Just how serious is Dubbyuh about the 'War on Terror'?

[Bullypulpit]

All indictions to date are that he's not very serious at all serious. After 9/11, Dubbyuh went all cowboy sheriff and made alot of noise about wanting Osama bin Laden <a href=http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/17/bush.powell.terrorism/>"...Dead or Alive..."</a>. Just a few months later, in March of 2002, Dubbyuh flip-flopped and said. "I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. - <a href=http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html>White House Press Conference, 5/13/02</a> This about the master-mind and financier of the worst attack perpetrated on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

During that March press conference, Dubbyuh was already making noises about the "threat " posed by Saddam Hussein. Also, in July of 2002, Dubbyuh, without notifying Congress as the post-9/11 appropriations bill required him to do , <a href=http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=7623>diverted some $700 million dollars</a> from the operational fund for Afghanistan to fund operations against Iraq. This was concurrent with the <a href=http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0630/dailyUpdate.html>stepped up bombing of targets in Iraq</a>, again without notifying Congress.

On the homefront, Dubbyuh and his merry band contiue seeking to make the tax-cuts beneffiting the wealthiest 1% of Americans permanent...This in a time of war. Shouldn't we be raising taxes to fund ongoiing military oprerations? But no, he'd rather borrow from foreign lenders to support his foreign military adventurism. <a href=http://www.jems.com/homelandfirstresponse/exclus05/e0428a.html>Cuts in funding to first -responders</a>, fire, police and EMS personnel, continue unabated. <a href=http://www.aapa-ports.org/pressroom/jan0305.htm>Funding for sea-port security</a> remains far below what is needed. <a href=http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1026-08.htm>Nuclear power plants and petro-chem facilites</a> remain large, soft targets, particularly since the Chemical Facilities Security Act of 2003 died in committee.

So, just how serious is Dubbyuh about the war on terror...? Not very. It just gets trotted out with "Remember 9/11!" when his poll numbers sag as they have been in recent weeks.

 

[dilloduck]

All indictions to date are that he's not very serious at all serious. After 9/11, Dubbyuh went all cowboy sheriff and made alot of noise about wanting Osama bin Laden <a href=http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/17/bush.powell.terrorism/>"...Dead or Alive..."</a>. Just a few months later, in March of 2002, Dubbyuh flip-flopped and said. "I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. - <a href=http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html>White House Press Conference, 5/13/02</a> This about the master-mind and financier of the worst attack perpetrated on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

During that March press conference, Dubbyuh was already making noises about the "threat " posed by Saddam Hussein. Also, in July of 2002, Dubbyuh, without notifying Congress as the post-9/11 appropriations bill required him to do , <a href=http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=7623>diverted some $700 million dollars</a> from the operational fund for Afghanistan to fund operations against Iraq. This was concurrent with the <a href=http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0630/dailyUpdate.html>stepped up bombing of targets in Iraq</a>, again without notifying Congress.

On the homefront, Dubbyuh and his merry band contiue seeking to make the tax-cuts beneffiting the wealthiest 1% of Americans permanent...This in a time of war. Shouldn't we be raising taxes to fund ongoiing military oprerations? But no, he'd rather borrow from foreign lenders to support his foreign military adventurism. <a href=http://www.jems.com/homelandfirstresponse/exclus05/e0428a.html>Cuts in funding to first -responders</a>, fire, police and EMS personnel, continue unabated. <a href=http://www.aapa-ports.org/pressroom/jan0305.htm>Funding for sea-port security</a> remains far below what is needed. <a href=http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1026-08.htm>Nuclear power plants and petro-chem facilites</a> remain large, soft targets, particularly since the Chemical Facilities Security Act of 2003 died in committee.

So, just how serious is Dubbyuh about the war on terror...? Not very. It just gets trotted out with "Remember 9/11!" when his poll numbers sag as they have been in recent weeks.

What is it that you think he should be doing ,Bully?

 

[Bullypulpit]

What is it that you think he should be doing ,Bully?

Correcting the above mentionend oversights and omissions.

 

[freeandfun1]

Correcting the above mentionend oversights and omissions.

Yeah, throwing money at the various POTENTIAL targets is better than just nip'n the problem in the bud by going after those that might plan to attack said facilities.... yup, sure. Throw money at it so that when they do attack them, because we have been too busy ignoring them, we might save a few more lives than if we hadn't thrown money at em.... yup sure.

Hey, I have a novel idea... let's go and kill those that might threaten those facilities to there is no threat!! WOW, that is a novel idea....

oops, that is what we are doing isn't it? damn, now I am confused... which is the best and longest lasting plan???

 

[Bullypulpit]

Yeah, throwing money at the various POTENTIAL targets is better than just nip'n the problem in the bud by going after those that might plan to attack said facilities.... yup, sure. Throw money at it so that when they do attack them, because we have been too busy ignoring them, we might save a few more lives than if we hadn't thrown money at em.... yup sure.

Hey, I have a novel idea... let's go and kill those that might threaten those facilities to there is no threat!! WOW, that is a novel idea....

oops, that is what we are doing isn't it? damn, now I am confused... which is the best and longest lasting plan???

Had our fearless leaders dealt, with extreme prejudice, the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan rather than letting them escape into Pakistan at Tora-Bora, we could successfully transformed Afghanistan into a democracy. Instead, we have Hamid Kharzai and his cabinet acting as little more than the mayor and city council of Kabul. Instead, we have warlords consolidating their control over the countryside as they finance their militias with the money from heroine exports. The Taliban and Al Qaeda are retrenching in southern Afghanistan. We could have had victory there.

Had our fearless leaders not gone haring off to Iraq to satisfy Dubbyuh's chubby for Saddam, the world would be a safer place. Saddm's regime would have collapsed under its own weight with time, and he was a threat to no one but his own people. Wmd's and terrorism were nothing more than a pretext, and a flimsy one at that, for war. As it stands now, the CIA considers Iraq a breeding ground for the next generation of terrorists.

Dismissed.

 

[Gabriella84]

Obviously, GW is not as serious about it now as he was during the election campaign. It's all about saving face and making sure he doesn't end up looking like Lyndon Johnson.

 

[Avatar4321]

All indictions to date are that he's not very serious at all serious. After 9/11, Dubbyuh went all cowboy sheriff and made alot of noise about wanting Osama bin Laden <a href=http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/17/bush.powell.terrorism/>"...Dead or Alive..."</a>. Just a few months later, in March of 2002, Dubbyuh flip-flopped and said. "I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. - <a href=http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html>White House Press Conference, 5/13/02</a> This about the master-mind and financier of the worst attack perpetrated on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

You ever think he just isnt that worried about him because we have him trapped in some cave somewhere and he isn't harming Americans?

During that March press conference, Dubbyuh was already making noises about the "threat " posed by Saddam Hussein. Also, in July of 2002, Dubbyuh, without notifying Congress as the post-9/11 appropriations bill required him to do , <a href=http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=7623>diverted some $700 million dollars</a> from the operational fund for Afghanistan to fund operations against Iraq. This was concurrent with the <a href=http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0630/dailyUpdate.html>stepped up bombing of targets in Iraq</a>, again without notifying Congress.

Congress gives money for war on terror, Iraq is the second stage in the war on terror. Why is it you have such a hard time grasping this Bully? is it really that difficult?

On the homefront, Dubbyuh and his merry band contiue seeking to make the tax-cuts beneffiting the wealthiest 1% of Americans permanent...This in a time of war. Shouldn't we be raising taxes to fund ongoiing military oprerations? But no, he'd rather borrow from foreign lenders to support his foreign military adventurism. <a href=http://www.jems.com/homelandfirstresponse/exclus05/e0428a.html>Cuts in funding to first -responders</a>, fire, police and EMS personnel, continue unabated. <a href=http://www.aapa-ports.org/pressroom/jan0305.htm>Funding for sea-port security</a> remains far below what is needed. <a href=http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1026-08.htm>Nuclear power plants and petro-chem facilites</a> remain large, soft targets, particularly since the Chemical Facilities Security Act of 2003 died in committee.

You ever wonder why People aren't voting Democrats? It's because you care more about raising taxes than doing a damn thing to protect this nation. And you know Kerry got screwed for the fact that he was more worried about increasing taxes than the lives of those soldiers he voted to put into conflict. Karma sucks doesnt it?

So, just how serious is Dubbyuh about the war on terror...? Not very. It just gets trotted out with "Remember 9/11!" when his poll numbers sag as they have been in recent weeks.

Holy crap you are such a hypocrite. You've been doing nothing but bitching about what the President has been doing in Iraq. The President put His butt on the line because he felt that we needed regime change in Iraq in order to successfully prosecute the war on terror. We've liberated two nations in the war on terror that used to support terrorists. They don't now. Now all the terrorists go and try to fight our troops in the grounds of both these countries instead of attacking sites in the US. Sounds like the war on terror is going pretty darn well if we are luring them out to fight our troops instead of luring them out to kill civilians.

But thats the problem with liberals like you. You have lacked any vision in this war on terror. You have no plans to actually win it. And if you actually sat down and thought about it the only way to win it is to liberate all the nations that support it and improve the lives of the people with freedom so they dont need to resort to terrorism anymore.

You want to sit there and pretend 911 hasn't changed anything. It changed everything you blind parasite. You want to continue with the same policies that failed to prevent 911. You think doing nothing in the world means no one will harm you. Wake up! There are bad men and women in the world who will walk all over you if you let them. You fail to respond and they will continue to walk all over you. The only way to deal with these people is for good men to be stronger than them. That would be us. we are the good men going out and kicking the butts of the school yard bully, meanwhile you want to bend over and grab the ankles.

Now get over the Blind hatred against the President. Gore lost. Kerry lost. George Bush is our Commander in Chief. He won both elections fair and square despite two attempts of you libs trying to steal it from him. You lost get over it.