I certainly did not miss the blatant threat of war against Syria and Iran.

It is terrifying that Bush continues to ignore reality and shun all rationality. It's truly terrifying that all Bush wants is escalation of an already failed strategy.

Thank God some sane people were elected last November that will hopefully stop Bush's war fantasy.

Bush is a modern Napoleon and Iraq is his Waterloo. Even many Republicans are fleeing this bunker president.

Wade

Mark, I thought President Bush's speech tonight was wonderful, a speech spoken by a real leader. Imagine how pissed off the dems would be if America was able to win the war on terror, Iraq being a part of same.

You are delusional.

James,

I do believe our Democratic friends are in a funk tonight - they don't quite know what to do, and thats why we see the stupid proposal to have a non-binding resolution in favor of quitting.

For crying out loud, Democrats: defy someone! If you can't defy the terrorists then defy President Bush...and if you think that defying President Bush on this is a losing proposition, then defy your leftwing base...this mush-mouthed garbage is just going to make Democrats despised on all sides.

Democrats purged the word VICTORY from their dictionaries after WW2. Now, they are stuck not knowing what to do but advocate defeat.

The media should be playing Harry 'the scrapper' Reid's statements from Dec. 17th stating he was very amenable to an increase in troop levels...and do a side by side with the whiny little excrement now saying he wants the dems to go on record opposing it. I think Kerry must have given the boy his flip flops. I think that the dems are having difficulty finding a position on this new strategy, since if our military kicks some ass and wins this, they will look like anti-American, anti-military, anti-Bush commies. Of course, we know they are cut and run, but GWB just gave them a kick in the groin to stir them up. I heard Teddy was at the bar watching the speech, and commented he was going out for a swim. I hope he tries for one more lap than he can handle...and that would be just one lap!

George has done it again. Ignoring the will of the Citizens of the United States (CNN, AP, and Gallop polls which show 66% of Citizens oppose the war) in sending more troops into an area that we need to be leaving. Even a Republican lead bi-partisen commishion called upon George to get U.S. Troops out of Iraq and to begin discussions with their neighbors. Even war vets call upon George to pull troops out of Iraq.

From Bad to Worst.
Out of the Frying Pan, into the Fire.

Magnum Serpentine

Mark,

I don't know if you include CNN and MSNBC in your umbrella term of "MSM", but both of them discussed last night (within a half hour of the end of the speech) the implications that carrier strike group has for Iran and other countries in the area...

Frankly, I am skeptical of the "surge" plan, as I am skeptical of pretty much everything else that the President does nowadays, but one thing is more than apparent to me...

Bush needs a speech coach... he sounded like a middle schooler reading a book report...

Mark,

The Dems have "Buckfever" when it comes to GW.

They believe that the American voter gave them the mandate to "close out this war", and the one most important aspect of GW's speech was; "This begins with addressing Iran and Syria."

An issue that should have been dealt with before the war, but it wasn't, so now's the time to put both Iran & Syria on formal notice that we retain the right to defend our interests in the region and if we deem that either are not refraining from encouraging their terrorist groups from engaging in Iraq, thet we WILL bring them to their knees, even if the world peace community doesn't like it...tough!

After listening to GW, I firmly believe that he, along with our military are fed up with the ROE and that we simply need to flex some muscles for once.

Another major problem with this war is that since we did not use overwhelming force, this left our enemies thinking that we don't have the stomach for war and THAT has emboldened them to think that we won't attack Iran or Syria. I believe they are seriously mistaken.

I keep hearing from our side that "if we don't succeed in Iraq, it will embolden our enemies", but it has already happened. Our enemies have witnessed our hands being tied for the last two years and to them, this represents a "lack of stomach". But what they tend to forget, is that we have pulled the nuke trigger in the past and if push comes to shove, we'll use it again, but in a smaller scale and more wide spread since our airpower is capable of being equipped with this type of weaponry.

What really get's my goat is how our miltary has been hamstrung by the ROE and if we continue to execute this war, this way, we will never succeed.

Georgia Frawg

You're right. Ever since GW came into office, I've said that he needs a speech coach and that even when a person has the heart that he has, the American public is so superficial, that the left and the MSM will pick every botched word apart like it's a piece of KFC.

Did you get my drift Georgia...superficial?

Iran and Syria are responsible for the lion's share of the trouble in Iraq

Absurd, fact-free statements like these, are why most blogs on the right have no credibilty anymore.

Iraq has been a debacle. This occured while the Republicans controlled both Congress and the White House.
He should be listening more to hes daddy.

What really get's my goat is how our miltary has been hamstrung by the ROE and if we continue to execute this war, this way, we will never succeed.

Amen. At the same time we restrict our ROE and flagellate ourselves over our wrongdoings (Abu Ghraib, etc.), we have an enemy that obeys no ROE whatsoever. While I have no objections to putting in more troops, and agree wholeheartedly with the objective of cutting the supply of weapons, if we continue to tie one hand behind the respective backs of our troops, they will do little more than become additional IED targets.

Imagine how pissed off the dems would be if America was able to win the war on terror, Iraq being a part of same.

First, the Dems would have to be persuaded that Iraq is part of the WOT. Some insist that invading Iraq was a distraction from the WOT, or only became part of the WOT with our invasion (conveniently overlooking Saddam's previous harboring of terrorists, such as WTC bomber Abdul Raman Yassin, the presence in Iraq of people like Zarqawi BEFORE we invaded, his offer of reward money to PLO suicide bombers, etc.)

I think Bush is being smart about this. Yes, I actually agree with GF the last night was one of his deer in the headlights speeches, but he's given more than one electrifying speech, more than I can say for our last President. But with all these small raids, I think he's gathering information on Iraqi involvement, not trusting any assurance of a slam dunk case against Iran until he sees it himself, in a way that he can explain it to the American people.

I can’t help but wonder if the political realities of the day will allow a victory in Iraq. Clearly, if we are to succeed in Iraq, we need to confront Iran and to a lesser degree Syria: however, the Dems are moving ever further left, equating Iraq with Vietnam in what I believe to be the mantra of their 2008 presidential bid. It seems as if the left is willing to trade military victory for political power.

That being the case, Iran, seeing the division between our political parties, is unlikely to see any reason to stop promoting strife in Iraq as their strategy is working. In fact, they will be emboldened to continue attempting to further split US resolve concerning US policies on Iraq. The last thing the Iranians want is a successful US friendly democracy on their boarder.

I believe to achieve the victory in Iraq that we must militarily confront the Iranians with the prospect of forced regime change in that country. Politically, to accomplish this, our nation must be united on both sides of the isle on this course of action. Today, such consensual leadership appears an impossible dream. I will, however, concede that if any military can pull this off, without the complete support of its nation, it be the US military.

let's get down to brass tacks.......re-institute the draft NOW! send 100,000 troops or more and get this job done.

Is it democratic just to show posts that are positive toward GW. The fact you have no posts in your items today suggest you are 'censoring' all posts coming in.

DEMOCRATIC - Yeah right

Georgia,

I generally don't watch televised news other than glances as Fox and some of the local news in the morning to check the weather. I don't watch CNN or MSNBC at all because of their rank leftwing partisanship in their reporting (confirmed recently when I was stuck watching CNN while waiting for my wife to finish surgery).

Lenny,

A draft would take at least 18 months to provide troops, and how do we decide whom to draft out of the 30 million military aged males in the United States? At most, we need about 100,000 more troops in the Army and Marines than we have now...outside of the absurdity of forcing people to fight in a war they don't want to fight in, the practical aspsects forbid a draft.

Morris- getting an "electrifying"speech from W is like getting laid while you are asleep. It just doesn't feel right- IFF (yes folks that's two *F's* -- IFF you remember it at all.

AkaDad,

Haven't been paying attention to the news, have you? You are aware of the source for the IED's we're confronted with, aren't you? You are aware that in a battle the other day in Baghdad, the Iraqi army captured 7 Syrians who were fighting with the "insurgents" in Baghdad, right?

I;m wit Lenny. Do it- do it right or don't do it at all.

mark- c'mon- whats 18 months cmpared to 4 years. You know we wil be there 18 montsh from now anyway. Bush has said so. He said, as long as he is CC we wil have troops in Iraq. So what the hell- do it right Mark. Why would you do this WAR wrong?

BTW- I reiterate NO MATTER what happens, we will have troops in Iraq. Gee my confidence in the presidents judgment is makeing my hair stand on end. "electrifying"

Mark whay mnot do it RIGHT like Lenny suggests? kick some Iraqi butt and do it right? unless VICTORY is NOT the goal.

Is that it Mark, gang...do you WANT to lose in Iraq? sending some toke 20K kids over thre to get smeared? let's send 100K and open up a can!

Here's the real scary part.

All these kooks that are espousing their hatred for GW, America and the war have themselves backed into a corner that they won't be able to get out of it unless we do lose. What kind of life is that?

They're betting on the come that we do lose or that we have already lost. What type of patriotism is that and where did it come from. We all know where the Swimmer, Kerry and Kookspinach get their's, but what about these uneducated Bush haters that rationalize every argument with Bush this or Bush that. Where do they get it...the MSM. The MSM that our enemies pay very careful attention to.

Most of you sound exactly like Sambo the Suicide Bomber and guess what, that's what Iran wants to hear...total emphatic dissent that feeds their motives for their antagonistic attitude.

Unless the right reall DOES NOT WANT TO WIN.

Which is it a token 20K or a 100K plus to get the mission accomplished?

I really wonder if the right would prefer to lose this war or just keep the perpetual war going for their own political gain.

hmm.. McCain seems to agree wtih me and Lenny on the troops.

BS

I take back anything I've said half way nice to you...your an ass!

Navy I know you still support Nixon too, right?

you know, after bush has been ousted and replaced by Nancy- yeah Dick goes with W too- DOAH! I bet that gets your goat! After W is gone, And he is indeed found criminal, derelict, and of course incompetent, then what?

Will you still play your song and dance? I know, Nixon is still praised. So i guess with your un-ending passion for W, you'll support him along withBarney and Laura, right?

Don't let Bush fool you anymore.

Navy- do you want to win in Iraq or send 20k token kids to their grave?

So let me get this straight: Bush is now defying the Baker Report, Congress, the military, and the American public by escalating the war...Forgive me for not brimming over with optimism...
www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com

That's correct..BS!

But you're still an ass and if you think you can dissuade my affection for our party...you are sadly misguided. It is also obvious that you kook leftys have no desire to win this war since you so boldly espouse your hatred for our military.

If you were the disabled vet that you say you are, and I would be inclined to believe it was from a head wound, then you would have far greater respect, and be more careful what and where you preach these despicable rants.

I can guarantee that if you or your other troll buddies were to publicly denounce the military and our President as you have here at B4B, you would be stoned...or at least have the crap beat out of you!

So please, go ahead and take your game to the American public and see how far you get. I'm sure it won't be far.

hey, what happens if maliki doesn't meet his "benchmarks" do we bug out, like most iraqis and americans want? so all maliki has to do to be rid f us is... nothing. sounds like a plan!

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed the remarks about the carrier and Patriots missiles. I wondered when I heard it, what that had to do with Baghdad? But it does seem the President might be positioning himself to take on Iran or Syria. Shortly after the speech, US Forces entered and arrested several Iranians in Iraq at an Iranian consulate.

Democrats purged the word VICTORY from their dictionaries after WW2.

So, how'd you guys do in the election?

Do you people EVER get sick of being wrong ALL of the time?

Navy- your dillusional attempts to minimalize my concern for teh wellfor of our troops is aJOKE.

That is the funniest thing ever- " Hey i care about our troops, let's send more in to die" "yippie"

yeah navy- your a real bright one. Support the troops until they fall to the ground?

You know- i care enouygh about our kids that i WANT to see them live, NOT parrish in some battle for pride which is already lost.

Navy- the fact is saving lives of our troops means bringing them home NOT seeing tehm drop util there are no more. Boy Navy- i guess you call it tough love huh?

Democrats cut off the funding for Vietnam, if they try that this time what would the long terms consequences of thier actions be?

"Navy- the fact is saving lives of our troops means bringing them home NOT seeing tehm drop util there are no more. Boy Navy- i guess you call it tough love huh?"

BS

Unfortunate for you kooks, the majority of Americans believe that this IS a world wide WOT and not an isolated flare up, as you kooks would like to think. No, it is a war that will entail a lot of pain and a long time to resolve as all of us including GW has so often mentioned...but you simply do not want to listen.

So, you can make all your cliched remarks and all the lib kook talking points that you want, but nothing is going to change the fact that we are there, there are terrorists that want to kill us and governments that proclaim their hatred for America and Israel...and this was all before we invaded Iraq.

If you believe in our troops then give them the support they are asking for...more troops!!!

Don't you listen or read the news where every single troop that has been interviewed wants more troops and less restraint with ROE?

And BS...you're still an ass.

I just figured it out... these kooks honestly don't believe our troops are smart enough to make military decisions!!! Talk about liars.

They try to portray themselves as supporters, but when it comes down to it, their desire for the downfall of the Bush Administration overwhelms their sensibility and repsect for the troops....pethetic.

Ok Navy let me address this- seriously i will.

Let's accept your point. Let us say you are correct and the war on terror is global And BTW I agree.

Ok let us look at Iraq- the problem is we move there, they move out. We take conrol then we go on. They move back in right? This IS why we are adding some more troops right?

OK now let us expand that premise- let us say we manage Iraq and do it right. HEy mission Accomplished FOR REAL. seriously. We did it. Now let us go after Syra, and Iran and Ledonon just on principal. ;-)

ok with me so far gang?

So we WON in Iraq and we bail and go into these other num-nutz states. Hey We are rockin- and- a - rolling right?

S.O.B. they moved back into Iraq?

well i'll be dammd. No really i will. Any way All that effort, all this fueding by us all the money al the lives was for what exactly?

The flux of Iraq just shifted back in.

You see the premise of Iraq is merely a microcosim of what you claim. So even if I, we, America agrees with you, your logic an plan fails.

What then- add 200K to those countries?

do you see the futility in your logic?

Terroism is perpetual. you know- sometimes a hard punch just deosn't cut it. Sometimes we have to use our brains not our brawn.

but try as you may we keep failing to do that right?

Dear Blogs for Bush

There you go again with the old talking points no one but your ever shrinking crowd buys any more. Talk of "victory" sounds so hollow coming after four years of you people saying the same thing over and over again and NEVER PRODUCING. That's what happen when you start a war with a bunch of BS and think you can win it with slogans, or by attacking the Democrats.

Victory according to your side will be to give the Al Malaki Government the rains in Iraq. Problem with your "victory" is the following;

1) Al Malaki is backed and supplied by the Iranians. He is a Shiite , and the Shiite will take over any Democracy in Iraq. Therefore Iraq and Iran will become the best of friends. Your so called "victory" if it was ever going to happen basically gives Iran a new friend and partner. You people are not dilusional, you people are idiots, pure ans simple.... With "victories" like that who needs Osama as an enemy?

2) Can some one from your "victorious" crowd please tell me who is going to disarm the Shiite Militias, and the over 160,000 Pashmerga Kurd Militias in the North?? If they are not disarmed what kind of a "Democracy " will there be in Iraq???... Your side can call it the "Twilight Zone Democracy" in Iraq... I like the ring to it. Or maibe you want to make pretend (your favorite game) that our soldiers are going to be in Iraq forever... Just a reminder, for how long has Israel been fighting Arabs???

But of course you suport a "victory" as long as no one questions what in hell do you are actually saying. Hell, you might even actually believe that any one takes you seriously any more.

Is sad how you make pretend that there is any darn thing that your crowd can say that will change the now UNIVERSAL perception that you people are a bunch of nuts, that got to power by hiding your ideas. Your ideas will last for about two more years while The Idiot in Chief stagers to the finish line to face his judgment in history as the worst Administartion in modern times. As for your ideas.... Let's just say that your crowd should not expect to be taken seriously for the rest of their natural lives.

navydad: "If you believe in our troops then give them the support they are asking for...more troops!!!"

You say this as if you as if you're unaware of the significant amount of irony in it.

Man, I thought we had some kooks here. This speech did not sit well with the Dummies.

Sometimes we have to use our brains not our brawn.

What's this "we" kemo sabe?

Bill,

That is really rather obtuse - we're not just there in Iraq playing "whack a mole" and then move on - what we're doing is fighting and building until we get a democratic Iraq able to defend itself and aligned with the United States in opposition to terrorism as a means of political action. When we leave, if you Democrats will allow us to win, then the terrorists won't come back because the Iraqi government won't let them come back.

This is what you critics just don't get - that unless we change the social dynamic in the Arab/Moslem world, we will eventually have a terrorist nuke set off in the United States. Its inevitible - leave them alone long enough and they will build, buy or steal nuclear weapons...and no matter how secure we make ourselves here at home, they will eventually get one in here. Its what they live and dream for - not the US out of the middle east, not Isreal out of the West Bank, but the United States and Israel destroyed altogether. They will not stop, unless we stop them - and the only way we're going to stop them, short of massacring everyone over there (which is what we might end up doing if you get your way - imagine how angry the American people would be if Los Angeles were reduced to radioactive rubble), is to bring them hope for a better future so that the support systems for the terrorists dry up to the point where the real hard core become hunted animals, able to be dealt with easily by the local governments.

I just don't understand why you critics don't get this - it isn't brain surgery. I'm not some Napoleon over here...I just see things as they are, not as I wish them to be.

Patriot missles are NOT used against insurgencies or IED's they are used against significant nationstates. Regardless of politics it seems like the failures of Iraq will be put on the back burner in the publics mind for campaigns involving the nation states of Iran and Syria.

If we really intended to pacify Iraq we would have just bought them out and controlled them with properly distributed oil revenues. The execution of that campaign seems too obviously bad to be accidental.

I suspect the the oil lobby and the defense lobby were of one mind in this campaign. Limit oil production (to increase margins in the Oil industry) and reduce military inventories respectively (those no bid Halliburton contracts seem a little suspicious as well).

No Real conservative would stand behind such destructive policy. Run away deficits, expansion of public spending, poorly executed drawn out military campaign, outrageous pork projects and runaway corporate welfare, and suspension of half of the bill of rights, nation building...
these wanna be conservatives are a real conservatives worst nightmare.

Mark- I'd beleive you, if it weren't the past 4 years of you and the gang following Bush as he lied and SWORE to you that things were going great in Iraq.

Mark- should we belive the GWBush of the pat 4 years or the GWBush of now?

Let's see- you guys beleived him then, then he flips flops, and now we find you beleive him now.

And what should the rest of America beleive- the old Bush or the new Bush?

Really guys, aren't you embarrassed?

I assumed the threats against Iran and Syria were just a way of giving the middle finger to Jim Baker and the ISG.

if the worst fighting is happening next door to our ally Jordan, aren't they possibly part of the problem?

Iran has a lot of influence in Iraq, and it's in their best interest for Iraq to be a table country. We want iraq to be stable. That's why the ISG wanted negotiations. It is possible that talking to Iran might keep a few of our soldiers alive, and some iraqis. I guess we'll never know.

BTW- did it occur to any of you on the right that Bush's claim to seal the borders in Iraq is a farce.

What makes you think Bush can seal the borders in Iraq and stop terroist from crossing them when he can't stop terroists from coming across our borders?

Can we get an answer here?

ever here of America 1st?

make that "hear"

man i need help- obviously

navydad, enough back-and-forth with BS--the moron is a spoof.

There's just no way anyone over four years old can think, and write, like that. He/she/it (circle at least one) is purposely making typographical errors.

Mark, if you don't raise the standards, and ban those who insist on polluting this blog, then I may leave.

But I'll e-mail you my address so's you can send me a signed copy of your and Matt's book...

"navydad, enough back-and-forth with BS--the moron is a spoof"

Agreed!

The dialogue defintely degrades when we're faced with a constant barrage of assinine questions and editorial comments.

I for one will boycott posts by anyone such as BS, GTgrad or anyone else that is purely seeking to denigrate our troops, our country or our President. However, if these libs want to engage in dialogue that requires some thought and research of the facts, then the door will be open, but until then adios kooks.

I know "god"- Can't seal the borders here at home from terrorist so why not try over in Iraq.

Hey i'm with ya- gotta try to succeed somewhere right?

Can't govern here, build a nation there!

brilliant.

You know this nation building stuff is hittin' the wallet kinda hard though. Still, brillliant!

God, Navy- What's next gonna censor Brownback, Coleman, Hagel?

What would you do with out the "other guys"in here?

argue with each other about which faction on the right to sign with?

Navydad-I cannot believe someone that loves war soooooo much ever was a squid. Iraq is not a vidio game. Men, just like the ones I served with with for over 20 years, are losing their limbs and lives.
Where are all these liberals coming from? Anyone against this war is a liberal? I love my Country!!!
The people here like NavyDad love Dubya and dead americans more. Most Americans, including most of the troops over there want no more troops to be sent to Iraq.

Navyvet,

You went and asked all of the troops in Iraq and most of them told you they don't want more troops? Or are you just making stuff up as you go along?

