Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On'

[Bowmaster]

This just in from The Onion:

WASHINGTON, DC?In an internationally televised statement Monday, President Bush modified a July 2003 challenge to Iraqi militants attacking U.S. forces. "Terrorists, Saddam loyalists, and anti-American insurgents: Please stop bringing it on now," Bush said at a Monday press conference. "Nine months and 500 U.S. casualties ago, I may have invited y'all to bring it on, but as of today, I formally rescind that statement. I would officially like for you to step back." The president added that the "it" Iraqis should stop bringing includes gunfire, bombings, grenade attacks, and suicide missions of all types.


Nice "News In Brief". Of course, Bush would never say this as he still believes there are no problems in Iraq now that we are there...

 

[PlatinumGold]

we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

I disagree. I think our troops certainly have the resolve and motivation (their lives are on the line.) But, I think we're just undermanned. There are, what, 2,000 troops or so in Falluja to contain that entire city? That's a joke!!!

 

[PingSpike]

Did you guys see the "Cheney to drink glass of water while Bush speaks" headline?

I particularly like the "Onion in History" section. "FDR's corpse elected for second term: A better man dead than any alive"

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

I disagree. I think our troops certainly have the resolve and motivation (their lives are on the line.) But, I think we're just undermanned. There are, what, 2,000 troops or so in Falluja to contain that entire city? That's a joke!!!

i mispoke. it's not resolve of our troops i should have questioned in middle east or in vietnam. its the resolve of our leadership that i question. in vietnam, our leadership resolve was clearly the issue.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

I disagree. I think our troops certainly have the resolve and motivation (their lives are on the line.) But, I think we're just undermanned. There are, what, 2,000 troops or so in Falluja to contain that entire city? That's a joke!!!

i mispoke. it's not resolve of our troops i should have questioned in middle east or in vietnam. its the resolve of our leadership that i question. in vietnam, our leadership resolve was clearly the issue.

It was politicians directing the military. Much like we have now.

Did FDR or Truman direct as much from the White House or did they let the generals do what they know best?

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

I disagree. I think our troops certainly have the resolve and motivation (their lives are on the line.) But, I think we're just undermanned. There are, what, 2,000 troops or so in Falluja to contain that entire city? That's a joke!!!

I don't think that the American troops have the motivation that the Iraqis have, the Iraqis are fighting for their country, what are the US forces fighting for?

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
we didn't "get it" in vietnam and we apparently don't "get it" now.

war's aren't won because you have more firepower, wars are won by resolve and motivation. face it, our troops don't have the resolve and motivation that the iraqis do. wonder why.

I disagree. I think our troops certainly have the resolve and motivation (their lives are on the line.) But, I think we're just undermanned. There are, what, 2,000 troops or so in Falluja to contain that entire city? That's a joke!!!

I don't think that the American troops have the motivation that the Iraqis have, the Iraqis are fighting for their country, what are the US forces fighting for?

freedom, democracy, end of tyranny, end of world hunger, cure for cancer and all those other fantasies