Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

God, he's such a follower.Follow

#1 Dec 20 2006 at 8:06 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Only a matter of time, I suppose.
Quote:
    U.S. not winning war in Iraq, Bush says
President seeking expansion of Army, Marine Corps
President Bush acknowledged for the first time yesterday that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq and said he plans to expand the overall size of the "stressed" U.S. armed forces to meet the challenges of a long-term global struggle against terrorists.

As he searches for a new strategy for Iraq, Bush has adopted the formula advanced by his top military adviser to describe the situation. "We're not winning, we're not losing," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. The assessment was a striking reversal for a president who, days before the November elections, declared, "Absolutely, we're winning."

His response to this is to increase troops over the course of coming years, so it wouldn't shorten anything or pull us out any sooner.
#2 Dec 20 2006 at 8:08 AM Rating: Default
Quote:
His response to this is to increase troops over the course of coming years, so it wouldn't shorten anything or pull us out any sooner.
Welcome to politics.
#3 Dec 20 2006 at 8:11 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
"We're not winning, we're not losing,"


This is just clever wordsmithing on the part of this writers to cover a more clear statement of "We are currently losing, but in the end, we refuse to accept defeat." Why else would they need so many more troops to squash 'la resistance' of a few thousand?

Smiley: dubious
#4 Dec 20 2006 at 8:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Atomicflea wrote:
"We're not winning, we're not losing,"
Are we staying the course?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#5 Dec 20 2006 at 8:22 AM Rating: Good
***
1,625 posts
Slight detor off course. But just temporary until they actually figure out what the course will be!
#6 Dec 20 2006 at 8:24 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Adding troops is helpful, really. Even if you plan on withdrawing, it'd be nice to be able to do that in a non fall of Saigon kind of way.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#7 Dec 20 2006 at 8:32 AM Rating: Decent
****
6,318 posts
I smell some sort of "in out in out" Clockwork Orange joke in there somewhere.

Atomicflea wrote:

Quote:
"We're not winning, we're not losing," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post.

Didn't Rummy v2.0 say the exact same thing a few weeks ago?

Edited, Dec 20th 2006 11:37am by PsiChi
#8 Dec 20 2006 at 10:52 AM Rating: Decent
Saw a press conference this morning. Bush is getting better and answering questions without actually giving an answer. I think the administration is basically not setting any specific goal so that they can't be accused of failing. It's always "when the Iraqi government is ready to take over," but they never set any criteria for what will indicate they are ready. FuCking politicians.
#9 Dec 20 2006 at 3:37 PM Rating: Decent
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
If you're not first, you're last!
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#10 Dec 20 2006 at 3:38 PM Rating: Decent
bodhisattva wrote:
If you're not first, you're last!


Shake 'n bake!
#11 Dec 20 2006 at 4:27 PM Rating: Good
adding more troops will change nothing. bush knows it. im sure his generals have told him as much.

adding more troops is a response to not having a plan. a chance to stir up the dems to oppose it so he can point the finger at them and scream (they wont let me win).

the dems arent biting. they are smart enough to stay in the background and give "W" enough rope to hang himself and his party with him. so no open opposition to something that clearly will make no differance. like hanging bait out but the fish arnt biting.

there gona let him ride his bucket of crap all the way to the cess pool all by himself. as they should. its a no brainer. just stand there and say nothing and this freight train that is already off the tracks will plunge off the cliff without anyone doing anything. the only thing they could possibly do is stick their nose in it and get smeared with Bush,s pile on his way to the bottom. so, do nothing and let hom have whatever he asks for is the best coarse for the dems for the next 2 years.

unfortunatly, the lives of our service men will be paying the ultimate price for the dems political security. that is intollerable. inexcusable. unconscionable.

they should impeach his **** NOW, get his sorry butt out of the way, and put an end to this stupidity to save as many american lives as possible.

but they wont. and more americans will die for a politicans agenda.
#12 Dec 20 2006 at 4:30 PM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Althrun wrote:
bodhisattva wrote:
If you're not first, you're last!


Shake 'n bake!


'n ah hayelped.

ugh, even *I* can't sound that hick.
#13 Dec 20 2006 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
I thought it was Magic Man and El Diablo?
#14 Dec 20 2006 at 5:14 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

adding more troops will change nothing. bush knows it. im sure his generals have told him as much.


That's patently false. How many troops are added will determine the impace. Obviously if you added a billion troops, it would change things dramatically and if you added 1000 it wouldn't. Adding a few hundred thousand probably helps a great deal, but not enough to 'win' in any conventional sense. It would make withdrawing in an orderly fashion a lot easier, though.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#15 Dec 20 2006 at 5:20 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,632 posts
BloodwolfeX wrote:
I think the administration is basically not setting any specific goal so that they can't be accused of failing.


Something tells me that not setting a clearly-defined goal isn't exactly going to stop anybody from calling the war a failure.
#16 Dec 20 2006 at 5:37 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
Well, something's gotta give. If it's with an eye towards finishing up rather than indefinite extension, then that's something. At least the shuffle of El Generales has begun, PR machine notwithstanding.
#17 Dec 20 2006 at 11:53 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,562 posts
Quote:
Bush has adopted the formula

wasn't he supposed to have figured out the "formula" you know... before the war started?
#18 Dec 21 2006 at 6:34 AM Rating: Good
Obscur wrote:
Quote:
Bush has adopted the formula

wasn't he supposed to have figured out the "formula" you know... before the war started?


I don't think "Bush" and "figured out" can be in the same sentence without a negative somehwere in there.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#19 Dec 22 2006 at 9:01 PM Rating: Default
Ok, can I say just when you think you're out, they pull you back in. Can I?
#20 Jan 11 2007 at 12:09 AM Rating: Default
It's ironic to say the leader of a country is a follower. Secondly what the fu<k is wrong with being a follower? Many countries today on the third rock from the sun wouldn't exist if not for followers who trusted and followed leaders. Get an education please. I like how you started the thread with the word god, because we all know that no one follows god. The pathetic thing is I was being sarcastic I bet you're religious and believe in god and therefore follow what ever religion "your" god stands for.
#21 Jan 11 2007 at 12:21 AM Rating: Decent
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Inanimate wrote:
I bet you're religious and believe in god and therefore follow what ever religion "your" god stands for.


You'd lose that bet faster than your ***** of a mother lost her virginity!

Edited, Jan 11th 2007 8:23am by bodhisattva
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#22 Jan 11 2007 at 3:59 AM Rating: Default
Thats ironic considering I am jesus. My mother was Mary, thats right my mother couldn't have been a ***** because I was born as a *******, I am Jesus son of mary I have no father except "god". Bow before me now haha.
#23 Jan 11 2007 at 4:15 AM Rating: Good
As long as its still all about the terrorists
#24 Jan 11 2007 at 10:56 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
Inanimate wrote:
Thats ironic considering I am jesus. My mother was Mary, thats right my mother couldn't have been a ***** because I was born as a *******, I am Jesus son of mary I have no father except "god". Bow before me now haha.


*******: Illegitimacy, the circumstance of being born of parents who are not married to one another.

This would make your mother more likely to be a *****...Get an Education.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 291 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (291)