posted on December 7, 2006 01:45:53 PM
The bi-partisan Study Group on Bushy's Iraq Invasion Released their report on 12/06/06.
Looks like a good time to start a new Iraq Nam invasion update post. All eyes are on Bushy and what he does with the bi-partisan Study Group's recommendations.
We Americans will be watching how many recommendations will Bushy implement?
How long will it take Bushy to implement recommendations?
How long before the last American Soldier dies in Bushy's failed invasion of Iraq.
As of TODAY 12/07/06
America has 2,920 dead American troops.
America has 22,057 wounded American troops.
America has spent 348,000,000,000 tax dollars on Iraq.
"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."
IRAQ 'APPEASE' SQUEEZE ON W.
* PANEL KISSES UP TO IRAN & SYRIA
* PLAN WOULD PULL TROOPS OUT IN '08
NILES LATHEM Post Correspondent
Slideshow image
PreviousPauseNext
PrintEmailDiscussion BoardStory Bottom
December 7, 2006 -- What do you think of the report’s recommendations? Click the discussion board link below the photo to post your comments.
WASHINGTON - The Iraq Study Group report delivered to President Bush yesterday contains 79 separate recommendations - but not one that explains how American forces can defeat the terrorist insurgents, only ways to bring the troops home.
Declaring the situation "grave and deteriorating," the high-powered commission proposed the United States talk directly to terror abettors Iran and Syria to get their cooperation, and commit to removing U.S. combat troops in early 2008.
In a major policy report presented to Bush and Congress, the panel also recommended taking a harder line with the fledgling Iraqi government by threatening to reduce or cut off military and financial support unless it does more to crack down on militia death squads.
Reaction to the much-anticipated report was swift:
* President Bush called it a "tough" assessment of U.S. involvement in Iraq and said he would treat all of its recommendations seriously, but he didn't publicly embrace any of the proposals.
* White House spokesman Tony Snow later rejected the call for America to have open dialogue with enemy Iran, saying that could happen only after the Islamic state halted uranium enrichment.
* Democrats in Congress heartily embraced the study, saying it offered Bush some good ideas, and put the burden on him to accept some of them.
* Republicans generally had a polite but noncommittal response.
* In Iraq, U.S. troops said they didn't believe that Baghdad's own forces were prepared yet to take over security, and questioned whether GIs could come home in 2008, as the report urged.
Meanwhile, as the report was being debated, 10 American troops were killed in Iraq in four separate attacks amid worsening violence.
Critics said the study was foolish to suggest pressuring the Iraqi government to do more when it's not yet capable.
"Simply calling for a weak and divided Iraqi government to act in the face of all the forces that are tearing it apart is almost feckless," said Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"It comes far too close to having the U.S. threaten to take its ball and go home if the Iraqis do not play the game our way."
The group's chairman, Bush family friend and former Secretary of State James Baker, warned that "there is no magic formula to solve the problems in Iraq" - but added, in a stinging rebuke to the president, "We can no longer afford to stay the course."
"Our ship of state has hit rough waters. It must now chart a new way forward," added former Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, the group's Democratic co-chairman.
The panel, made up of five prominent Democrats and five prominent Republicans, offered a total of 79 comprehensive political, military and diplomatic and other recommendations.
The report was released as pressure mounted on Bush to come up with an exit strategy from Iraq amid rising opposition to a war that has resulted in the deaths of 2,900 U.S. troops and injuries to close to 21,000 servicemen and women.
It warns of even greater chaos and bloodshed, which could spread outside Iraq if action is not taken soon to change policy.
"If the situation continues to deteriorate, the consequences could be severe. A slide toward chaos could trigger the collapse of Iraq's government and a human catastrophe," the report said.
"Neighboring countries could intervene. Sunni-Shia clashes could spread. Al Qaeda could win a propaganda victory and expand its base of operations. The global standing of the U.S. could be diminished. Americans could become more polarized," the report continued.
The commission recommended that the number of U.S. troops embedded to train Iraqis be increased dramatically, from 3,000 to 4,000 currently to 10,000 to 20,000.
Commission member William Perry, defense secretary in the Clinton administration, said those could be drawn from combat brigades already in Iraq.
Yesterday morning, a stoic Bush listened to the panel's report at a White House meeting with all 10 commission members and said later he would take the recommendations "seriously."
"We applaud your work. We take it very seriously and we'll act on it in a timely fashion," Bush told the panel at a meeting in the White House Cabinet Room.
But aides were quick to point out that the president is also waiting for findings of special study groups at the Pentagon, the National Security Council and the State Department before making final decisions about any midcourse correction on Iraq.
That decision could involve "cherry-picking" different proposals from different reports, according to White House officials.
But the Baker panel's report contained many recommendations that Bush is certain to oppose - at least for now.
It calls for direct talks with Syria and Iran - two nations the Bush administration believes are fomenting the violence in Iraq.
The talks would be part of a regional diplomatic offensive that would also seek solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian clash and the conflict in Lebanon.
"If we don't talk to them, we don't see much progress being made," Hamilton said at a press conference on Capitol Hill.
"You can't look at this part of the world and pick and chose which countries you're going to deal with."
Israeli officials were alarmed with a line in the report that said a negotiated peace with the Palestinians should address their "right of return." That's a highly controversial demand, rejected by Israel, for all Palestinian refugees and their descendants to be allowed to return to Israeli land.
On the military side, the Baker commission is calling for the transformation of the mission of U.S. forces in Iraq from a combat to a support and advisory role.
It would accomplish this by "redeploying" 15 U.S. combat brigades by the first quarter of 2008 and increasing fivefold the number of U.S. trainers embedded in Iraqi military units.
However, the report calls for special rapid reaction teams and Special Forces to remain in the area to fight al Qaeda and other foreign terrorist groups.
"Despite a massive effort, stability in Iraq remains elusive and the situation is deteriorating," the report said. "The ability of the United States to shape outcomes is diminishing. Time is running out."
The commission also briefed members of the Baghdad government by teleconference, and one official there agreed that Iraqis must take responsibility for their own security.
"Absolute dependence on foreign troops is not possible," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh.
Even though the Baker commission stopped short of endorsing Democratic calls for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops by a certain date, newly empowered congressional Democrats embraced the report.
"The report underscores the message the American people sent one month ago. There must be change and there is no time to lose," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters.
In another major recommendation for change in policy, the Baker panel called for a tougher approach to Iraq's Shiite-dominated government.
It said Iraqi leaders should do more to disarm militias and achieve national reconciliation, and called for talking - and even giving amnesty - to insurgent leaders, including rabidly anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
"If the Iraqi government does not make substantial progress toward the achievement of milestones on national reconciliation, security and governance, the U.S. should reduce its political, military and economic support for the Iraqi government," the report said.
Many analysts initially believed the bipartisan panel would provide political cover for both sides for a U.S. exit from Iraq.
But the atmosphere between the panel and the White House has grown tense in recent weeks because of news stories that Baker, a close friend and confidant of Bush's father, ex-President George H. W. Bush, was part of an effort by the father to get his son out of political trouble.
JERUSALEM – A high level U.S. commission's recommendations for an eventual withdrawal from Iraq and for dialogue with Iran and Syria proves "Islamic resistance" works and America will ultimately be defeated, according to senior terrorist leaders interviewed by WND.
The militants, from the largest Palestinian terror groups in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, welcomed the policies outlined by the Iraq Study Group, which they claim recognizes Islam is the "new giant of the world."
The group is led by former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker.
"The report proves that this is the era of Islam and of jihad," said Abu Ayman, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin.
The Islamic Jihad terror group is responsible for every suicide bombing in Israel during the past two years.
"[With the Iraq Study Group report], the Americans came to the conclusion that Islam is the new giant of the world and it would be clever to reduce hostilities with this giant. In the Quran the principle of the rotation is clear and according to this principle the end of the Americans and of all non-believers is getting closer," Abu Ayman said.
According to Abu Abdullah, a senior leader of Hamas' so-called military wing, Baker's report is a victory for Islam brought about by "Allah and his angels."
"It is not just a simple victory. It is a great one. The big superpower of the world is defeated by a small group of mujahedeen (fighters). Did you see the mujahedeens' clothes and weapons in comparison with the huge individual military arsenal and supply that was carrying every American soldier?" exclaimed Abu Abdullah, who is considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, Hamas' declared "resistance" department.
"It is no doubt that Allah and his angels were fighting with them (insurgents) against the Americans. It is a sign to all those who keep saying that America, Israel and the West in general cannot be defeated on the ground so let us negotiate with them," Abu Abdullah said.
Abu Abdullah said following a withdrawal from Iraq, the U.S. will be defeated on its own soil.
"America must understand that with anti-American governments in Latin America and with Islam growing and reinforcing, including in the U.S. itself, the next step would be a total defeat on their (American) land, not a relative one like they are facing in Iraq," he said.
Abu Nasser, the second-in-command of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group in the West Bank, called the Iraq Study Group report a "great victory" from which other jihadist organizations can learn.
"The Iraqi victory is a great message and lesson to the revolutionary and freedom movements in the world. Just to think that this resistance is led by hundreds of Sunni fighters who defeated hundreds of thousands of Americans, British and thousands of soldiers who belong to the puppet regime in Baghdad. What would be the situation if the Shiites will decide to join the resistance?" commented Abu Nasser.
The Al Aqsa leader said his group learned from the "Iraqi resistance" that jihad will ultimately destroy Israel.
The Al Aqsa Brigades is the declared "military wing" of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party.
"If Israel will not start negotiating its withdrawal we are ready to launch the new stage of the intifada," Abu Nasser said.
Islamic Jihad's Abu Ayman said after the U.S. "defeat" in Iraq is finalized, insurgents there should move to the West Bank and Gaza to help destroy Israel.
"We hope that after chasing the occupation from Iraq, these jihad efforts and experiences will be transferred to Palestine, and yes, I mean that we expect these fighters will come to Palestine as part of a big Islamic army."
The Iraqi Study Group's report called the U.S. position in Iraq "grave and deteriorating," and recommended the withdrawal of most combat troops from Iraq by 2008.
It warned, "The ability of the United States to influence events within Iraq is diminishing."
The report stated the U.S. should engage Iran, Syria and insurgent leaders in Iraq, and said Israel should be pressured into withdrawing from the West Bank and the Golan Heights.
The West Bank runs alongside Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Israel's international airport. The Heights is strategic mountainous territory that looks down in Israeli and Syrian population centers.
President Bush received the report at the White House this morning. Flanked by Baker and other commission members, Bush pledged to treat each proposal seriously and act in a "timely fashion."
The White House said Bush will make key decisions within weeks.
Some terror leaders, though, were unsure whether the Baker report would actually be implemented. They claimed Israel controls U.S. foreign policy and would ultimately block changes in American actions in the Middle East.
"The problem is that I think the political structure of the U.S. and the role of the Zionists in the U.S. turns impossible the possibility that this report would be implemented," said Abu Ayman.
Still the terror leader said the report shows insurgent actions are working.
"It is the dawn of the real Islam what we are seeing now, young people who are leaving everything in their countries and are coming to fight in Iraq," said Abu Ayman.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on December 7, 2006 04:15:55 PM
You know bear, in all honesty after reading their full, published report....I don't see ONE new recommendation that hasn't ALREADY been offered before.
It's like they've wasted all this time and money....repeating suggestions that have already been offered.
And where are we???? Still in the same position we were.
I can only laugh at the recommendation [again, already been offered up] that we should 'talk' to Syria and Iran...work something out with them.
It's like they're totally insane, nuts, crazy. Syria and Iran have been helping the terrorists we're fighting in Iraq.
SCARY to know the dems can push that nonsense.
"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."
posted on December 7, 2006 04:43:26 PM
Bush is now stuck, European leaders have responded, they will not be sending troops to help the US withdraw from Iraq gracefully. Bush will either withdraw the troops per the wishes of the American electorate (see 2006 elections,) and the new Democratic majority in Congress or he will find himself being "de-funded" in his little escapade by the US Congress. The House and Senate do NOT have to do one thing, all they have to do is NOT do one thing and that is appropriate funds.
Bush will either conform or he will take Republicans down to a certain defeat again in 2008. Since the majority of US Senators coming up for re-election in 2008 are Republicans and most perceived as vulnerable Republicans, President Bush may find himself rather alone at the top, as his party loyals in Congress FLEE from him for their own political survival.
What legacy will Bush leave history to report, almost certainly one of utter defeat and stupidity. Works for me.
All that is needed to guarantee a Democratic Presidential victory in 2008 is for Bush to be seen as obstinate in this issue and continuing his defiance of the will of the majority of the American people. He is such a little man with a little brain and a little hmmmmmm to compensate for, I am CERTAIN he will do just that.
posted on December 7, 2006 04:51:54 PM
lol I don't know about all your assumptions there. lol
Especially considering how many of the dems have said they will NOT agree to 'defund' the war. They feel that would be to damaging to our troops.
After all, some dems really DO care about our troops.
Top Democrats rebuff calls to cut off war funds
By Christina Bellantoni
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
December 6, 2006
Top Democrats in Congress are ignoring calls from within their caucus to eliminate funding for troops in Iraq, a strategy some say is necessary to end U.S. involvement in the war.
"There is only one way in which the United States will withdraw from Iraq prior to the end of President Bush's term," said Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat. "Congress must vote to cut off funds."
Democratic leaders flatly rejected the idea yesterday, insisting they will move to "change the course" of the war but will continue to appropriate money to support the troops fighting in Iraq.
"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 Dec 7, 2006 05:07 PM ]
posted on December 7, 2006 05:22:30 PM
I am not speaking about doing something, I am speaking about NOT doing something. Now WHO is going to be the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee? Who is going to be the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee? Are you aware of the power of Chairman? Are you aware of how easily ONE US Senator can indefinently STALL any piece of legislation that he or she sees fit to? hmmmm LOL LOL yourself.
posted on December 7, 2006 05:33:22 PM
JustSimpleMe,
I believe your 100% right "Bush is now stuck."
Bushy and his GANG have now been fully exposed for the Liars and fakes they are.
The bi-partisan Study Group said Bushy needs to get busy not wait months or even weeks to change his Iraq policy.
We all know that Bushy and what is left of his supporters drank a lot of repug Kool-Aid. Because of that fact these Bushy believers are now completely confused and out of touch with reality.
We need to remember that in Bushy's and his GANG cases they no only drank the Kool-Aid they brewed it. Being his own brew master "Bush is now stuck."
The American people have had enough of Bushy's Bull Sh*t. Unless Bushy starts moving fast on a change of his failed Iraq policy the American people will start calling for his impeachment. I am betting the new congress will have to start the impeachment process even they don't want to.
"Bush is now stuck." like you said. Bushy has no one to bail him out this time around.
posted on December 7, 2006 05:40:40 PM
I was appalled today to see how halting Bush's speaking was, as though he was having trouble summoning up the simplest words. Is it possible his brain is more damaged from the drugs and alcohol than we all thought originally? My impression is that he's falling apart.
He should never try to speak in tandem with another foreign leader; all of them make him look almost retarded. It's embarrassing.
posted on December 7, 2006 05:49:29 PM
LOL...sure you were, justsimple me.....you said: "Bush will either withdraw the troops per the wishes of the American electorate (see 2006 elections,) and the new Democratic majority in Congress or he will find himself being "de-funded" in his little escapade by the US Congress."
Now you're saying: "I am not speaking about doing something, I am speaking about NOT doing something."
I think you're confused about what you said the first time. 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."
posted on December 7, 2006 05:56:18 PM
No Linda, I am not confused at all and no matter how you attempt to spin what I said, it is still there for everyone to read for themselves.
Bush will either begin to withdraw the troops or Congress will begin to defund, just like they did in Vietnam, remember? That is not an affirmative action, it is NOT ACTING. Big difference there. You know that, you just don't like it.
posted on December 8, 2006 05:40:23 AM
I forgot to ask beast,stone and bear can you say Civil war yet?
23 killed in Iraq; 35 bodies found
Iraqi military chief vows house-to-house search in Baghdad to find weapons
By THOMAS WAGNER
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BAGHDAD, Iraq - A series of bombings and shootings killed at least 23 people in Iraq on Thursday, including a 7-year-old girl and two college professors.
Iraqi police also found 35 bullet-riddled bodies that had been bound and blindfolded and left in different parts of the capital.
Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, director of the Interior Ministry's national command center, vowed to strike back at the spiraling sectarian violence in Baghdad, saying Iraqi forces will soon launch house-to-house searches to confiscate hidden weapons.
"No house or area will be excluded from this search. All kinds of weapons will be confiscated," he told reporters, adding that 40 police officers were killed and 90 wounded in the capital in the past week.
posted on December 8, 2006 08:16:39 AM
linduh,""I don't see ONE new recommendation that hasn't ALREADY been offered before.
It's like they've wasted all this time and money....repeating suggestions that have already been offered.
And where are we???? Still in the same position we were."""
Thanks to GW BUSH and his failed "stay the course" philosophy!!!!!Time and money WILL be wasted if Bush the Ignorant cannot adapt to changing situations and LEARN something.
""I can only laugh at the recommendation [again, already been offered up] that we should 'talk' to Syria and Iran...work something out with them.
It's like they're totally insane, nuts, crazy. Syria and Iran have been helping the terrorists we're fighting in Iraq.
SCARY to know the dems can push that nonsense."""
And the alternative to DIPLOMACY ????? You want the entire Middle East to look like Iraq ??? In the REAL world we will HAVE to deal with countries who support terrorists since there's so many of them...to ignore them is stupid, to bomb them incredibly stupid.....what do YOU suggest, linduh, more genocide of muslims????
posted on December 8, 2006 08:34:48 AM
You [general] might 'look out of it' too....if you had the common sense to realize what America is up against....how much the future of our democracy depends on the results in Iraq....and could see so many misquided liberals who appear not to care one bit.
========================
Another side of the Iraq story....by a PRO-American, one who wants to see America be successful....not fail.
White House spokesman Tony Snow noted that the president still believes the United States is winning in Iraq.
"What I think is demoralizing is a constant effort to try to portray this as a losing mission," Snow added.
The soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines with whom we're embedded here in Ramadi concur with their commander in chief. Not one of the many with whom we have spoken since arriving here believes that they are failing in their mission.
They see the growing ability of the Iraqi army and police as proof of their effectiveness -- and evidence that this war is heading toward a favorable outcome for the country that they volunteered to serve -- and the people of Mesopotamia.
Unfortunately, the judgment of those with "boots on the ground" doesn't seem to much matter to the masters of the media and many of the power brokers on the Potomac. Just a day after Gates delivered his negative prognosis, President Bush tersely announced that he had received the much-leaked final report of the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group (ISG).
Flanked by committee co-chairmen, former Secretary of State James Baker and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, Bush described the report as a "tough assessment" that he will take seriously in seeking a strategy for the way forward in the Middle East and Iraq.
Eyewitness participants here are understandably reluctant to comment on a report that they have not read in its entirety, but privately many express grave concerns that it appears to be at odds with what those who are fighting this war are seeing.
After a single four-day visit to Baghdad the ISG finds the situation here to be "grave and deteriorating" and accused the Pentagon of "under-reporting" the violence in Iraq.
The report calls for a "new" emphasis on training Iraqis to assume greater responsibility for their own security.
Yet, it pays scant attention to dramatic improvements in the capabilities of Iraqi police and Army units being wrought by Military Transition Teams (MTTs). One MTT officer who has lived with his Iraqi counterparts for months dryly observed, "I wonder what the hell they think I've been doing out here?"
As forecast in a stream of pre-release "leaks" the ISG recommended that, "Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United States should try to engage them constructively." And in a strange conclusion ignoring the long-term, global jihad being waged against the West, the committee found a link between a successful outcome in this war to a "right of return" for Palestinians who left Israel since the founding of the Jewish state.
Negative news is nothing new in war -- neither Gates nor the Iraq Study Group is unique in that.
In 1944, after the Japanese began making Kamikaze suicide attacks during the Battle of Leyte Gulf, there were those who suggested that winning the war was becoming too costly. They were wrong then -- and they are wrong today.
Winning that war was crucial. Winning this one is too, if the sacrifices being made today are to be worth anything.
Oliver North
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"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 Dec 8, 2006 08:47 AM ]
posted on December 8, 2006 09:39:26 AM
Mingo: I heard last night on the news that when Bush got the news about the committee report on the Iraq war, he said, "Where's my drink?"
He may have been kidding, but in light of how he's been appearing lately on TV, I just wonder. If he didn't really mean it, it does show that alcohol is still on his mind in a big way. Scary.
posted on December 8, 2006 12:05:27 PM
beast Liar_k said about the Iraq report,
"It's like they've wasted all this time and money....repeating suggestions that have already been offered."
"And where are we???? Still in the same position we were."
Hey beast liar_k, since you SPOUTED your latest LIE things have changed a lot in Iraq Nam. 2 more brave American Troops have died. Plus the American Tax payer has spent several Million Dollars more on Bushy's blunders.
When will the first NEW-CON say Civil War in Iraq Nam?
posted on December 8, 2006 03:19:19 PM
OH BROTHER!
Linda_K
posted on December 8, 2006 08:34:48 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You [general] might 'look out of it' too....if you had the common sense to realize what America is up against....how much the future of our democracy depends on the results in Iraq....and could see so many misquided liberals who appear not to care one bit. """
Now she's blaming the liberals for bushy's dry drunk !!!LOL!
And THIS: ""how much the future of our democracy depends on the results in Iraq....""
OUR democracy...OUR democracy ?????
EXACTLY how is that ????
I thought we were (erroneously) lead to believe it was the IRAQIs democracy we were there for !!!!!???
How in the hell could OUR democracy depend on THEIR democracy...you blooming idiot, that is by far the dumbest thing you have ever posted and that's saying something!!!!!
What a load of utter claptrap!
Losing arguments has truly addled what little of your brain is left.
posted on December 9, 2006 12:26:21 AM
Bush does have the look of a man who is drinking. He has to live the rest of his life with the burden of knowing he is responsible for all those deaths and if he has any morals at all, it will weigh him down until he dies. Since he has been a spoiled wus all his life, he will most likely take some meds or alcohol to block the reality of what he's done each time it starts to seep into his brain.
posted on December 10, 2006 04:10:24 PM
I just hope that the stats that you quote become widely known and serve as a wakeup call to both young Americans and their parents.
Service in the US Military may be seen by many as some sort of conduit to a decent life, education, benefits etc, BUT IT IS NOT WORTH IT.
People need to refocus young people's attention on the fact that you can get PERMANENTLY INJURED AND CAN DIE in the military, It is NOT just a way to get a college education, a few extra bucks, some medical coverage. People need to wake up, NOBODY GIVES YOU ANYTHING OF VALUE for free in this world.
It is not acts of patriotism that cause these young people to "join up." It is desperation and a strong desire to get out of the poverty and cycle of a substandard of living that many have found themselves raised in.
The US military has been used as a political tool since Korea and continues to be so. Not since World War II has the US has a really true desire to be victorious in anything. It is the "expendable" lifes of undesirables that have been lost and maimed, everyone knows that.
posted on December 11, 2006 03:44:42 PM
JustSimpleMe,
I update Bushy's failed invasion of Iraq Nam so we can all see what Bushy's criminal actions have brought to America.
I would like to see the NEO-CON Bushy supporters DENY these facts.
As of TODAY 12/11/06
America has 2,932 dead American troops up 3 since yesterday.
America has 22,057 wounded American troops.
America has spent 348,000,000,000 tax dollars on Iraq.
12/11/06 AFP: 'All Iraqis are being targeted:' 26 more dead
The Iraqi Defense Ministry said Monday it is doing its best to protect victims of sectarian violence, as at least 26 people were killed including a pregnant woman and three of her children, who were savagely murdered.
The whole world is telling Bushy his Iraq invasion has failed. The little voices in Bushy head is telling him differently.
posted on December 11, 2006 03:56:13 PM
okay peepa.....have the dems admitted defeat for America, in Iraq yet?
Think they will in January????
=======
And sure looks like justsimpleme is VERY MUCH ANTI-military.
WOW ....
And he/she has the FACTS all wrong....as most liberals here appear to do most of the time. tsk tsk tsk
Being so uninformed of the FACTS might be what causes them to think the way they do. But they're adults...they have access to the actual FACTS and should be able to STOP posting falsehoods.
THIS is the MOST educated group of soldiers that EVER served in our Armed Forces.
THIS is the MOST financially well off group of soldiers that EVER served in the Armed Forces.
They are MORE educated and come from HIGH economic levels than the whole of the population their age.
So...once again...another liberal posts UNTRUTHS.
Want the REAL FACTS? Not some anti-military guys OPINION.
posted on December 11, 2006 04:14:21 PM
I can only imagine what a poster by the name of 'charlie' who I've NEVER even seen his/her name before...must be saying to get YOU hellen so excited.
If you get excited...then it must be evil. lol lol lol
Or are you posting under a userid of 'charlie' over on Doc's board????
posted on December 11, 2006 04:25:08 PM
I've never posted under another name, dingbat. I am not registered at DrArcanes but now there is some interesting conversation there.
