That speech marked the end of our fighting against the Iraq military and Saddam regime.

We are not fighting Iraq or the Iraqi army. We are fighting imported terrorists.

Exactly, that was the point at which we were no longer fought against Iraqis but beside them.

you guys are unreel
and i'm sure you're convinced that the others are unreel

if a was a betting man i'de make some wager on how this is going to turn out ... oh sjit , i am a betting man !

5 bucks says the US eventually will pull out before things are sorted out
and it will be a free for all in downtown Iraq untill some other oppressive regime takes control and starts operating the country and the oil wells in a a productive , yet unthreatening manner (unthreatening as in nothing serious , just a bit of barking here and there ) and untill said regime get's in power, it will probably get a bit ugly...


i'm not putting a timeframe on this , we've seen in Vietnam that you guys take a long time to get smart , count your losses and retreat...

you a betting man lendaddy?

Wow... I usually only bet money on things that I want to happen. you're one sick puppy, sv.

Indeed I am, but the frame of that bet is aweful cloudy.

ok , let's rephrase :

retreat before the country is stable.

clear enough?

as for me beeing a sick puppy ? hell yeah !


see, i don't care bout nothing , i'm fair to those around me
i don't abuse anyone, don't steal , kill, or hurt

other than that , i'm just watching a movie
whatever the outcome , it's entertaining ( life in general , nothing specific )

Who decides stable? It's just not a good bet. I am sure there will be some instabilty and our goal is for the democratic government to sustain and defend itself.

Skip, I appreciate your honesty ... the "so what" is nothing more than honest dialogue. We’re not fighting the war here, we are talking about it.

The "so what" is that people with differing viewpoints can have a rational conversation without going off on dishonest, stupid tangents. I can’t have a serious conversation with someone that is insisting on selling a fantasy, someone appealing to the lowest common denominator.

And I can’t find common ground with someone that I don’t respect, someone that will say anything to "win" the argument. These people telling us that "mission accomplished" meant that the ship safely returned to port are doing just that. Maybe they even believe it themselves, which is just plain scary.

Here’s my viewpoint: We made some early and serious missteps in Iraq. We have paid for those missteps with lives and dollars and diminished standing in the world.

We have to move forward and finish the job, or we will pay a much higher price in the future. We NEED to finish the job, and we NEED Americans to come together to do that. So how about we acknowledge the successes and learn from the failures?

Their allegiance is to what they want to believe and whatever fits that preconceived conception...anything that discredits or weakens their belief system gets the memory-hole...They are wound up and/or their strings are pulled by the real puppet-masters in the media left and DNC.

sound hyperbolic or extreme?...not at all.

Huh? Please tell me you don't think that's what I'm saying....or even close.

Seriously?

No Flintstone said that. You are saying that the President put on that whole show to clebrate the military victory. And your imlication is that he would have done exactly the same thing if he knew that the body count would shortly triple, and that eighteen months later, Iraq would be teetering on the brink of civil war.

Not quite as bad, but pretty close.

No, I'm saying the invasion was an amazing success and they were celebrating that. They don't know the future so I don't get the point on that. It's really that simple.

Exactly. What you don't get is this: As I write this, whether "the invasion" was or was not a success is very much undecided. And was even more undecided on May 1, 2003, when the administration treated us to that broadway show on an aircraft carrier.

See your just wrong. The invasion was a complete success in every measurable way. The reconstruction and stabilization has been much more difficult by comparison.

We took control of Iraq in a staggeringly short period of time, that was the initial mission, it was accomplished.

By the way, don't you remember how all that lovely footage, with the proper soft lighting and the sailors wearing just the right hues to accent the president's steely eyes, was going to be used as campaign ad material? Remember?

Did you see any of it? Do you wonder why?

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Rodeo- Are you saying that Bush did know? Or, should have known?

- Skip

What does that have to do with anything? This is just what i was talking about....the pride and happiness on the left that they have a situation or moment in history that they can use and reuse to bash the President regardless of its intellectual honesty. The fact that it resonates is all that matters to you, not if it contains any actual substance or represents any failure.

Yep, and when I play basketball, my "initial mission" is to put the ball through the hoop. When I do that (occasonally), I don't break out the champagne and begin the celebration.

Why? Because I know that there's a lot of game left. Bush didn't know that.

Think he should have?

:rolleyes: Speaking of beeing unreasonable ...

he didn't say "the war is over..." (read the banner behind him. )

That aircraft carrier's Mission had been Accomplished. Those saliors were home. That aircraft carrier's Mission had been Accomplished. That aircraft carrier's Mission had been Accomplished.


Geeze man, when they retire that carrier, I suppose you'll claim the US destroyed it's military. :rolleyes:


I will give you that Bush said (in that speech) something to the effect of "Major operations are over. . . " Because they WERE! Though, perhaps you should start equivocating on that point. :cool: