"Something big is brewing - you don't go half way 'round the world for nothing."

51st state?

Tom,

If we were going to get a 51st State, I'd prefer the Bahamas or Jamaica...if we really were the imperialist scum, then we should be conquering the much nicer areas of the world, right?

Why is this bad news? Bush visiting his puppet Prime Minister, the one that he will ask to step down if he starts critisizing the US occupation like his predecessor.

You see, Bush only wants a democracy if the government sees things HIS way. If not, he will push the official out and replace them.

The day will come soon , when the Prime Minister will ask the Americans to leave and Bush will refuse, showing that he always intended to have a permanent presence there.

Did he bring another 'Mission Accomplished' sign with him?

Maybe he wants to start another failed oil business.

Oh....I got it, he wants to turn some corners!

or maybe he just wanted to clear up some 'misunderestimations'

I heard that the pool reporters who flew in the helicopters with President Bush wore body armor, but President Bush and his staff did not. I guess the reporters are better at creating flack than dodging it!

ABC news reported this trip had been planned for some time, but Iraq's new government wasn't told until shortly before he arrived. Now, how could ABC twist that into something more negative? By "wondering why", if the administration has so much confidence in the new Iraqi government, they couldn't let the new government know what's going on well in advance!

ABC could have used it as an opportunity to educate Americans. They could have explained the security implications and other reasons to those listeners who can't think for themselves, but no... they chose instead to subtly plant another negative comment and cut at President Bush.

Liberal biased negative news? Yep!

axis,

You mean the day will come when Iraq treats the United States the way your Canadian liberals have done?

The United States isn't going to "occupy" Iraq, but we are going to have some bases there for quite some time. It's a "mutual thing." We will both benefit. Iraq needs the security and we need can use some bases in that region beyond those we already have. As long as we have bases there, is Syria or Iran going to mount a direct attack on Iraq? Our bases in Iraq can quickly provide support for Iraqi troops against any terrorists, and they will give us quicker access to other potential trouble or troublesome spots!

AAR

Axis....you're Canadian remember? You don't mean anything to anyone.

Oh, when you say HIS do you mean Bush or ROVE, you know ROVE rules the world, ROVE sent Alberto just to show Jebb in his best light, when all is dark
ROVE will show us the way. Axis, maybe you should check under your bed "THEY" might be watching you!

TEO,

Life is not one big "mission accomplished"!

Life, history, and everything about it is a series of "missions accomplished", one after another, day after day. Each accomplishment -- no matter how big or small -- may warrant it's own "mission accomplished" sign or celebration.

The new Iraq government is another "mission accomplished"!

President Bush's successful trip to Baghdad to greet, encourage, and congratulate the new Iraqi democratic government is another "mission accomplished"!

The death of al-Zarqawi is a "mission accomplished"!

The list goes on and on and on.

The inability of Fitzgerald to indict Karl Rove is a "mission NOT accomplished"!

AAR

Bush should be safe and sound in Baghdad if he doesn't stray from the green zone.

Sadly, the average Iraqi citizen doesn't have the same option.

Did he bring his flight suit?

Just another P.R. trick to add to his "good week" as opposed to the BAD YEARS. It won't last long. With jis incompatent staff making statements that curl your toes about the tradagy at Gitmo. What hipocracy that Bush would interupt his almighty vacation to defend a brain dead woman and have staff calling the suicides at Gitmo a P.R. campain, we know where the far right REALLY omes from. Ann Coulter is their real spokesperson. Very few admit it.

AAR,

Are uncounted deaths of Iraqi civilians, 'Mission Accomplished'?

Is a civil war, 'Mission Accomplished'?

How about lack of electricity or water, or security...'Mission Accomplished'?

Lack of government relevancy outside of the greenzone, warlords in control of the police and militia members being integrated into the army...'Mission Accomplished'?

basically, short of scratching his own balls, not much has been accomplished, not least, the mission.

"basically, short of scratching his own balls, not much has been accomplished, not least, the mission."

My goodness arent you the little moonbat ray of sunshine and unsubstantiated statements. Stupidity is forever, ignorance is curable. I pretty sure which catagory you fall into.

Zoot,
I agree. I'm sure he has staff to do that for him.

Mark,

Bush going to Baghdad isn't a bad day for the left. Bush returning to the US is a bad day for the left.

Something big brewing? Doubtful. Dubya has snuck in and out of Iraq before and his numbers continue to tumble.

Mike

it was about time, that the president visits
iraq.

war is bad, everytime. but there
were three successes in this war:

1st: now we know for sure, that there are no WOM.
and thats what many europeans and people in my country just dont understand. they would be happier, if they dont know that. but i think, to have a country nearby the EU, which might have WOM, and is also a dictatorship - thats dangerous.

my theory:
iran - now developing WOM,
if the US wouldnt have invaded iraq:
i know, iraq and iran are enemies, but:
maybe iran would have given iraq materials
for WOM
they would connect against israel, for example
(remember what irans president said about
israel).

2nd: iraqi people are able to vote (even under hard circumstances) but the situation / democracy
is far from "normal life"

3rd: hussein is in jail.

but there are many other topics and rumors
in phantom discussions such as:
- what about that poison gas, germany delivered
to hussein, before he used it against civilians?
thats the scandal.
related:
- the architecture of that reactor in iran,
wasnt it build with the support of the russians
and of course, germans?

TIME magazine should investigate that!

eventually irans president is coming to germany,
to visit the players during football worldcup.
lets see how my country handles this. personally
i would not allow him to enter my country.

Most lefties are laying low this morning. The others are pathetically lame; even worse than most every other day.

TEO,

I'll list "missions accomplished." You, axis, and the LibDims can handle the others.

After all, the LibDims have had a big hand and part to play in delaying those other accomplishments, and in the deaths of thousands of Iraqi citizens and our soldiers by encouraging and providing hope to terrorists through your incessant 24/7 anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-war, anti-military, anti-everything rhetoric and propaganda!

Yep. You handle the negatives. That's where your expertise resides!!!

AAR

Most lefties are lying low this morning, the others are pathetically lame; even worse than most other days.

TEO,

Some Missions Accomplished:

1. Remove Taliban.

2. Disrupt bin Laden's terrorist network in Afghanistan.

3. Remove Saddam.

4. End Pakistan's nuclear proliferation.

5. End Libya's WMD programs.

6. Institute democracy in Afghanistan.

7. Institute democracy in Iraq.

8. Make new anti-terrorism alliances with Georgia, Tajikistan, Djibouti, Yemen, Jordan, India.

9. End Syrian occupation of Lebanon.

10. Force Palestinians to institute genuine democratic government.

11. Prevent any further attacks on US soil (this is an ongoing mission, but its been nearly five years now).

12. Kill or capture thousands of terrorists.

Not a bad list...

AAR,

If the military was given all the money they needed, and all the logistical support they needed, then any failures lie with them or their civilian leaders. But nice try.

Are you saying that us angry lefters are controlling military or Rummy's war plans? Are you saying that the administration somehow makes their gameplan on polls and perception of how a MINORITY of the public feels? Is that it? because i don't quite grasp how you say that WE have caused more death and destruction, above and beyond Bush's share.

Are you saying that guys who are willing to kill themselves would not continue to do so if we were silenced? Sounds pretty much like wishful thinking...infact sounds like a load of horse puckey, what happened to personal responsibility, what happened to your war plan, what happened to bright skies for iraqi freedoms, what happened to the buck stopping with the president?

You scared little boys have screwed things up because you don't understand international politics, and then go blame someone else for your mistakes, well tough luck Buck-o, you make this mess, now own up to it. the media and the MINORITY didn't start this war, but we sure as the hell are gonna finish it for you!

Why are Lefties so obsessed with that flight suit? OK, so a President stepping off a fighter jet on an aircraft carrier deck, wearing one of those pressurized flight suits EVERYONE has to wear on one of those planes, DID present a more manly and dynamic image than McPudgy waddling off a grannycopter in any of his 28 (TWENTY-EIGHT!) aircraft carrier landings. And he was there to congratulate the crew of the Abraham Lincoln for accomplishing their mission, which was translated into the phrase Mission Accomplished. The success of even one mission in Iraq clearly gets your vast pink panties in a twist, or you would not obsess about it so much.

I never cease to be amazed at how much you can dig out of this simple, clearcut, occassion. It's like watching a cow chewing its cud. It keeps getting brought back up for some more mastication, but no matter how much you work it, it was never more or less than a President in wartime flying out to the first carrier to return from that war to tell them "Well Done!".

And I see TEO has discarded all pretense of civility. Guess that delicately described "third eye" of his opens directly into the area I thought it would, based on his recent descent into sister-f**king and ball-scratching. See, give a Lib some time and he will always show his true colors. In this case, very very brown. (And that is a biological observation, not a racial one.)

As for our "observations" from our Canadian Observer, they are as skewed as usual. In fact, there are only a couple of zones in Iraq that are dangerous. Most of the country is quiet, civilized, and perking right along. Schools are being built and attended. Women are working. Water treatment plants and electric generation plants are being built. NOT, as you would have it, REbuilt, after those terrible liberators wrecked them, but built for the first time. The ecomony is improving daily. The terrorists are concentrating on areas where they can get the most press. And, funnily enough, our press keeps working hand in glove with them, giving them the attention and validation they need to keep going.

But AAR and I understand that them that can, do, and them that can't, carp. It's always the non-achievers who whine and moan and whimper incessantly about how those who DO achieve do their work. It's never enough, never quite right, for those who have never tried or accomplished anything in their own lives and have no idea of the complexities of running a business, much less a country, much less a country at war.

poor HR Clinton, bet she broke another lamp today!
you gotta love it!

Jan: We have witnesses to the construction of WMD. We have captured rockets whose only purpose was to deliver WMD. We have found sarin and anthrax, just not tons of either. We have testimony from people who helped ship heavy metal bottles marked with signs indicating poisons or toxic materials, on converted passenger planes flying established and allowed passenger schedules and routes into Syria. We have testimony from scientists who worked on nuclear projects, one of whom led US officers to illegal nuclear development machinery buried in his yard. We have satellite tapes and photos of convoys of tractor-trailers moving across the Syrian border. We have the testimony of a former high-ranking Iraqi that there were carefully established protocols for removing WMD in case of a threat to Iraq, backed by Russia and China---protocols which were enacted. We have traces of WMD in several of the buildings which we knew were factories, with markers to indicate that they were of recent manufacture and not left over from the days before we pulled Sadaam's teeth and turned him into a genial empty suit with no power and no influence.

I'd be interested in knowing more about the "scandals" you listed in your post. BTW, I am confident Ahmadinejad will not visit Germany because he will be arrested for his statements about the Holocaust.

In what part of Germany are you from? I lived in Ramstein for 5 years. Love the country and the people.

This trip might be successful if bush flies onto Iran and reestablishes full diplomatic relations wih them. Or if he allows the Iraqis to take charge of their own country and we pull our troops out. Or both. Peace

Mark, it's a good list, though a partial one.

But it won't matter to the whimperers and sneerers. They live in very small worlds in which they are fed their "news" and opinions, for later regurgitation, by their minders.

They do not go out and accomplish things. My bet is that they don't even try to accomplish things. My bet is that all of the LibLand posters here work for someone else, benefit from the risk and investment of time, money, and energy of others. Some understand and appreciate that concept,, but some simply seethe with imotent rage at the examples of the DOERS, and nitpick at everything.

So axis and TEO and the rest will probably sit in their teeny tiny emotional and intellectual little worlds and sneer at the doers because, to the non-doers, what was done wasn't PERFECT. It wasn't done the way THEY thought it should be done.

It's safe, and evidently quite gratifying, to never get in the race, but to feel like they are doing something by simply darting out to try to shove sticks through the spokes of those who are actually bold enough to participate.

I, for one, am glad we have Peleton One.

Hi Almiranta! I hope you don't mind my using your post about WMD. It is excellent!!

Liberals, and their views, are simply irrelevant. They always have been.

I heard that the pool reporters who flew in the helicopters with President Bush wore body armor, but President Bush and his staff did not. I guess the reporters are better at creating flack than dodging it!

-- Bush and his team all wear bullet proof vests 24/7, its just hidden under their suits

Wow! and clinton didn't even go to the World Trade Center in 1993 after it was attacked by terrorists!! God bless you President George W. Bush, the greatest president in american history. And God bless our brave men and women in uniform.

For a 51st state, I nominate Canada. It's close, it's got a lot of oil (and everyone knows that's the only reason we ever go to war) and then we could get axis into a school where he might learn something real about the United States.

Except they no longer need a regime change---they did it on their own.

Speaking of axis and Canada---doesn't their universal health care include psychiatrists? And if so, how can we explain axis?

You mean the day will come when Iraq treats the United States the way your Canadian liberals have done?

-- We diagreed with Bush's policy and protectionism, thats our perogrative as a sovereign nation.

The United States isn't going to "occupy" Iraq, but we are going to have some bases there for quite some time. It's a "mutual thing." We will both benefit. Iraq needs the security and we need can use some bases in that region beyond those we already have. As long as we have bases there, is Syria or Iran going to mount a direct attack on Iraq? Our bases in Iraq can quickly provide support for Iraqi troops against any terrorists, and they will give us quicker access to other potential trouble or troublesome spots!

-- Nope, Iraq is a sovereign nation. If they ask you to leave, you either need to leave 100% or admit that you are illegally occupying a sovereign nation against its will, in which case other nations may choose to get involved and force you out just like Daddy Bush did when Iraq invaded Kuwait.

You have no more rights to establish bases there than you do in china. Iraqis do not want your bases, neither does Congress. Only ones that do are the Bush administration. If Iraq says, ok, thats one thing, stealing Iraqi land and just establishing them there with no permission as you have done is not ok. Neither is stealing 104 acres and building the largest embassy on the planet using monies stolen from allocations to the troops. Bush is spending $600 million on this embassy instead of making sure the troops are taken care of with proper body armour and armoured vehicles and proper food rations.

Life is not one big "mission accomplished"!

-- Especially not when it really embarasses you by having raisen brain announce it when it is not so. You were dancing in the street back in 2002 when he announced it, now its a big embarassment so you try to back away from it and ignore it.

More bad news for neorads ... Kennedy has pleaded guilty to DUI charge.

Almiranta: Perhaps the courts should ask all neorads to be examined just as they did Alex Baldwin.

Yep. You handle the negatives. That's where your expertise resides!!!

-- Ok, that leaves you to handle the incompetance and shortsightedness, thats where your expertise resides!!

Almiranta,

Hitler was a Do'er too

-- All destroyed in 91 and after, and Iraq had them only because Regan SOLD them to him in the 1980's (Iran Contra). No WMD's found upon invasion, just dusty warehouses that once had them before Bush got them in 91

Jan: We have witnesses to the construction of WMD. We have captured rockets whose only purpose was to deliver WMD. We have found sarin and anthrax, just not tons of either. We have testimony from people who helped ship heavy metal bottles marked with signs indicating poisons or toxic materials, on converted passenger planes flying established and allowed passenger schedules and routes into Syria. We have testimony from scientists who worked on nuclear projects, one of whom led US officers to illegal nuclear development machinery buried in his yard. We have satellite tapes and photos of convoys of tractor-trailers moving across the Syrian border. We have the testimony of a former high-ranking Iraqi that there were carefully established protocols for removing WMD in case of a threat to Iraq, backed by Russia and China---protocols which were enacted. We have traces of WMD in several of the buildings which we knew were factories, with markers to indicate that they were of recent manufacture and not left over from the days before we pulled Sadaam's teeth and turned him into a genial empty suit with no power and no influence.

Mark,

1. Taliban regrouping and still there, opium trade still active, warlords still in control, hatred of US occupation still palpable.

2. AQ still fighting Pakis and Afghani forces, still haven't got around to worrying about OBL.

3. The Kurdish went ahead and did that job for us, but thanks for playing.

"By early Sunday – way before Saddam’s capture was being reported by the mainstream Western press – the Kurdish media ran the following news wire:

“Saddam Hussein, the former President of the Iraqi regime, was captured by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. A special intelligence unit led by Qusrat Rasul Ali, a high-ranking member of the PUK, found Saddam Hussein in the city of Tikrit, his birthplace. Qusrat’s team was accompanied by a group of US soldiers. Further details of the capture will emerge during the day; but the global Kurdish party is about to begin!”

By the time Western press agencies were running the same story, the emphasis had changed, and the ousted Iraqi president had been “captured in a raid by US forces backed by Kurdish fighters.”

4. AQ Kahn network let who knows what get out into the hands of who knows how many countries and terrorist groups, yet we still coddle a MILITARY DICTATORSHIP, not to mention our backing out of a nuclear non-proliferation treaty, so much for the American word.

5. Anymore toothless tigers you gonna make stand up for the cameras?

6. Afghanistan is being controlled by militias and warlords who still institute strict religious values on women, and rescrict freedoms, except when they round up their people to vote for their bloc of candidates. Way to liberate a country then leave them to fall back into the same messes...just like Reagan and Bush Sr. did to them in the 80's!

"They are still in power today, despite the facade of Hamid Karzai's democratically elected government in Kabul. Opium production, almost eliminated under Taliban rule, is back bigger than ever, because the warlords need the income. Even the Taliban (who no longer have any conventional tax revenues) are now taxing opium rather than eradicating it in the areas they control. And they will continue to have support in those Pashto-speaking areas because the Pashtuns, some 40 per cent of the population, see the Taliban as their best chance of recovering their traditional dominant role in running Afghanistan"

http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index.php?display=story&full_path=/2006/may/24/dyer/

7. Democracy will hopefully take hold, but as it stands now, the greenzone is about as far as the government of iraq's power extends, with outright civil war, lack of security, and militias controlling the police forces, If you're basing "democracy" on people voting, remember that Saddam let them vote too!

8. great, more pictures and face-time, im sure the press corps is excited...can you explain a world-wide increase in terrorism since our invasion...didn't think so.

9. hey, does Bush get to claim he did everything that happens under his watch? Lebanese kicked the Syrians out on their own, Bush had nothing to do with that, infact I would say the dead politician had more claim to that than anything in Der Leader's administration...what a laugh

10. You're gonna claim resposnsibility for Hamas taking control of the country? go for it!

11. took them 250 years for someone to do it, pretty good odds, keep going, how about instituting ALL the 9/11 commison advice, wanna try that one next?

12. Good, keep it up! Maybe invading a few more countries will make them see the follies of their ways.

Perhaps the fact that we have seen many more times the amount of terrorism alludes to the fact that we are helping to create more of them, ever think about that?

not a bad list...horrible would be my description.

-- You tried to invade before, several times in fact and we beat you back and sent you packing every time. A couple times, it was the militia and civilian than sent you packing.

We didn't get a Regime change, we have a Conservative minority, kept tightly in check by a slim minority and all the other parties left leaning of them. If they get out of line, we can toss them out on their ear and have another election. One of the advantages of the parlimentry system. You on the other hand are stuck with the dumbest president since the US was founded, until you impeach him or he leaves on his own

For a 51st state, I nominate Canada. It's close, it's got a lot of oil (and everyone knows that's the only reason we ever go to war) and then we could get axis into a school where he might learn something real about the United States.

Except they no longer need a regime change---they did it on their own.

Speaking of axis and Canada---doesn't their universal health care include psychiatrists? And if so, how can we explain axis?

axis,

It's Canada' prerogative as a sovereign nation to do what they choose. It's ours as a sovereign nation to do as we choose. Why do you Canadians want to continually meddle in our business. You have enough problems in Canada to deal with for now!

IF and WHEN Iraq wants the U.S. to leave, we will do so!

Have you been paying attention to the news?

The Iraqi government absolutely has not asked the U.S. to leave yet, and in fact, they and most Iraqis do not want the U.S. to leave yet. The last I heard, they asked us NOT to leave! They recognize the need for our troops. If we leave, the terrorists will take over Iraq as fast as our troops depart. No, axis, the Iraqis DO NOT want us to leave. Terrorists and some of their Sunni allies who want to regain power in Iraq want us out, pronto, but the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people in general do not!

How long will Iraq want the U.S. to remain in Iraq and maintain bases there. My guess is for several years. How long have we been in Europe? Our role in Europe has diminished. Our role in the Middle East has only begun!

Will some government officials say publicly that they want us to leave. Absolutely. They must talk to their "base" just like LibDims talk to their base here.

My hope is that Iraq will become and remain an ally of the United States and other democratic nations! I know that would be bad news for the LibDims, but not for America.

Who knows, maybe the new Iraq will be one of the nations which joins the United States in the organization of nations to replace the old and ineffective United Nations!!!

AAR

TEO,

I'm saying again what I have said before.

The LibDims incessant 24/7 anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-war, anti-military, anti-everything rhetoric, propaganda, and hate campaign provides hope, encouragement, and a reason to terrorists to continue killing more Iraqi men, women, children, and American soldiers.

You and the LibDims give the terrorists hope to continue their killings -- hoping and believing that you and the LibDims campaign will be successful and convince Americans to pull out of Iraq and leave it to the terrorists!

How can the terrorists help the LibDims convince Americans to leave Iraq to the terrorists -- why, by blowing up even more American troops, by blowing to bits even more Iraqi men, women, and children.

Did that cause all of the bombings and killings? No, but it has been a significant contributing factor and continues to be. LibDims either don't understand the results of their words and actions... or they don't care. I think it is the latter.

I'll forgo this opportunity to again talk about the damage the LibDim's rhetoric and propaganda have done to America's image, the image of our presidency, and our security and economic interests, and America's influence on the world in general!

Back to your "hero" and role model "Hitler"?

Or is it that you want to equate his murderous regime with Conservatives in your (and axis') continuing efforts to transfer his actions and deeds to those with whom you disagree? More character assassination!

Typical Liberal Tactics!!!

I've got some work to do and errands to run, so you liberals can have it for awhile.

AAR

AAR,

Would the US accept Iraqi bases on US soil?

So what makes you think they want permanent bases on their lands...have you asked them yourself, or are you relying on the word of Bush?

You know as well as i do that even one terrorist attack a year would justify us keeping our bases as close as possible to the petro-spigot forever. Bush is setting up precedent to create a cold-war that will never end, peace just isn't profitable.

What happens when 50 years from now we are still fighting insurgents in Iraq, when can we calim victory...Afghanistan is sliding back into warlord control, were we victorious there?

When do we know we have won the WOT? Do we get a signing of surrender on a ship in the Gulf, do we have to kill every arab male of fighting age? Do we just claim it whenever we want, and it becomes reality?

Interesting.

Bush has now been there twice during the conflict.

Ted Kennedy who calls it a "QUAGMIRE" has yet to be there.

Interesting.

I wonder how Teddy is able to determine it's a quagmire if he's never been there. Maybe Teddy just isn't intellectually curious.

LOL

OH...and Rove not being indicted. Liberals not winning the 50th. DailyKos convention tearing apart the Democratic Party. Bush's poll numbers up 15 points in the last 40 days. Zarqawi dead.

LOL

if we were going to get a 51st State, I'd prefer the Bahamas or Jamaica...if we really were the imperialist scum, then we should be conquering the much nicer areas of the world, right?

Mark:

What's more beautiful than a area with lots and lots of that bubblin' crude? Black gold. Texas tea. Sheet man, get enough of that and you could buy Jamaica.

Steve

Why would we re-establish full diplomatic relations with Iran...your boy Carter blew it with them. Your boy Clinton didn't re-establish them either so why should Bush?

Axis...until you stop killing 350,000 seals in the slaughter it's tough for me to take any of you Canucks seriously.

As for the "dumbest" President comment....is there a test that was taken or is that your opinion? You say you are in your 50's...you obviously saw what Jimmy Carter did. You obviously saw what LBJ did. You obviously saw what Bush's dad did. Not exactly great presidencies.

Now, go slaughter another seal.

Maybe he wants to start another failed oil business.

TEO: No, I think it's a baseball team he has his eye on.

The United States isn't going to "occupy" Iraq, but we are going to have some bases there for quite some time

AAR, I don't want to occupy your house, but do you mind if I keep my Lazy Boy recliner in front of your television? Thanks.

Life, history, and everything about it is a series of "missions accomplished

Thst IS true. But you know that is NOT what Captain Banana Cuckoonut meant on board that ship.

And the flight suit obsession comes from a chickenhawk wearing one to declare mission accomplished (more than 3 years ago) when the nearest he was to anykind of battle was flying over Alabama. It desecrates the uniform worn by true heros that gave their lives, their sight, their limbs in Southeast Asia.

AAR,

you can't answer one of my questions, how cute!

the rest of the world made it clear they didn't approve of what Bush was doing, infact I would say that the major demonstrations and lack of security council approval for the invasion would pretty much guarantee the world didn't condone our actions.

Now, we knew our actions were illegal, infact Richard perle admitted it was so back in 2003:

"But Mr Perle, a key member of the defence policy board, which advises the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said that "international law ... would have required us to leave Saddam Hussein alone", and this would have been morally unacceptable."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html

So if the world saw our actions as illegal, but we did it anyways, how much more respect can we lose? Our standing is directly linked with our lack of regard for what our neighbors think or need, the US media and MINORITY parties don't pull the strings for every country on the globe...or do they, hmmmm?

You assumptions that the terrorists would just give up because they are facing a unified america is silly, can you show me any modern wars where the enemy somehow backed out because a country was united...did Germany, Japan and Italy back down because they were facing a unified america? What a stupid assumption!

hugs and kisses

XOXOXO

Axis

Go read the speech by Bush on the Aircraft Carrier when "Mission Accomplished" was there. If you can read that speech and still come back here with an honest face and tell us all that he stated Mission Accomplished and that fighting / war was over, then you are a bigger man than I.

Would you like the link? Really, do yourself an honest favor and read the speech because no way in hell was Mission Accomplished ever part of the speech. Nor was there any implication of the kind.

For months on this board you have preached honesty, you have claimed people to be LIARS.

Here's a chance to show what YOU are truly made of.

Are you a man or a Canadian?

Ash...as a resident of Midland, Texas at the time of Bush's failed oil business....there were companies left and right going out of business in Texas during that time.

It was the Oil Bust of Texas from 1979 to 1989 and people were laid off and went belly up all over the place.

Why do you make it personal as if Bush was the only one? In fact good people around the entire state were hit very hard.

Shame you don't have the intellectual honesty to address that.

-------

In fact, no industry – including auto manufacturers – suffered more layoffs in the last recession than U.S. oil and gas producers – nearly 70,000 from July 1991 to July 1992 alone.

And from 1982 to 1992, the oil industry had to cut more than 450,000 jobs – roughly the population of Austin, Texas – according to the American Petroleum Industry.

Most of the cuts came during the bust of the mid-1980s, when crude prices plummeted to $9 a barrel. Then employment bottomed in 1989 and even picked up in 1990, as both independent wildcatters and major producers were lured back into the oil fields by Gulf War-led prices that got as high as $40 a barrel.

But demand proved short-lived, thanks to the sluggish economy, and prices returned to low levels.

Where was the press when independent producers were going out of business and the industry was losing money? There were few such sob stories then.

In 1992, moreover, domestic oil production sank to the lowest level in more than 30 years. And drilling activity hovered around 650 rigs nationwide – down from more than 3,000 in 1982, the industry peak, and the lowest level since 1940, according to Baker Hughes Inc.

Warriornation,

You read the article, but ill share my two favorite parts with you:

"Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed"

--Sounds like what it says, but just how do YOU define "major", to me 150,000 troops on the ground, with casualties daily, still not in control of large swaths of the country, and little to no reconstruction underway because of "security" issues to be pretty "major" to me...or was Vietnam a war of "minor" combat operations?

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001 and still goes on."

-- Seems like he is claiming victory in Iraq, am I reading that wrong, or is little relevant military accomplishments to be considered a "victory"?

This is what the folks on the right are good at (I guess they learned well from Clinton), parsing words just so finely as to claim something, and yet always leave the crack of plausible deniability...are you really going to tell me that while he was talking to the NATION on that ship, that he wasn't telling us that the worst in Iraq was over, that we had accomplished our mission, and all that was left now was picking up the pieces and moving on to our next "battle" in the WOT?...yeah yeah yeah I know deny all you want.

Are you a man or a Canadian?

It is ignorant statements like this that assure there will always be war. At least until all the warbonnets kill themselves, Escape From New York style.

it was the Oil Bust of Texas from 1979 to 1989

My mistake: I thought for sure I said baseball team! Oops, I did.

Bush is in Baghdad--good for our President. I like a man who isn't afraid to take risks. Maybe the Bush haters could form a hate club. They could call it the Westcoast/Canadian Satan's Roost. They could join up with the other hate groups and have Reid and Durbin as their leaders. Murtha could be their CEO and Jefferson their CFO. Ted Kennedy could drive. They could show up at funerals and on Air Amerika and Code Pink rallys and spread their Godless rants. Nothing like the loony left to give real Americans the chance to say, "we told ya so".

Uffy,

We told you that you were electing a warmongering idiot...sorry to say "Told ya so"

Oh good, a rehash of "mission accomplished."
For the record, Bush stepped out of an S-3 Viking anti-submarine aircraft, not a "jet fighter." He had no more reason to wear a flight suit than a passenger on a DC-9.

As for his recent trip to Iraq -- I fail to see how sneaking in and out of the Green Zone, like a thief in the night, is a bad day for the left -- I do agree that his returning to U.S. was a bad day for everyone.
As for the president's poll numbers (something I thought all B4B urchins disdain), last night CBS reported that unlike his "bounce" after the capture of Saddam, his numbers actually fell to 33 percent (down from 35 percent in the same poll a month ago) after the killing of AQ's #1 in Iraq.
This guy gets no respect because he has yet to earn any -- by the way, I haven't heard much crowing about the "booming" economy lately at this site, what gives?

AAR, Uffy, Warriornation, etc.

Anyone know how far out of the green zone Bush ventured. Perhaps he was afforded a glimpse of life as an Iraqi lives it, in a war zone, or perhaps he sat down with them for a little taste of reality. Anyone know?

Ash...so you're saying his baseball team was a failed venture...wow, prey tell how you came up with that concept.

Third Eye...we toppled Saddam and major combat operations with us racing into Baghdad in tanks, etc were over. Those are MAJOR combat operations.

I don't see how you can state it any other way. We have thousands of troops in Germany and Korea now...are you saying major combat operations there aren't over because they are still there?

Yes, TEO, Hitler WAS a Doer. Good for you. A gold star for the little Lib in the corner. (The one who reminds me of Kartman.)

I wondered how long it would take for you barking mad moonbats to dig up old Adolph. But you didn't have to, TEO---we already KNOW how empty is your intellect, how vacant is your rhetoric. You don't need to keep falling back on Hitler, or other irrelevant trivia, to convince us. You had us with "TEO".

There was once a silly old joke about prisoners who had been in jail together for so long they didn't even need to tell jokes any more. One would just say "Number 7" and they would all laugh.

You wild-eyed BDS hatemongers would do us all a favor if you would just do the same. You never have anything new to offer, the old tired rants you do offer have been rebutted by fact so often we are tired of going through it over and over again to an uncaring group that finds facts inconvenient and much prefers the delusional fantasy of the Left, and it would spare us a lot of wasted space.

Yes, TEO, we get it. You hate Bush, you hate America, you hate the war, you don't have the blood of innocents on your hands, you know all there is to know about everything that has ever happened, and you are just so......SPECIAL.

And yes, Adolph did get a lot done, and it was bad stuff. So what's your point? That some people who actually DO things do wrong things, so YOU are superior for just sitting on your "eye" and ridiculing everyone else who tries to accomplish anything?

Personally, I think the main reason the Mission Accomplished thing was so hard to understand by the Left was that it represented an alien concept, or a couple of them. The first was in having a mission that was not based on snide, sneering, negativism, and the second was that of accomplishment.

So be proud, ever so proud, of your seat up in the nosebleed section, watching those who are actually involved in doing anything, and high-fiving each other when you "identify" a "mistake". But remember, no matter how much you scream and shout and cut and paste and lie and rant, you still sound just plain ignorant. Or because of, etc.... You think you are right, so go off with axis and steve and maf and your yellow travelers and congratulate each other. You belong with your own kind. You spend so much time here, I'm beginning to think even they find you tiresome and wish that "eye" would close up every now and then.

Canadian Observer...I don't know where Bush went today but he's been there twice.

John Kerry....crickets chirping.

Ted Kennedy...crickets chirping.

Yet both call it a QUAGMIRE and they don't even go there...HELLO!

Sorry ASH, it was TEO that had the stupidity to say "another failed oil business".

Seriously, if you guys are to be taken with any grain of salt wouldn't a few facts along the way be nice.

How's that Karl Rove GUARANTEED indictment going for you today?

Canadian Observer,

Perhaps you could ask those Canadian troops who are helping rid Iraq of the bad guys. Do you think you could ask them and let us know what they said?

Got any really bad neighborhoods in Canada where people don't venture out alone at night? Well we have some here where I wouldn't walk alone at night? Likewise in Iraq.

There's no purpose for the President to walk out and deliberately put himself in danger, even though the LibDims would like to see that. President Bush wasn't there to fight Iraqi terrorists. Our troops and the Iraqi troops, however, do that every day! President Bush was there to meet with some of our "new world leaders" and to encourage Iraqis and our troops -- without the help of the U.N.

AAR

Saliva, you say:
"For the record, Bush stepped out of an S-3 Viking anti-submarine aircraft, not a "jet fighter." He had no more reason to wear a flight suit than a passenger on a DC-9."

Just for the record, did he "pretend" he flew the plane? Were you offended by the location of his exit? Did you realize there was an identified pilot who talked about flying the president but still believe there were some surreptitious efforts to send subliminal messages to the contrary? Just wondering if all Lefties are on the same track...

So you don't approve of Bush's attire. He wore a flight suit on a flight. He wore a military flight suit on a military flight. Now you say he made what....a fashion faux pas? (That would be "foe pah" in LibSpeak.) As what is evidently a qualified fashion consultant, what would YOU have recommended as appropriate attire? A jogging suit? Only if he jogged once he deplaned, I guess. Otherwise wearing it would make him a LIAR. A business suit? But you could carp that the President is no longer a businessman. Jeans and boots? First, it's not a good idea to wear boots on a deck, and second, you all hate him for being a "cowboy" so jeans would be a bad choice. Gee, if only they had asked YOU......

Do ya think maybe, just maybe, there is absolutely nothing the man could have worn that would have made you happy, no form of transportation to the aircraft carrier that you would have approved of, and no speech he could have made that you would not have had a sneerfest about? Do ya think? Because that's what WE think, and that's why your constant carping and whining and sneering and invention of bizarre untruths designed only to make the man look bad are so unconvincing.

You are like the really really ugly guys who keep talking about how undesireable the cheerleaders are, AS IF you can convince anyone you really are better than they are. Losers all, but relentlessly cheering each other on with the repeated claims that losing is really winning. Yes, somehow YOU have been given the great gift of being able to see what others can't---or more to the point, of believing what others can't. because it is just so....goofy.

You are the party with the Crystal Ball, able to discern the true hearts and minds of others. So why did President Bush wear a flight suit? Come on, tell us. Give us the unadulterated LibSpeak truth about why Bush chose to wear a military flight suit on a military flight. You got the inside skinny on this----share. What's the real, hidden, secret, known only to the special guys like you, reason? Because if YOU know it, it HAS to be important, secret, hidden, and SPECIAL...

350,000 seals slaughtered at the hands of Canadians this year.......

Oh the Canadian brutality

Almiranta,

It's so nice that you have fallen back on YOUR A-game, calling everyone else radicals and unintelligent; but you still don't havea ny facts to back-up your assumptions on this war.

Just because we choose not to illegaly invade a nation doesn't mean we don't "do anything". We just prefer to deal wtih the real issues at home. Bush did a whole lot in his dead or alive search for OBL, or has he even remembered why we started this little jaunt across the globe in the first place, to get the bad guy who hurt us...not to topple some tin-pot dictator we coddled for decades for cheap oil...or has your goldfish memory span blanked that little inconvenient truth?

You can think anything you want about me, but the truth is that the time of the warmonger is over, you are a dying breed, still sniffing the air for something to justify your admiration for the bomb. Peace is an anathema to you, because you can't figure out how to survive if you don't have another bogey-man to hate.

So since you have fallen back on the age-old tactic of ignoring reality so that you can crow in false accomplishments, I will end this with a tip of my cap to you, and an apology if i hurt your feelings regarding my crass statement of yesterday.

Go with God(s)
XOXOXO

Why did the pilot of Bush's plane wear a flight suit? Why not a T shirt and cutoffs? Why not a NY Yankees uniform? Why not a smart little pastel ensemble from Lands End? Why not plaid golf slacks?

TEO,

Perhaps you can tell me why you think we need Iraqi bases on U.S. soil.

The United States has had bases throughout Europe, South Korea, Japan, the Middle East, and other areas of the world for years. Did you know that? Do you know why we have troops there? Do you know how much it costs for us to keep those troops there? Do you know how much the United States spends each year on our military -- the same one that provides or helps provide security for most of the free world?

Do those countries each maintain bases here in the United States in exchange for us providing military security to those nations and the world?

Do you understand why we might want to keep bases in Iraq?

Do you see any benefit to Iraq? Do you see any benefit to the United States?

We won't be fighting insurgents in Iraq 50 years from now or 5 years from now. You know that. I know that. You just want to exaggerate your propaganda by saying that we will be fighting in Iraq 50 years from now. It is the terrorists we are fighting and the ones we do not want to take over that country.

I know you LibDims would like for President Bush to pull our troops so the terrorists would have an oil rich nation to fund their terrorist activities and training, but that would be suicidal for America!

And no, TEO, the United States is not there to kill Arabs as you would like the Arabs to believe. That's just another liberal lie and exaggeration intended to mislead, inflame. and incite your liberal base and any Arabs or terrorists who may be reading your comments.

And yes, TEO, I can think of a reason why we might need or want Iraqi bases in the United States 50 years from now if liberals get their way!

AAR

Warriornation,

You're missing the point.

"Major" combat operations is a pretty broad term, is there something i'm missing in the army field manuel that explains what a "major" combat operation is, does it always have to involve tanks, is that the threshold? What about sustained bombing by aircraft, or actionable service by offshore carrier assets, is that major?

now, if I remember correctly, we didn't have tanks rolling through Vietnam, yet I doubt anyone would classify our operations there as "minor", although a whole lotta bombing runs and squad level anti-insurgency actions might be minor, but I don't think so.

"AAR, Uffy, Warriornation, etc.

Anyone know how far out of the green zone Bush ventured. Perhaps he was afforded a glimpse of life as an Iraqi lives it, in a war zone, or perhaps he sat down with them for a little taste of reality. Anyone know?"

Hmmmm, not sure about that one. I would guess that he made it as far out of the Green Zone as the reporters who tell us how bad Iraq is on a daily basis.

I also believe that it is ALOT closer than you or any of the Bush haters on this site have ever been.

Warriornation,

I was asking a rhetorical question in regards to Iraq having a base here. Don't be silly, you know that.

No in regards to bases around the globe: We provide the bulk of the security for many of the nations of the world, now ask yourself why is that? Germany, Turkey, Japan, England, all these coutnries are able to stand up for themselves, but we keep bases there so that we have quick responses to threats to us or our allies, thats simple, but the question is why WE have taken on the responsibility to upkeep bases and military personel in a post cold war enviroment? Wouldn't it be much more useful to transfer those troops to secure our homeland, which if you remember was why we have entered into this war in the first place.

My point isn't that we should remove every military installation to pull back soldier to here, but that we should be asking is the price worth the gains? Do we need fast reaction forces in Germany or the UK anymore? could we better utilize our military in other spots?

I'll ignore your stupid remark about our intentions with regards to terrorists.

In regards to killing arabs, can you show me where our actions aren't killing arabs? our "collateral damage" doesnt hurt white people, infact 100% of that damage is to arabs, so the reality is that we are killing more people on accident than terrorists we kill on purpose.

Bush DID require a flightsuit.

Another lie from the left. The pilot was Marquette University graduate (my alma mater) Commander John "Skip" Lussier.

There have been some fantastic articles on the entire flight in the Marquette Magazine about what went on, what part of the flying Bush did (he did actually fly the plane for awhile thus needing the flightsuit).

It continues to amaze me that crap the left throws out. And even though this has now been debunked, they will continue to do it just like they do the "failed oil business" and all the other crap.

Bush flies Viking for 20 minutes at over 400mph

Read it and Weap!!! Another left myth totally blown out of the water. This is why you need a flight suit you idiots.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=137897

TEO,

From the PBS Website...

"...Because the often soggy Vietnamese terrain limited their range, tanks did not play a major role in Vietnam. They did, however, provide valuable support to American forces in the south, securing contested roadways and engaging enemy troops."

Our troops use the best equipment that's appropriate for the combat and the war they are fighting. We use tanks in dry areas like desserts. We don't use as many tanks in swamps and rivers.

That's why Kerry, who claims to have been in Viet Nam, said he served on as Swift Boat and not a tank creeping along in the mud and ooze on the bottom of the swamps and rivers!

AAR

We didn't have tanks rolling through Vietnam....I'll have to remind my relatives of the 1st Cav and 81st that were on those tanks that this didn't happen.

Look TEO, you are going to define things in your prism because of your dislike for Bush that is obvious. Mission Accomplished had to do with the ship coming home, not with Bush. He has said from day one this was going to take years and many conflicts, why you guys cherry pick parts of a speech or a sign that had nothing to do with that speech is your issue.

We're in it for the long haul and that has been expressed time and time again at the UN, the state of the union speeches, policy speeches, etc, etc.

No one EVER said this would be easy. Little did we know that in addition to fighting terrorists, we have to fight the soft underbelly of America as well....you guys.

"I heard that the pool reporters who flew in the helicopters with President Bush wore body armor, but President Bush and his staff did not."

"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Bush sat in the cockpit of Air Force One when the plane landed at Baghdad's airport after the 11-hour overnight flight, Bartlett said. The president wore a 25-pound flak jacket during the helicopter flight from the airport to the Green Zone, Bartlett said."

Sorry to blow your fearless leader image. It only makes sense...

Warriornation,

You guys are doing a great job fighting the soft underbelly, infact the polls show the soft underbelly to be winning against Der Leader. LOL!!

You still didn't answer my question, was Vietnam, sans tanks, a "minor conflict". Would you consider chaotic, deadly, and sustained squad-level combat over 2/3rds of a country "minor combat"? Now I don't know what the military calls it, but 3 years of this sounds pretty major to me...at what point does it reach "major" combat, only when we bring tanks back in? what about the use of up-armored Hum-Vees with .50 cal turrets and LAWs, in use right now, is that not crossing the threshold of "major" combat?

TEO says:

"It's so nice that you have fallen back on YOUR A-game, calling everyone else radicals and un