should demand that Congress declare war, formally, whenever we are attacked again (and we will be). This is so he won’t be accused of “leading us into” war. What a crock. I seem to recall there were a whole lot of people, democrats included, making statements like “He’s (Saddam)got to be stopped”. I often wonder what life would be like had we never even addressed that madman in Iraq. Not just for us, but for the survivors of thousands of people he would be killing and torturing (Bob), and the women whose lives would be destroyed…of course the French and Russians, and some U.N. officials, would be richer, great. And maybe he would have just continued on with his WMD program, who knows what would have developed? Do you think the UN would have solved the problem on their own? If you answer yes, you are on fantasy island.
    And speaking of women, where are all you left wing, radical, liberal N.O.W. types out there? Why haven’t you gone rushing to the aid of all of these poor Islamic women, now that the liberal media has made you aware of their plight? WHY? you are content sitting on your ample asses and badmouthing conservative women here, and our own country, but you don’t seem to give a damn about women who experience REAL abuse! In Islam, women are PROPERTY! ‘Course, you can’t go to bat for those women, because then it would appear like you were on the side of the President, right? Again, a crock. You jerks could care less about women – your agenda is politics.
    Which brings me right back to this for a closer. Politics and war don’t mix well. Bob, I’m glad you are proud to be a Democrat. Ditto for my Repub stripes…but this isn’t about pride, man. This is really about getting this job done with as little amount of casualties as possible. It doesn’t do any good to be a speedbump or accuse the other side of some type of high crime that is bullshit. And nobody is questioning anybody’s patriotism, Dave. Everyone here has inalienable rights. A given. It is just that we tend to get off track. War. Adios.

  21. JerryDinAZ
    September 30, 2006 at 9:00 pm

    SAME LIBERAL BLATHER! “WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER GONE THERE”…OK ALL YOU DEFEATOCANTS, YOU LIBORATS…NOW THAT WE ARE THERE, WHERE IS YOUR PLAN OR YOUR PARTIES PLAN TO GET OUT? i HEAR NOTING ON THIS BLOG EXCEPT 3 YEAR OLD “I TOLD YOU SO’S”…NOTHING FROM THE DNC, AND NOTING FROM YOUR ALMOST PRESIDENTS GORE AND KERRY…NOTHING FROM YOUR WACKALOON DEAN…NOTHING FROM YOUR FEMINAZI PELOSI…SO REALLY KIDS, WHO SPEAKS FOR YOUR PARTY? COLLIN POWEL’S NEXT BOOK? HE IS A REPUBLICAN! SO WHY DON’T YOU JUST SHUT UP AND KNOCK OFF THE ENTIRE COPY-N-PASTE BS AND TELL US WHAT YOUR PLAN IS FOR IRAQ? WE WANT TO KNOW! SO IF YOU SOUND GOOD WE MAY VOTE FOR YOUR CANDIDATES.
    SO ONCE AGAIN…HERE WE ARE! CUT-N-RUNNERS NOT WILLING TO SAY THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WILL DO, AND IN THE SILENCE NOTHING ELSE IS COMING FORWARD. DAVE, YOU ARE THE MASTER OF COPY-N-PASTE! FIND A PLAN YOUR PARTY IS PUTTING FORTH AND PASTE THE SUCKER HERE! OR BETTER YET COME UP WITH A PLAN OF YOUR OWN.
    HERE IS WHAT WE KNOW. WE ARE AT WAR IN IRAQ. THE QUESTION OF SHOULD WE BE THERE AT ALL WILL BE ANSWERED BY THE FUTURE, AND THAT’S A LONG WAY OFF. SO FOR NOW HOW BOUT SOME IDEAS BOYS? C’MON! YOU ALL HATE BUSH. IRAQ IS THE HOT BUTTON, SO COME UP WITH A PLAN WE CAN DEBATE IN THE NEXT 30 SOMETHING DAYS!

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PAN FOR IRAQ?

    LET’S TRY IT ONE MORE TIME BOYS N GIRLS! A SIMPLE STRAIGHT FORWARD QUESTION, YOU GUTLESS WHINERS!

    DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING IN YOUR QUIVER OTHER THAN HATE BUSH ARROWS? REALLY! PLEASE DON’T TELL ME YOU PINNED YOUR HOPES FOR THE HOUSE…THE SENATE…AND EVEN THE PRESIDENCY ON HATING A MAN! REALLY, YOU AND YOUR PARTY MUST BE DEEPER THAN THAT!

    SO?

  22. Bob from San Luis
    October 1, 2006 at 6:44 am

    JerryD: You want plans for Iraq from Democrats? Okay, here is a couple (follow the links there), here is another, here is another, and last but not least, here is another one, this last one from the official web site of the Democratic Party. Please look closely at the dates of the linked articles; you may notice that some are a few months old and the last one is from February of this year. What’s that you say? You never heard or read about these plans? Maybe they didn’t get picked up by the SCLM, the media owned by the 5 major corporations that pretty well control what gets reported. “Another report of a missing blonde woman…” , “Paris Hilton zzzzz…” ; is it any wonder that the media couldn’t find a Democrat’s plan for Iraq unless it was attached to some young woman’s chest? Anyway, Rich, JerryD and anybody else that thinks the Dems don’t have a plan, you’ve got some reading to do.

  23. Bob from San Luis
    October 1, 2006 at 6:45 am

    well, poop, double posted again. Sorry.

  24. Rich from Paso
    October 1, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    Bob, You posted Biden’s “three state plan” (which I already tore to shreads) and three ohter “plans” that were the same thing: Retreat and lose (cut and run is over used and doesn’t get to the heart of the problem). “Strategic Redeployment” is the fancy way of saying that they want to “retreat and lose” in Iraq. As I said, Bush has to be wrong and Iraq has to fail so that all you nay-ayers and Monday-morning Quarterbacks, and Dave’s “I told you so”‘s will be validated as right. But you are as wrong as water falling UP. Let’s narrow this down for the slow bunny’sin the audience: Is there a Democratic plan to WIN in Iraq? Winning is defined as leaving Iraq stable and secure, able to defend itself from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    No, just maybe, you defeatest liberals.aybe you can dedicate your energy to helping us and the Iraqis win there.

    Oh, by the way, on the subject of permanent bases: Bob, why are you against us putting “permanent” bases in Iraq? Are you aware that in every country we fought a war with and won in the last century, we established permanent bases there? Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, and Kuwait all have one or more permanent bases there. The only place where we lack a permanent base after a war is Vietnam. Why? Because defeatest liberal hippies and politicians kept us from winning there. That same group also made it possible for 58,000 of our best and brightest to die for nothing except a defeat. The same pattern is emergingm today. Not 3,000 of our best and brightest dying in vain. Oh, no, no. But defeatest, liberal hippies and politicians trying to convince America that we are wrong, not good enough and unable to beat a bunch of terrorist thugs that has only one wish: to die for Allah and to take as many non-believers with them as possible. I say let’s all stop this counter-productive bickering and help those sonzabitches met Allah personally. Come on, Dave and Bob and the rest of you liberals: come on over to Jerry, Redneck and my team and trying winning at something for a change.

  25. Rich from Paso
    October 1, 2006 at 10:39 pm

    One other thing for Bob: Since you are so against torture and so for giving the terrorists in G’itmo the same rights as American citizens, why don’t you camopaign to give them American citizenship? That way you could prevent them from being abused because we would NEVER torture an American citizen. And after you have gained there citizenship, you’d be able to get them registered as Democratic voters. That way they could help you vote George Bush out of office. Well, why not? Since Democrats in general and Huillary Clinton in particular are desparately trying to get illegal aliens registered as Democrats and give back convicted felons the franchise, why stop there? Give the G’itmo terrorists a say as registered Democrat voters. You are for giving them every other benefit of citizenship, why not go all the way, Bob? You’ll be seen as so cosmopolitan and poular by your liberal buddies (and the French!!), unlike us heathens like Jerry and I, that you’ll be the talk of the town…until those terrorists that you are so fond of protecting come and cut your head off for being an infidel.

