Great Quote from Bush Today

[-Cp]

ROFL - GREAT QUOTE FROM BUSH TODAY:

"Senator Kerry said our soldiers and Marines are not fighting for a mistake but also called the liberation of Iraq a colossal error. He said we need to do more to train Iraqis, but he also said we shouldn't be spending so much money over there.

He said he wants to hold a summit meeting so he can invite other countries to join what he calls the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time. He said terrorists are pouring across the Iraqi border but also said that fighting those terrorists is a diversion from the war on terror.

You hear all that and you can understand why somebody would make a face."

 

[DKSuddeth]

dayyyyaaammmmmmmnnnnnnnnn.

 

[nakedemperor]

ROFL - GREAT QUOTE FROM BUSH TODAY:

"Senator Kerry said our soldiers and Marines are not fighting for a mistake but also called the liberation of Iraq a colossal error. He said we need to do more to train Iraqis, but he also said we shouldn't be spending so much money over there.

He said he wants to hold a summit meeting so he can invite other countries to join what he calls the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time. He said terrorists are pouring across the Iraqi border but also said that fighting those terrorists is a diversion from the war on terror.

You hear all that and you can understand why somebody would make a face."

If I might try to put Bush's representation of Kerry's sentiments back into context:

The marines on the ground are fighting for a worthy cause. Saddam needed to be deposed. This is Kerry's stance.

Bush asserts that in Kerry's opinion, the 'liberation of Iraq' is a colossal error. That's a shamefully dishonest representation of what Kerry believes, which is that the way in which the war was prosecuted was the colossal error.

Ergo, fighting for a worthy cause but in a manner which is erroneous
are not incompatible statements.

Kerry says we need to spend less money there. I agree. Kerry also says we should be doing more to train Iraqis. If we garner more international funding for the war, both of these can be achieved simultaneously, ergo they are not incompatible statements.

John Kerry believes that a war in which 90% of the casualties and 90% of the money are coming from the United States is "the wrong war". I agree. If we are able to garner more international support, it would be "the right war".

When the Iraq war was initially prosecuted, it was a diversion from Afghanistan, the most direct assault on the terrorist in the war on terror. AT THE TIME, he believed invading Iraq was a diversion from this war. Bush took that sentiment out of context and said that Kerry labeled the war HERE AND NOW as a diversion from the war on terror. This is a subtle and effective way of twisting Kerry's logic, and the president had no qualms in doing so.


Ok, having clarified all that, I don't necessarily understand 1. how Kerry is going to garner more int'l support 2. what 'doing more' to train Iraqis is. I also am not sure that I agree that invading Iraq was a 'diversion' from the War on terror. ALL I'm saying is that I'm not OK will the president willfully misrepresenting what John Kerry has been saying. Although I will admit he did so in a very clever and effective manner (both sides do it, its a function of being in a tight presidential election race).

 

[-Cp]

John Kerry believes that a war in which 90% of the casualties and 90% of the money are coming from the United States is "the wrong war". I agree. If we are able to garner more international support, it would be "the right war".

Yeah? So what other countries would need to support us for you to consider it a "right war" and not a "wrong war"?

 

[dmp]

Yeah? So what other countries would need to support us for you to consider it a "right war" and not a "wrong war"?

Fuck what other countries think is 'right'...America has a GOOD track record of fighting wars for the right reasons. It's MUCH better for the USA to stand alone in the world for 'truth' than to only do the right thing when the rest of the world approves.


Hows this for the Right War?

The UN voted to take military action against IRAQ in Gulf War I.



KERRY Voted AGAINST that action.


What will it take for Kerry to take a stand against evil? He says 'wait for the UN pussies to tell us to act', but when they told us to act, he STILL said 'no'.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

I'll forgive Bush for it since he only has four more weeks as CIC.

 

[nakedemperor]

The UN voted to take military action against IRAQ in Gulf War I.



KERRY Voted AGAINST that action.


What will it take for Kerry to take a stand against evil? He says 'wait for the UN pussies to tell us to act', but when they told us to act, he STILL said 'no'.

Cheney was against that action too. Look at the quote in my signature, its from 1992.

 

[nakedemperor]

Yeah? So what other countries would need to support us for you to consider it a "right war" and not a "wrong war"?

More or less. Damned if I know how he's going to pull that one off though =P

 

[dmp]

Cheney was against that action too. Look at the quote in my signature, its from 1992.

Kerry was against military action even to rid Saddam from KUWAIT...

 

[-Cp]

More or less. Damned if I know how he's going to pull that one off though =P

That's not an answer for someone who thinks Kerry should be CIC...

WHICH COUNTRIES dude? Name them... .Otherwise you need to shut your flam-hole on this issue....

:2guns:

 

[nakedemperor]

That's not an answer for someone who thinks Kerry should be CIC...

WHICH COUNTRIES dude? Name them... .Otherwise you need to shut your flam-hole on this issue....

:2guns:

I think its a good idea to get more countries involved. I'm not a politician, I don't know who the viable candidates are. I'm not saying I don't think its impossible for Kerry to do this, but I do think its a great idea for him to want to try. I mean, its either that or more of the same. I think Kerry should be CIC because Bush doesn't seem willing, and even if he were, I don't think he'd be able to bring others to the table.

My flam-hole will not be silenced!

 

[-Cp]

I think its a good idea to get more countries involved. I'm not a politician, I don't know who the viable candidates are. I'm not saying I don't think its impossible for Kerry to do this, but I do think its a great idea for him to want to try. I mean, its either that or more of the same. I think Kerry should be CIC because Bush doesn't seem willing, and even if he were, I don't think he'd be able to bring others to the table.

My flam-hole will not be silenced!

How many more countries then? 34 seemed to be enough for people (libs) like you back in Gulf War 1, but somehow 30 isn't enough for this war? Jeesh..

 

[nakedemperor]

How many more countries then? 34 seemed to be enough for people (libs) like you back in Gulf War 1, but somehow 30 isn't enough for this war? Jeesh..

Are you actually saying that the coalition (that provided more troops and money, many many times over, than they're doing now) that was necessary to drive Saddam from Kuwait is a force that is and should be comparable to the force necessary to DEPOSE SADDAM, OCCUPY IRAQ, CHANGE THE REGIME, AND RESTORE PEACE?

Stop making false analogies or shut your flam-hole =P

 

[UsaPride]

Are you actually saying that the coalition (that provided more troops and money, many many times over, than they're doing now) that was necessary to drive Saddam from Kuwait is a force that is and should be comparable to the force necessary to DEPOSE SADDAM, OCCUPY IRAQ, CHANGE THE REGIME, AND RESTORE PEACE?

Look at what they have done. Seriously. I know alot of people don't want to see the good that's happened and happening in Iraq, but really, there is. Of course theres terrorists pouring in because they don't want Iraq to be stable. They want Iraq safe for them. But look at what this coalition has done. It's remarkable.
First Gulf War, move Iraq out of Kuwait.
This war, get rid of Saddam-done, Change the Regime- done, restore peace - sure as hell trying.
Give the soldiers (ours and the coalition) a little respect, please. This goes for you, Kerry, Edwards, and whoever else that needs to put down the people who are trying to help us.

 

[nakedemperor]

Look at what they have done. Seriously. I know alot of people don't want to see the good that's happened and happening in Iraq, but really, there is. Of course theres terrorists pouring in because they don't want Iraq to be stable. They want Iraq safe for them. But look at what this coalition has done. It's remarkable.
First Gulf War, move Iraq out of Kuwait.
This war, get rid of Saddam-done, Change the Regime- done, restore peace - sure as hell trying.
Give the soldiers (ours and the coalition) a little respect, please. This goes for you, Kerry, Edwards, and whoever else that needs to put down the people who are trying to help us.

Agreed. But why did you quote my post? I was merely pointing out that Cp seems to believe a force large enough and funded enough to expel Saddam from Kuwait is large enough and funded well enough to do all the things you just mentioned, which is looney.

 

[-Cp]

Are you actually saying that the coalition (that provided more troops and money, many many times over, than they're doing now) that was necessary to drive Saddam from Kuwait is a force that is and should be comparable to the force necessary to DEPOSE SADDAM, OCCUPY IRAQ, CHANGE THE REGIME, AND RESTORE PEACE?

Stop making false analogies or shut your flam-hole =P

Why do you keep ducking my question?

 

[nakedemperor]

Why do you keep ducking my question?

I'm copy-pasting this from an earlier post, because it answers your question. I guess you missed it.

"I think its a good idea to get more countries involved. I'm not a politician, I don't know who the viable candidates are. I'm not saying I don't think its impossible for Kerry to do this, but I do think its a great idea for him to want to try. I mean, its either that or more of the same. I think Kerry should be CIC because Bush doesn't seem willing, and even if he were, I don't think he'd be able to bring others to the table. "


Way to side-step your befuddling Gulf War I and Enduring Freedom parallel.

 

[UsaPride]

Agreed. But why did you quote my post? I was merely pointing out that Cp seems to believe a force large enough and funded enough to expel Saddam from Kuwait is large enough and funded well enough to do all the things you just mentioned, which is looney.

The coalition we have is doing just that, without the same allies, all the troops and funding that we had during Gulf War 1.

 

[nakedemperor]

The coalition we have is doing just that, without the same allies, all the troops and funding that we had during Gulf War 1.

Um, exactly....that's a bad thing.

 

[UsaPride]

Look at what they have done. Seriously. I know alot of people don't want to see the good that's happened and happening in Iraq, but really, there is. Of course theres terrorists pouring in because they don't want Iraq to be stable. They want Iraq safe for them. But look at what this coalition has done. It's remarkable.
First Gulf War, move Iraq out of Kuwait.
This war, get rid of Saddam-done, Change the Regime- done, restore peace - sure as hell trying.
Give the soldiers (ours and the coalition) a little respect, please. This goes for you, Kerry, Edwards, and whoever else that needs to put down the people who are trying to help us.

You agreed with me here, but now you say it's a bad thing.
Um, okay. :huh: