posted on November 13, 2006 11:20:25 AM new
IRAQ WAR UPDATE SINCE THE ELECTION ON 11/07/06
Since some people are saying the high death rate in Iraq was ment to sway our elections. Today 6 days after our elections is a good place to start a new Iraq war update post.
Hopefully since Bush is crying out for help with his illegal invasion of Iraq we can start finding a fix to his blunder and failure.
ON ELECTION DAY AMERICA HAD 2836 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS. TODAY WE HAVE 2851 DEAD TROOPS UP 15 SINCE THE ELECTION.
THE BEST INSURANCE BUSHY HAS AGAINST IMPEACHMENT IS CHENEY.
posted on November 13, 2006 11:35:53 AM new
It's all the Democrats fault though. There is a difference now. Remember that... Linda will be the first to remind you.
posted on November 13, 2006 11:47:52 AM new
Yep, increase in violence has ALWAYS occurred right before elections...theirs and ours.
Just like in VN they KNOW they can't win with their 'military'...but they CAN win by influencing Americans and making them SICK of the loss of our treasure.
It worked in VN...and it appears it's working again in this war. They've got the media on their side...they've got MOST of the liberals on their side...and non a lot of Independents wanted to see change in our Congress.
So...the decision will most likely be in the hands of our newly elected dem majority.
Will they insist on a complete withdrawal? A partial withdrawal?
I don't believe so. There are too many conservative and moderate dems that DON'T want to see the US LOSE this war. They're NOT at all like the radical 'ADMIT DEFEAT and 'bring our troops home now' club of radical liberals.
And just like McCain said...I personally believe MOST moderate and conservative DEMS will feel as he does:
Well, first of all, I believe that a lot of Americans trust my judgment on issues such as this because of the experience and background that I have.
Of course they're frustrated, they have every reason to be frustrated, I am frustrated. The question is, is what's the solution? And I believe that a withdrawal, or a date for withdrawal, will lead to chaos in the region, and most military experts think the same thing. I believe that there are a lot of things that we can do to salvage this, but they all require the presence of additional troops.
Now, if you want to, to give up on, on Iraq, then fine, and take the consequences. I think there will be chaos in the region. But we need to control the-this insurgency, we need to embed people with the police and the military, we need to clear and hold-and "hold" is the important part-so we can expand areas of security. There's a lot of things that we can and must do. But if we don't want to do that, fine, but that is a decision that I think will have profound consequences. I'm not prepared to go to an American family and tell them, "Well, you know, we'll-you just stay there for a while and we'll delay this withdrawal and defeat for a year or two," I'm not prepared to tell them that. I'm prepared to tell them that if we have the will to win, we will do what's necessary to win.
But I'm not interested in seeing a scene of the American Embassy on the, the roof of the American embassy in Saigon multiplied a thousandfold.
MR. RUSSERT: But John McCain is suggesting we get deeper into Iraq, send more troops; the American public is on the side of getting out. Look at this from our exit polls. Send more troops, 18 percent of the American people, 23 percent say maintain current level, 28 say withdraw some, 31 percent say withdraw all. Eighty-two percent have a different position than McCain. How can you go to the country after these elections and say, "Send more troops to Iraq"?
SEN. McCAIN: I can only do what I think is best for these young men and women who are in the military. To do otherwise would be immoral and dishonorable. I believe that we have sacrificed enormously because of mistakes that have been made that were serious, which have been well-chronicled on this program and in many books.
You have to make a decision as to whether you're going to pursue a path that can bring to-about a stable Iraq and freedom and dem-for the people of Iraq, or you're going to have some kind of, of situation where we either withdraw immediately or delay.
And there are some who will say, "Well, we, we can stabilize the situation and withdraw gradually," I don't accept that, I think that what's going to happen is that, as you withdraw, that you will see these-the sectarian violence increase, I think you'll see involvement by Iran and Syria, and I think you will see a serious situation. I have to do what I think is morally right, and that's been what has guided me throughout my life, and I do have some experience in some of these issues.
MR. RUSSERT: Bottom line for John McCain is if there's no consensus to send more troops to Iraq and, "win"...
SEN. McCAIN: Mm-hmm.
MR. RUSSERT: ...then, rather than delay withdrawal for a year and let others die, bring the troops home.
SEN. McCAIN: I, I think you-it's-I can't say that specifically, but I certainly wouldn't support a proposal that leads to eventual defeat-that I am convinced that would lead to eventual defeat. And, look, if you talk to most military experts, we're in a critical and crucial time.
We're either going to lose this thing or win this thing within the next several months.
posted on November 14, 2006 05:46:48 AM new
ON ELECTION DAY AMERICA HAD 2836 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS. TODAY WE HAVE 2853 DEAD TROOPS UP 17 SINCE THE ELECTION.
posted on November 14, 2006 07:45:09 PM new
Typical new "McCain Light", he's been in Washington too long. Won't take a position one way or the other. What a sad disappointment this man is.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 14, 2006 07:51:49 PM new
Oh...but profe...your PARTY liked him so much they were PRAYING that he'd agree to run as their V.P. with traitor kerry.
[How easily they forget.
]
~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 14, 2006 07:54 PM ]
posted on November 14, 2006 08:01:42 PM new
AND NOW THE CHARGES BEGIN AGAINST BUSHY AND HIS GANG. THESE CHARGES ARE JUST A WARM UP AND TIP OF AN ICE BURG. ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THE TRUTH ABOUT BUSH'S FOLLIES AND FAILURES IN IRAQ WILL COME OUT.
Moves to charge Rumsfeld with war crimes
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 14/11/2006
Reporter: Tom Iggulden
In Germany, there are moves to charge former US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld with war crimes.
Transcript
PAUL LOCKYER: Overseas now and there's still intense discussion among the leaders of the coalition of the willing about how to deal with the chaos in Iraq. Neither a withdrawal nor an increase in troop numbers appear to have strong enough political support, leaving the West looking towards Iraq's neighbours for help. Meanwhile in Germany there's a move to prosecute one of the war's chief architects, recently sacked Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for war crimes. Tom Iggulden reports.
TOM IGGULDEN: Another day in Baghdad, another gruesome discovery, this time the bodies of 45 Sunnis most showing signs of torture. And across town in Baghdad's east, 20 Shi'ites are killed by a car bomb at a major intersection. Washington's Iraq study group has spent the last eight months interviewing 150 people to find a solution to the chaos. Today they spent an hour and a half at the White House.
TONY SNOW: This was not proposal shopping by the Iraq study group. They asked the President questions, he asked them questions but there was care taken not to sort of try to prejudge or also to get a jump on what they're going to do.
GEORGE W BUSH: I was impressed by the questions they asked. They want us to succeed in Iraq, just like I want to succeed. I believe it is very important though for people making suggestions to recognise that the best military options depend upon the conditions on the ground.
TOM IGGULDEN: Only one of the study group's 10 members has any connection to the military. It's headed by James Baker who was Secretary of State under the President's father. He's among the members of the first Bush Administration who were against the current President's decision to invade Iraq.
MAUREEN DOWS: W (George W Bush) and Karl Rove came into office wanting to use the father as the reverse playbook and their whole foreign policy is a rebuke to the father's foreign policy.
TOM IGGULDEN: Mr Baker hasn't always seen eye to eye with George W Bush.
CHRISTIAN ALFONSI: It's an arm's length relationship. It's one where he knows that Baker is, and this is to Baker's credit, the consummate political fixer of his generation and the great wise man of Republican politics. So he needs him from time to time for the real big things, fixing Iraq, fixing the Florida recount and so forth.
TOM IGGULDEN: The study group's recommendations will also be closely watched over the Atlantic. The British Prime Minister wants the solution to include Iraq's neighbours.
TONY BLAIR: And there is a fundamental misunderstanding that this is about changing policy on Syria and Iran. On the contrary, a whole region policy should start with Israel, Palestine. That is the core. We should then make progress on Lebanon, we should unite all moderate Arab and Muslim voices behind a push for peace in those countries but also in Iraq and we should be standing up for, empowering, respecting those with a moderate and modern view of the faith of Islam everywhere.
TOM IGGULDEN: And there were sympathy for that view tonight in Sydney.
JOHN HOWARD: Let us again intensify our efforts towards a sustainable and just solution to the Palestinian issue.
TOM IGGULDEN: Mr Blair also offered support for the embattled Bush Administration and warned against using America's foreign policy mistakes to dilute its power.
TONY BLAIR: We may agree or disagree with the United State's position on some or all of these issues but none of these vital British concerns can be addressed, let alone solved, without America.
TOM IGGULDEN: Meanwhile German and US human rights lawyers are trying to have Donald Rumsfeld prosecuted for war crimes. They filed 255 pages of evidence to Germany's Ministry of Justice on behalf of 11 prisoners of Abu Ghraib prison, much of it from the officer who ran the prison, Brigadier General Janice Karpinski.
WOLFGANG KALECK (TRANSLATION): Janice Karpinski is practically our star witness because she's the highest military officer ready to provide her insights to us and to the prosecuting office which will be ready to hear from her. Janice Karpinski was ready to provide testimony in the US and the court martial process against her soldiers but nobody wanted to question her.
TOM IGGULDEN: The lawsuit alleges Mr Rumsfeld personally approved or condoned torture.
posted on November 14, 2006 08:04:02 PM new
And sadly a man who served his country well...through many presidents....will now have the DEM/LIBERAL party full backing his conviction.
Yep....they're patriots alright. NOT!!!
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 14, 2006 09:53:16 PM new
ON ELECTION DAY AMERICA HAD 2836 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS. TODAY WE HAVE 2853 DEAD TROOPS UP 17 SINCE THE ELECTION.
THE BEST INSURANCE BUSHY HAS AGAINST IMPEACHMENT IS CHENEY.
posted on November 15, 2006 12:02:30 AM new
McCain:""I believe that a withdrawal, or a date for withdrawal, will lead to chaos in the region, and most military experts think the same thing. I believe that there are a lot of things that we can do to salvage this, but they all require the presence of additional troops.
Now, if you want to, to give up on, on Iraq, then fine, and take the consequences. I think there will be chaos in the region.""
Uh DUH! There IS CHAOS NOW YOU Bloody Dolt!
My gawd , has that spineless wonder been up bush's butt so long he went blind!?????
posted on November 15, 2006 02:45:56 AM new
He's just not as stupid as you are. The fact that the most important spot on the globe is being threatened by a religious dictatorship (Iran, dummy) seems important to him.
BTW, peepa, I'm sure Rumsfeld is quaking in is shoes. LOL
posted on November 15, 2006 05:28:31 AM new
I'll bet clueless desquirreleys such as you believe that Rumsfeld is deserving of high honors for what only you can see as a stellar performance. Stick to burying your nuts, dumbo. It's going to be a bitter winter for you and your fellow creatures.
posted on November 15, 2006 06:55:00 AM new
My opinions of Rumsfeld were neither stated nor relevant.
And as I mentioned in other threads, tell me of my "bitter winter" after your worshiped group actually DOES something. Until then, continue to moo with the rest. Your self-perceived cleverness is lost in the herd.
posted on November 15, 2006 08:55:14 AM new
After the destruction that your group has perpetrated on the country and the world in general how do you have room to speak? No action at all would be an improvement over that miserable performance. Cleaning up your mess will be a horrific task but one in which the Democratic party will excel.
posted on November 16, 2006 01:03:24 PM new
desquirrel
Remember when liar_k was saying the increase in violence in Iraq was planed to influence our elections? SEE BELOW and you will see how full of BULL ROAR YOU NEW-CONS ARE. All you guys have to say is leave our troops in Iraq to die in Iraq's CIVIL WAR THAT BUSHY STARTED THROUGH LIES,BLUNDERS AND FAILURES.
Iraq war update 11/16/06.
ON ELECTION DAY AMERICA HAD 2836 DEAD AMERICAN TROOPS. TODAY WE HAVE 2853 DEAD TROOPS UP 27 SINCE THE ELECTION.
'This is civil war'
Between 2 percent and 5 percent of Iraq's 27 million people have been killed, wounded or uprooted since the Americans invaded in 2003, calculates Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for International and Strategic Studies.
"This is civil war," he said.
THE BEST INSURANCE BUSHY HAS AGAINST IMPEACHMENT IS CHENEY.
posted on November 16, 2006 01:10:59 PM new
You can chant any imbecility you like. It won't change the fact that the Iraq conflict is Iran by proxy and that it is the most important spot on the entire planet.
You can keep your count running. It's a sure bet even the Democrats won't do a cut and run.
posted on November 16, 2006 01:17:18 PM newOh...but profe...your PARTY liked him so much they were PRAYING that he'd agree to run as their V.P. with traitor kerry.
I often vote as a Democrat Linda, but not always. Always though, my opinions are my own. I have spoken at length here in the past of my distaste and disgust with McCain.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 17, 2006 01:09:51 PM new
profe said, in part:
"I often vote as a Democrat Linda, but not always. Always though, my opinions are my own. I have spoken at length here in the past of my distaste and disgust with McCain."
lol....yes but MY memory goes back further than that profe. lol
I remember the time when you FULLY supported and stated that same support for McCain. And then when and why you changed your mind.
When HE back up this President about the war in Iraq. Only from THAT point on have you stated your disapoint/disapproval with him. You said something along the line of 'since he sold out'....lol
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
posted on November 17, 2006 02:23:54 PM new
Yes, linduh, it's called changing your mind...it's what people who think and can reason do. Which is exactly why YOU never change your mind
posted on November 18, 2006 05:33:00 AM new
Wrong again Linda. My change of mind about McCain didn't come from his support for the war. It began during the election, when I saw that he was willing to bend over for the Bush political machine. They maligned everything about the man...spread rumors that he had a black child (so what?)...denigrated his patriotism and questioned whether he'd actually suffered as a prisoner of war and he took it all without a fight. It made me sick to see.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 18, 2006 05:37:47 AM new
Having said that, what possible difference does it make? Unless you're making it personal....
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on November 18, 2006 06:37:08 AM new Deur1, I can see that you are not interested in politics by the misinformation that you have just posted. George Bush misled the American people and Congress with bogus information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction aimed and ready to use. The American people and Congress were misinformed with the lie that an "imminent threat" existed and so they were duped into supporting Bush.
On the topic of McCain....
McCain's obsequeous loyalty to the Bush machine is his fatal flaw. That kind of Republican doesn't have a chance in hell of being elected president.
posted on November 18, 2006 07:08:05 AM new
No, profe.....what I am saying is that up until right before the 2004 elections...I saw you, by your posts here, as being VERY supportive of McCain.
Then when he gave his speech at the RNC convention you THEN changed your mind about him.
This was the first time I EVER saw you post anything negative about McCain....
posted on August 30, 2004 08:44:13 PM new
profe - I'm done with McCain. Talk about a sell out....
___________________________________
Our `neoconservatives´ are neither new nor conservative, but old as Bablyon
and evil as Hell." --Edward Abbey
AND
posted on August 30, 2004 08:57:22 PM
profe - McCain calles Moore "disingenuous" as McCain attempts to support Bush ????
Perfect call Reamond. The man's performance tonigh is a profound disappointment.
___________________________________
Our `neoconservatives´ are neither new nor conservative, but old as Bablyon
and evil as Hell." --Edward Abbey
---------------
So....up until the time tha McCain stated his support for HIS PARTY, sided with this President on the war....then your tune about him changed....dramatically.
McCain's speech before the RNC WAS very much about the war:
And again, I remember that the DEM party wanted to run McCain as their V.P. but HE wasn't interested....he restated he was a Republican though and though.
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 18, 2006 07:29 AM ]
posted on November 18, 2006 07:23:58 AM new
LOL...have to laugh at hellen's 'he lied' 'he gave the congress false info' routine she continues to spew.
I think most honest people know that most ALL dems voted to give him war powers. Most honest people can READ the statements of the dem leaders on why we NEEDED to go into Iraq.
So...if this President lied, as the radical lefties/socialists like to continue repeating...then so did those dem leaders in THEIR party.
As to being given FALSE information...LOL LOL LOL....they must really thing all the DEMS in the Senate and the HOUSE are total IDIOTS that we 'led astray' but a CIC that pulled the wool over their stupid eyes. LOL
Honest people know the clinton administration was saying the say EXACT thing about the threat from Iraq...saddam.
But they just IGNORE that...it's ALL this President's lying to us.
Yeah right. Sure...
Just goes to show their own inability to form rational conclusions.
Plus THREE investigative panels, including the 9-11 commission came to the conclusion that he DIDN'T lie nor made our intelligence lie about the threat.
Try and ignore the wackos deur....their just full of hatred for a President whose done NOTHING by try and protect our Nation.
[b]edited to add: helen has been one calling for us to ADMIT DEFEAT AND RUN.
She'd like nothing better than to let our enemies the terrorists win.
And she's been 'calling' for it since the war began.
posted on October 26, 2003 06:42:27 AM
helenjw Admit defeat, and leave as soon as possible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation:
What would a Democrat president have done at that point? Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack.
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Nov 18, 2006 07:47 AM ]
posted on November 18, 2006 07:31:54 AM new
mingotree
posted on November 17, 2006 02:23:54 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, linduh, it's called changing your mind...it's what people who think and can reason do. Which is exactly why YOU never change your mind
Boy linda, it really is an important issue with you just WHEN profe changed his mind,,,,why?
Why does it matter SO much to you???That is very odd....kinda sick....
Personally, I hope McCain runs...he will be seen as nothing but a puppet of the Bush administration with Rove's fist firmly up his backside....and since bush's ratings are in the flusher....LOL!
[ edited by mingotree on Nov 18, 2006 07:33 AM ]
This topic is 7 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new
that he'd agree to run as their V.P. with traitor kerry.