  26. Red Neckersniff
    October 2, 2006 at 3:16 am

    Responding to your last, Bob: The President asked lawmakers to clarify the Geneva Convention wording that defines torture. He is well aware that we now live in a society overun with people willing to tackle our own team instead of going for the touchdown, unlike when this document was written so many years ago. If you were an agent questioning an Arab terrorist in custody, wouldn’t you want the reassurance that you wouldn’t be sued, fired, or jailed youself because you stepped over a hazey line and some pencil-neck clown wanting to make a name for himself charges you with “torture”? Remember the black officer who fired off his sidearm in the midst of it all, next to the head of a terrorist to scare the shit out of him to get crucial info? He got the info, everybody (including the terrorist) lived, but he was put through living hell, and ended up retiring! We lost a damn fine officer.
    Powell, McCain and others objected on grounds that perhaps other countries would do the same with other parts of the Geneva Convention, thereby clarifying the whole damn thing! Maybe they would just clarify that sum-bitch right out of a place at the dinner table and have to make a new one! ‘cept this time they otta make it the Muskogee Convention – it’d make more sense. Seriously though, can you think of any folks we went to war with that actually held to the tenets of the convention? the Germans? Japanese? Vietnamese? N. Koreans? sorry, pal, NONE of ’em! the Germans will say they did and say how civilized they were until you point out how many of our guys were actually tortured to death or just murdered while in custody. Besides, they committed genocide, so they get an F. You might reply that we in turn wasted lots and lots of our POW’s…how does that explain the German POW camps established right here in the USA?
    Many of them even stayed here!
    Doesn’t it seem eerily familiar that these people we fought back then thought of us as sub-human (Geneva didn’t apply to sub-humans said the Japanese), that they would rule the world by force, and that they MUST defeat the USA and it’s weak citizens? Everybody back then seemed to get it, mobilized, and kicked their ass.
    Even when the cold war kicked in, our enemy was determined to beat us, because he deemed himself superior, and would take over the world by force. They were beaten because of our superior economic system, our military strength, and our resolve to not give up, to NEVER give up.
    And no, authorities are still not allowed to go out and arrest anyone they want at any time for any reason – that is quite overblown and untrue…only applies to combat detainees, the enemy.
    Lastly, I also read those plans you linked. They’re all the same! And I agree with Rich, these guys are using warm and fuzzy words in order not to say the “R” word (RUN!) It’s like using the term “expanding projectile tips” for hollow points so’s not to make Mothers Against Killing Felons angry. Most folks are smart enough to see through it.
    adios.

  27. Red Neckersniff
    October 2, 2006 at 3:24 am

    PS for Bob – I wouldn’t mind seeing a democrat’s plan for Iraq attached to some young woman’s chest…what’s so wrong with that? zzzzzzzzz

  28. Dave Congalton
    October 2, 2006 at 5:14 am

    Hey Rich,

    So who is the one “unwilling to go outside the safety of this blog”???? It’s not me, pal. you know where to find me from 3 to 7 weekdays. I take all calls.

    You, on the other hand, have declined my last two invitations to come into the studio, claiming, “There’s nothing new to talk about with Iraq.” Yeah. Right.

  29. Bob from San Luis
    October 2, 2006 at 6:40 am

    Rich: Would any of those permanent bases in Iraq be like the base we had in Saudi Arabia? You know, some 10,000 troop strength, but after bin Laden attacked us, we closed that base and moved out of Saudi Arabia. In every country that we have military bases in, that country was involved in a declared war, either because they had attacked us or had declared war upon us, with the exception of Korea, I believe. Vietnam was another country that we had no formal declaration of war, and with good reason. Vietnam was ultimately a civil war, just like Iraq is turning into, and just like we had no business going into Vietnam, we had no justification for going into (illegally) Iraq. Yes Yes Yes, Saddam was a bad man, an evil leader that killed many of his own citizens; would he have killed as many Iraqis by now as we have done? Would regime change have been possible in any other manner than we chose? Another method that would not have had killed 2700 of our troops? Injured 20,000+ of our troops? Another method that would have not alienated so many of our “allies”? Another method that would not have spent, what is it now, $500 BILLION? Another method that would not have had some 100,000 Iraqis die? Rich, what is your plan for Iraq? Are you suggesting that what is being done now is the best that can be accomplished?
    As far as the question of torture goes, yes, we have had many of our enemies torture our soldiers, in many wars, and our military always strived to conduct itself within the guidelines of fairness and humane treatment of prisoners. Here is a link to George Washington declaring how prisoners should be treated; his example is something the current administration could learn from. Oh yeah, I forgot, that is sooo pre-9/11 mind-think.

  30. Red Neckersniff
    October 2, 2006 at 9:00 am

    OK Bob, you got it wrong, pard. We have bases all over the world, in places that have nothing to do with a declared war. We are there for strategic purposes, because we have agreements with those countries that are in our, and their, best interests…I would refer you to Goose Bay Labrador, to Thule, Greenland, to Reykavik Iceland, to Taiwan, and to Spain, just to mention a few. We have a presence all over the world because we are the strongest, and the most advanced, military and economic force on the planet. Matters not to some, and some might be ashamed of that, but for others like me, I sleep better at night.
    And this crap of you guys constantly whining about going into Iraq illegally means that you think Hillary, Kerry, and all of the rest of the democrats on the Hill and the Senate voted to commit a crime? Is that what you are saying Bob? Why do you guys keep saying we went in there illegally? Didn’t Hussein violate the UN resolutions? Didnt he present a threat to the entire region if not the world? Otherwise, why did everybody VOTE TO GO TO WAR THERE? I don’t think our G.I.’s would appreciate being called criminals. And what Iraqis are we killing? Are you referring to insurrgents? If not then are you saying that we are targeting civilians for death? what are you referring to? I have heard a few leftists say this, that we are killing thousands of innocent Iraqis…where? How? Iraqis are being killed by radical Muslim terrorist bombings, kidnappings, executions, etc, not by American GI’s!
    Sounds to me like you may be an isolationist, Bob. Are you? Do you think that more diplomacy would have done the trick with Iraq? Just more and more and more, just keep appeasing, and capitulating, anything it takes not to get involved, don’t expend any blood or money. Don’t try to spread freedom, or liberty. Just let them take care of it, or let Saddam take care of it. Apparently, the U.K. and a host of other “allies” felt the same as we did, had the same intell, too. Only a couple caved in after some threats, and some never showed up for the dance because they are cowardly cheese eating criminals. Bottom line, there is nobody alive that really knows the right way to solve the problem without loss of life…it is too bad that there is evil men who wipe out their own people.
    Let’s change course for a moment, and for the sake of our argument/discussion temporarily; What about IRAN? If you wake up one morn, and snap open your Trib and see that Jeruselem or New York is a smoldering bed of molten glass from Iran’s nuke, Iraq will seem like a stroll in the park, a distraction. All of the allies we “alienated” will be crawling up our ass to please, please do something before that crazy midget drops one on them!. The voice of Neville Chamberlain crys out from the ground! “Oh My Persia! How I loved Thee!”

  31. Red Neckersniff
    October 2, 2006 at 9:14 am

    PS to Bob before my nite nite…a lot of people said that the evil Cheney, aka Halliburton Dick, got us into the quagmire for oil…blood for oil, that’s what. Since Iraq is the 3rd largest oil producer behind the Saudi’s and Iran, I’m thinking NOW maybe that is not such a bad thing if we go to $100-200 a barrel. Hey better us’ns than somebody else! If Abadinajihad says no oil for youse guys, kinda puts a dent in our budget, ‘specially if Hugo joins in, the 5th largest producer, and al Qaeda targets Nigerian oil fields. Hmmmmm. zzzzz

  32. JerryDinAZ
    October 2, 2006 at 2:31 pm

    I LOVE HOW THE LIBS TURN A SINCERE QUESTION ASKING SESSION INTO AN ATTACK ON ONE OF THOSE ASKING THE QUESTION. SO VERY VERY TYPICAL OF A LIBOCANT! CAN’T ANSWER A QUESTION SO THEY ATTACK THE ASKER! KINDA SAD IF YOU ASK ME. SO BEYOND THE TYPICAL ATTACKS…LET’S TRY THIS AGAIN. FOR THE 4TH TIME? 5TH?

    WHAT IS “YOUR” PLAN FOR IRAQ?

    OTHER THAN ATTACKING THOSE THAT ARE ASKING! ARE YOU GETTING TIRED OF THE QUESTION? GOOD! ANSWER IT! WE ARE GETTING TIRED OF YOUR SAME OLD BS AND DODGING THE QUESTION.

    HARRY, NANCY AND HOWARD CAN’T HELP YOU HERE…CUZ THEY WON’T ANSWER IT EITHER.
    PLEASE DONT MAKE ME ASK YOU FOR THE 6TH TIME.

    PS: AS FOR $100-200 A BARREL OIL! I SAY GO FOR IT! THEN THE LIBS WILL FINALLY APPROVE DRILLING IN ALASKA AND OFFSHORE! BRING IT ON!

  33. Rich from Paso
    October 2, 2006 at 4:27 pm

    So I guess my two year old experiences aren’t outdated after all, or they only outdated when I disagree with you and Bob. In case you forgot, I have been on your show three times, so there goes me “remaining safe” on your blog . All any of your callers on the left want to talk about is the past. Well, I’ve covered that. Frankly, I get tired of being seconded guessed or argued with about what I actually saw. Jose did it during our debate and you called him on it. But I guess you missed the line where I said “I will debate any Iraq veteran that has actually been to Iraq”. Those are the conditions for me going back on your show. But enough about me, Dave. Why don’t you want to e-mail my Iraqi friend and apologize to him about how evil the United States was for illegally invading his country and ruining his life by deposing Saddam Hussein? You get all indignant and brissle when I challenge you on that, but still you avoid any mention of the challenge you get indignant about. Why won’t you go the extra mile if you believe that the Iraq War was so illegal?

  34. Rich from Paso
    October 2, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    Before I forget: Bob, you will find my plan for how to win in Iraq as the second post under the “all 16 agencies agree” heading. Still waiting to see a plan from a liberal and/or Democrat that doesn’t involve retreat and defeat. My guess is that liberal democrats don’t know how to win wars. WWII was the last war a liberal democrat won.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: