For those of you who wonder why it's important for our troops to stay in Iraq, read....

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

John P

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,426
2
0
Well, more of the same from the left, namecalling and nitpicking, nothing of substance and certainly no solutions.

There were plenty of mistakes made during the Clinton adiministration also.

What it boils down to is that we have a threat, not a peceived threat but a threat. It has been proven that diplomacy does not work, there was plenty of that during the Clinton administration. To me that is basically pretending we don't have a threat, which is dangerous.

So, what do we do?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,101
46,630
136
Originally posted by: John P.
Well, more of the same from the left, namecalling and nitpicking, nothing of substance and certainly no solutions.

There were plenty of mistakes made during the Clinton adiministration also.

What it boils down to is that we have a threat, not a peceived threat but a threat. It has been proven that diplomacy does not work, there was plenty of that during the Clinton administration. To me that is basically pretending we don't have a threat, which is dangerous.

So, what do we do?

Well, to analyze your post... you start it off with namecalling, then move into the "Clinton did it" excuse, followed by 'facts' you made up about Clinton's diplomatic record, then finally moving into fearmongering. Thanks for contributing.
 

John P

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,426
2
0
Well, to analyze your post... you start it off with namecalling, then move into the "Clinton did it" excuse, followed by 'facts' you made up about Clinton's diplomatic record, then finally moving into fearmongering. Thanks for contributing.

No, thank you for proving my point further.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: John P.
Well, to analyze your post... you start it off with namecalling, then move into the "Clinton did it" excuse, followed by 'facts' you made up about Clinton's diplomatic record, then finally moving into fearmongering. Thanks for contributing.

No, thank you for proving my point further.
How did he do that? I didn't read anywhere in your posts where you admitted being a fool!

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: John P.
Well, more of the same from the left, namecalling and nitpicking, nothing of substance and certainly no solutions.

There were plenty of mistakes made during the Clinton adiministration also.

While I have never been a fan of the Clintons, I cannot think of any mistake he made that was anywhere near as bad as Bush invading Iraq.

What it boils down to is that we have a threat, not a peceived threat but a threat.

In Iraq? Any threat coming from Iraq was the result of Bush's invasion.

It has been proven that diplomacy does not work, there was plenty of that during the Clinton administration. To me that is basically pretending we don't have a threat, which is dangerous.

So, what do we do?

Well, invading Iraq certainly wasn't the answer.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: John P.
Well, more of the same from the left, namecalling and nitpicking, nothing of substance and certainly no solutions.

There were plenty of mistakes made during the Clinton adiministration also.

While I have never been a fan of the Clintons, I cannot think of any mistake he made that was anywhere near as bad as Bush invading Iraq.

What it boils down to is that we have a threat, not a peceived threat but a threat.

In Iraq? Any threat coming from Iraq was the result of Bush's invasion.

It has been proven that diplomacy does not work, there was plenty of that during the Clinton administration. To me that is basically pretending we don't have a threat, which is dangerous.

So, what do we do?

Well, invading Iraq certainly wasn't the answer.

I think he means "what do we do now?"

As in, given that the invasion was probably a mistake, what can we do now to make the best of it and give the Iraqi people a chance at peace?

People need to stop harping on how big a mistake the war was to begin with, and start figuring out a real way to recover from said mistake instead.

That is what I am counting on the Democrats to accomplish -- but I'm beginning to think that they're just as ignorant as their Republican brethren.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: palehorse74
I think he means "what do we do now?"

As in, given that the invasion was probably a mistake, what can we do now to make the best of it and give the Iraqi people a chance at peace?

Keeping 150K US troops in Iraq cerainly won't give Iraqi's a chance at peace. I think Iraqi's need to find peace for themselves. If they want to kill each other, so be it. I'd rather Iraqi's kill Iraqi's than US kill Iraqi's. Of course I'd prefer neither.

People need to stop harping on how big a mistake the war was to begin with,

No. No we don't.

and start figuring out a real way to recover from said mistake instead.

That is what I am counting on the Democrats to accomplish -- but I'm beginning to think that they're just as ignorant as their Republican brethren.

:laugh:

What a crock of shlt.

Let me get this straight. Bush invades Iraq, creates total chaos, basically creates a civil war, and you are counting on the other party to fix it? And if they can't, they are just as ignorant as the Bush admin?

:laugh:

Wow, simply, wow.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
People need to stop harping on how big a mistake the war was to begin with,

No. No we don't.
Yes, you do. That is, if finding a way out of this mess is your real goal. Then, later, we can go back and examine the mistakes that got us into the mess to begin with. Harping on them now is totally and completely counterproductive.... as you can see by the lack of results in the "new and improved Congress."
and start figuring out a real way to recover from said mistake instead.
That is what I am counting on the Democrats to accomplish -- but I'm beginning to think that they're just as ignorant as their Republican brethren.

:laugh:

What a crock of shlt.

Let me get this straight. Bush invades Iraq, creates total chaos, basically creates a civil war, and you are counting on the other party to fix it? And if they can't, they are just as ignorant as the Bush admin?
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: palehorse74
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.

Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised. Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge. I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:
uhh, yes - given that it was their entire platform for election last November. Taking on the task of extricating us from this mess was their pledge, and it won them their elections. It is therefore our duty to hold them accountable for their broken promises, just as we hold Bush accountable for his broken promises made several years earlier.

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.
As i said, once we get out of this mess, you can study the initial mistakes for the rest of your days, for all I care... But when it comes to priorities, fixing this mess trumps the Blame Game every time.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised.
HAHAHAHA, WHAT?!!? uhhh, ya... right.

Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge.
this shattered faith in Republican rule that you describe was the very reason every Democratic candidate DID promise to fix what was broken in Washington. But if you think the democrats won their seats without making such promises, you're delusional!

I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.
on that we can NOW agree. However, I believe that many democrats had faith in their candidates last October... only recently has reality begun to kick in and show them for the equally useless politicians that they are.

sad that.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: bamacre
Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:
uhh, yes - given that it was their entire platform for election last November. Taking on the task of extricating us from this mess was their pledge, and it won them their elections. It is therefore our duty to hold them accountable for their broken promises, just as we hold Bush accountable for his broken promises made several years earlier.

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.
As i said, once we get out of this mess, you can study the initial mistakes for the rest of your days, for all I care... But when it comes to priorities, fixing this mess trumps the Blame Game every time.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised.
HAHAHAHA, WHAT?!!? uhhh, ya... right.

Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge.
this shattered faith in Republican rule that you describe was the very reason every Democratic candidate DID promise to fix what was broken in Washington. But if you think the democrats won their seats without making such promises, you're delusional!

I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.
on that we can NOW agree. However, I believe that many democrats had faith in their candidates last October... only recently has reality begun to kick in and show them for the equally useless politicians that they are.

sad that.
Useless maybe but not as destructive. At least with the Dems controlling congress we now have someone to stop Bush from going ahead and invading Iran. ioo bad they weren't there for Iraq and the ones that were didn't have the balls to prevent the Dub and his Handlers from fscking us over so bad.

Only the ignorant would consider the Democrats saviors, they just aren't as bad as the Republicans.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,615
1,964
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: palehorse74
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.

Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised. Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge. I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.


Where were you during the last election cycle? All I heard was how the Democrats would come in and save the day, from the Dems on this board to the Dems running for office. Now you are already starting to make excuses for them? So sad....
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: bamacre
Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:
uhh, yes - given that it was their entire platform for election last November. Taking on the task of extricating us from this mess was their pledge, and it won them their elections. It is therefore our duty to hold them accountable for their broken promises, just as we hold Bush accountable for his broken promises made several years earlier.

First off, it was not their choice, as you said. I'm sure that's not what they would have chosen to run on, I'm sure they wouldn't want to feel they'd have to clean up a mess made by Bush. I'm quite sure they'd wish we weren't there, that there wasn't a mess to clean up.

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.
As i said, once we get out of this mess, you can study the initial mistakes for the rest of your days, for all I care... But when it comes to priorities, fixing this mess trumps the Blame Game every time.

And you seem to think that it is a-ok for Bush to make the mess as long as the Democrats are able to fix them. And if they can't, it's their fault for not being able to fix them. :roll:

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised.
HAHAHAHA, WHAT?!!? uhhh, ya... right.

I'm not wrong and you know it. The elections went the way they did because of Bush's foul-ups, not because of anything Democrats promised. Americans voted against Republicans MUCH more so than they voted for Democrats.

Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge.
this shattered faith in Republican rule that you describe was the very reason every Democratic candidate DID promise to fix what was broken in Washington. But if you think the democrats won their seats without making such promises, you're delusional!

You act as if Americans had a choice here. WTF were they going to do? Continue voting for Republicans? The ballots may have just said, "FOR Republican, or AGAINST Republican."

I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.
on that we can NOW agree. However, I believe that many democrats had faith in their candidates last October... only recently has reality begun to kick in and show them for the equally useless politicians that they are.

sad that.

Oh we agree? Doesn't look like it considering the rest of your posts. Where we disagree is that it is not "only recently" that the American voters lost faith in Democrats in fixing Iraq. They knew before the elections that Iraq was such a freakin' mess than no one could really fix it. They didn't vote for Democrats because they thought they could fix Iraq, they voted against Republicans for fvcking it up to begin with. And if you can't see that, you're blind.

And just so you know, I am not a Democrat. Never voted for one in my life. That is probably going to change thanks to your buddy in charge.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: palehorse74
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.

Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised. Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge. I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.


Where were you during the last election cycle? All I heard was how the Democrats would come in and save the day, from the Dems on this board to the Dems running for office. Now you are already starting to make excuses for them? So sad....

Oh please. :roll:

All I heard was how much of a cluster-fvck Iraq is.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,615
1,964
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: palehorse74
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.

Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised. Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge. I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.


Where were you during the last election cycle? All I heard was how the Democrats would come in and save the day, from the Dems on this board to the Dems running for office. Now you are already starting to make excuses for them? So sad....

Oh please. :roll:

All I heard was how much of a cluster-fvck Iraq is.

So I guess you missed everyone saying that the Democrats could do better?

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
I wonder if the next Republican Nominee is going to have the Dub stump for them? It was a mistake that Gore didn't have Clinton campaign for him and it probably cost him the election. On the other hand I think it would be a mistake for the next Republican Nominee to have the Dub campaign for him as he should try to distance himsef from Bush as much as possible.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: palehorse74
They were voted into office on the premise that they would implement changes and fix what has been broken by the Bush Administration. So yes, we have every right to hold them to those promises. The duty of extricating our country from this mess has fallen to them. Taking on that responsibility was their choice, and their promise! Thus far, however, they've given us no indication that they are any better than those who got us into this mess.

They have been given a chance to make things right, so it is our duty to hold them to it. Eternal harping on Bush's past mistakes gets us nowhere in terms of resolving said crisis.

Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised. Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge. I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.


Where were you during the last election cycle? All I heard was how the Democrats would come in and save the day, from the Dems on this board to the Dems running for office. Now you are already starting to make excuses for them? So sad....

Oh please. :roll:

All I heard was how much of a cluster-fvck Iraq is.

So I guess you missed everyone saying that the Democrats could do better?

How the hell could they do worse?:confused:
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I wonder if the next Republican Nominee is going to have the Dub stump for them? It was a mistake that Gore didn't have Clinton campaign for him and it probably cost him the election. On the other hand I think it would be a mistake for the next Republican Nominee to have the Dub campaign for him as he should try to distance himsef from Bush as much as possible.

Can't argue with that.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: bamacre
Oh, it was their choice, huh? :roll:
uhh, yes - given that it was their entire platform for election last November. Taking on the task of extricating us from this mess was their pledge, and it won them their elections. It is therefore our duty to hold them accountable for their broken promises, just as we hold Bush accountable for his broken promises made several years earlier.

First off, it was not their choice, as you said. I'm sure that's not what they would have chosen to run on, I'm sure they wouldn't want to feel they'd have to clean up a mess made by Bush. I'm quite sure they'd wish we weren't there, that there wasn't a mess to clean up.
ohhh jeebus... listen: it was their choice to run last year given the circumstances. In making that decision, they agreed to a platform consisting primarily of promises for changes and fixes to Bush's screw-ups. Whether or not they ever wanted to run on such a platform is irrelevant... because they did.

And "harping on Bush's past mistakes" may not get us anywhere "in terms of resolving said crisis," but it should be done to help prevent those mistakes from happening again.
As i said, once we get out of this mess, you can study the initial mistakes for the rest of your days, for all I care... But when it comes to priorities, fixing this mess trumps the Blame Game every time.

And you seem to think that it is a-ok for Bush to make the mess as long as the Democrats are able to fix them. And if they can't, it's their fault for not being able to fix them. :roll:
1) It's Bush's fault we are in this mess. 2) It will be his AND the current Congress' fault if they do not figure a way out of this mess. they have signed on to be a part of the solution, with promises to that effect, so yes, they too should be held accountable for whatever happens from here on out. What about that is so difficult for you to grasp?

If a company is failing, and the board of directors is replaced with people who say that they can fix it, don't they themselves become responsible for whatever happens once they take control? If the company continues to fail, then they too will be partially to blame for not following through with their promises to fix said company.

comprende'?

You know as well as I do that the Democrats winning of the past elections was not because of anything they promised.
HAHAHAHA, WHAT?!!? uhhh, ya... right.

I'm not wrong and you know it. The elections went the way they did because of Bush's foul-ups, not because of anything Democrats promised. Americans voted against Republicans MUCH more so than they voted for Democrats.
Let me spell it out for you: The Democrats' promises were a result of Bush's screw-ups. Therefore, they tied their own election results directly to their own promises of change and resolution. Regardless of the reasons people voted for who they did, the bottom line across the board is that those votes were cast with a desire for CHANGE. As in, we have every right to hope that the democrats fix what the Republicans broke. To desire anything less would be ignorant -- unless you somehow enjoy the mess itself, simply because the other guy is to blame...?

Instead, they won because of the broken promises and many mistakes made by the Republicans in charge.
this shattered faith in Republican rule that you describe was the very reason every Democratic candidate DID promise to fix what was broken in Washington. But if you think the democrats won their seats without making such promises, you're delusional!

You act as if Americans had a choice here. WTF were they going to do? Continue voting for Republicans? The ballots may have just said, "FOR Republican, or AGAINST Republican."
not quite... the Democrats tied their promises, and their elections, directly to the Iraq issue; therefore their eventual performance will be measured accordingly.

I don't think the American voters have any faith in the Democrats resolving the problem in Iraq, nor anyone else for that matter.
on that we can NOW agree. However, I believe that many democrats had faith in their candidates last October... only recently has reality begun to kick in and show them for the equally useless politicians that they are.

sad that.

Oh we agree? Doesn't look like it considering the rest of your posts. Where we disagree is that it is not "only recently" that the American voters lost faith in Democrats in fixing Iraq. They knew before the elections that Iraq was such a freakin' mess than no one could really fix it.
I do not believe that. Rather, I do believe that the new democrats at least gave us a shred of hope that things would change. Americans have never been the sort to just give up, so I highly doubt that the entire populace went into last November with a defeatist attitude and a total lack of expectations or hope.

They didn't vote for Democrats because they thought they could fix Iraq, they voted against Republicans for fvcking it up to begin with. And if you can't see that, you're blind.
they voted for both reasons... but, the Democratic candidates took the mess upon their own shoulders when they voiced promises for change and an eventual solution to the mess Republicans created.

And just so you know, I am not a Democrat. Never voted for one in my life. That is probably going to change thanks to your buddy in charge.
well, just so YOU know, I'm not a republican. My voting record has been 50/50 R/D over the last 15 years. Second, Bush is not my "buddy" - He is my Commander in Chief.

I think you're spending too much time pointing fingers and playing the Blame Game to apply the proper pressure on the new Congress to get us out of this mess. your priorities are out of whack.

Extricating ourselves from this mess, properly, should be our highest priority. Instead, too many people are focusing on the year 2003, to move forward in 2007...
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
62,449
10,779
136
I love how the right supported BushCo's total fvcking up the war on terror by going after Iraq, instead of continuing & finishing the war in Afghanistan, but now they expect the Dems to solve the problem in the first 3 months after they took office...
Patience...it took your boys 4 years to get things this fvcked up...it'll take time to fix it...(IF it CAN be fixed) I'm not sure it will ever be fixed...the best overall solution may be to just withdraw all our troops to the borders, control them to keep outside parties out of the fray, and let the Iraqi's fight it out...
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,615
1,964
126
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I love how the right supported BushCo's total fvcking up the war on terror by going after Iraq, instead of continuing & finishing the war in Afghanistan, but now they expect the Dems to solve the problem in the first 3 months after they took office...
Patience...it took your boys 4 years to get things this fvcked up...it'll take time to fix it...(IF it CAN be fixed) I'm not sure it will ever be fixed...the best overall solution may be to just withdraw all our troops to the borders, control them to keep outside parties out of the fray, and let the Iraqi's fight it out...

Hey, its the Dems that said that they would save us all in the first 100 hours.

:laugh:

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,101
46,630
136
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I love how the right supported BushCo's total fvcking up the war on terror by going after Iraq, instead of continuing & finishing the war in Afghanistan, but now they expect the Dems to solve the problem in the first 3 months after they took office...
Patience...it took your boys 4 years to get things this fvcked up...it'll take time to fix it...(IF it CAN be fixed) I'm not sure it will ever be fixed...the best overall solution may be to just withdraw all our troops to the borders, control them to keep outside parties out of the fray, and let the Iraqi's fight it out...

Hey, its the Dems that said that they would save us all in the first 100 hours.

:laugh:

Are you A.) Totally ignorant of the goals the democrats set out for the 100 hours thing or B.) trolling?

 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,615
1,964
126
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I love how the right supported BushCo's total fvcking up the war on terror by going after Iraq, instead of continuing & finishing the war in Afghanistan, but now they expect the Dems to solve the problem in the first 3 months after they took office...
Patience...it took your boys 4 years to get things this fvcked up...it'll take time to fix it...(IF it CAN be fixed) I'm not sure it will ever be fixed...the best overall solution may be to just withdraw all our troops to the borders, control them to keep outside parties out of the fray, and let the Iraqi's fight it out...

Hey, its the Dems that said that they would save us all in the first 100 hours.

:laugh:

Are you A.) Totally ignorant of the goals the democrats set out for the 100 hours thing or B.) trolling?


B

Edit - How did that 100 hours thing work out by the way? I don't even remember what they wanted to do.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,101
46,630
136
It went pretty well actually. Of course they engineered it to go well by filling it with easy things they knew they could pass. (Who is going to vote against greater oversight of congress when people are getting caught molesting pages?) They sort of weaseled out of some things though, like their promise to fully implement the 9/11 commission's proposals (they did implement most, but not all of them)