Bill,

In most of Iraq, right now, things are quite good - and even in the bad areas, Baghdad and Anbar, things aren't as bad as the MSM makes them out...the situation is, as President Bush pointed out, is unacceptable to the American people and to him - and to me, too: but for the people, it is unacceptable because most of them don't know the truth, for President Bush and his supporters, it is unacceptable because the false impression the MSM has created about Iraq threatens the entire mission in Iraq, and the larger War on Terrorism...so, the President is going to smoother the violence in Iraq, which will in turn give him the ability to more sternly deal with Iran and Syria.

MArk- you alluded to the MSM many times. IT doesn't fly- you are telling me (us) anyone that the MSM controls Coleman, Brownback, Hagel, Smith, etc. etc.? i would buy it if it were Kerry and Gore, Nancy and Harry, etc. But your own guys ar lashing out now.

Mark- this is not the secret covert dealings of the MSM. They do not control the repulican officials do they?

HEy Mark- just wanted to mention tis: there is a saying i am learning as I re-build my fat body into a lean, not so green, not so fighting machine. In lifting weights i here the saying: "results don't lie"

Well i can see the more i work the better i feel and the better shape i am in.

when we look at this in the realm of the war in Iraw- we see results, and no, they do not lie: $400B and growing, and 3018 troops and hopefully not counting, but we can't igore that.

The MSM has nothing to do with the results. The results are as they say- facts. Facts are facts. They are not influenced but rather reacted to.

Do you really think with resluts like that anyone should be happy- and after 4 years of both umbers rising year after year?

i'm trying to be civil on this point (you guys complain about my ranting). so hopefully you may offer a fair response.

Bill,

Results do matter:

1. No new terrorist attacks on the United States.

2. At least 50,000 enemy dead.

3. 50 million people liberated.

4. Once half a million Iraqis martialed in a Saddamite army against us, now 350,000 Iraqis martialed in an allied army.

5. Libya voluntarily giving up WMDs.

6. Djibouti, Ethiopia, India and Georgia becoming rock-solid allies of the United States.

7. Terrorists being destroyed in Somalia with our assistence.

8. Japan beginning to take its share of the load in northeast Asia.

I can go on - all of this, just because we stood up and fought, rather than issue worthless indictments and try to define what "is" is.

Meanwhile,

The MSM is biased against the President - I don't care that Hagel is echoing MSM idiocy, I only care that the MSM is broadcasting idiocy on a regular basis and calling it news.

BS writes:
"Morris- getting an "electrifying"speech from W is like getting laid while you are asleep. It just doesn't feel right- IFF (yes folks that's two *F's* -- IFF you remember it at all."

Actually, I don't know how it feels to get laid while I'm asleep because the women I've been with prefer me to be awake. But don't take it personally, I'm sure it must happen to lots of guys. Or were they just that ugly, that it wouldn't work out if you were awake and could see them? Best not to think about it, right.

But you actually do make a point here. If you don't like Bush to begin with, then watching him give an electrifying speech that quickens the spirit won't feel right, it won't seem to fit. But he did it after 9/11, and he did it at the last Republican convention. This is the trouble with personal dislike of a politician, it distorts how your view their ideas because the best ones don't feel right, just because you don't like him personally.

AkaDad,

Haven't been paying attention to the news, have you? You are aware of the source for the IED's we're confronted with, aren't you? You are aware that in a battle the other day in Baghdad, the Iraqi army captured 7 Syrians who were fighting with the "insurgents" in Baghdad, right?

Posted by: Mark Noonan

Wow. So seven whole Syrians amongst a fighting force of +/- 20,000 insurgents. That proves the Syrian government is fighting us, huh? Maybe they are contract workers (mercenaries) who are just making a living (like the many Blackwater thugs roaming the countryside). To tie the 7 Syrians to the entire country of Syria requires much stretching and contortion. Something I notice you can do with ease. I also noticed your post to Bill indicating things are going well in Bagdad and beyond. Again, a simple glance at the truth would dismiss that assertion. I bet you were good playing the game 'Twister'. It takes an acrobat to spin the news that way you do.

Unfortunate for you kooks, the majority of Americans believe that this IS a world wide WOT and not an isolated flare up, as you kooks would like to think.

Comment by navydad

Yep. That is why the vast majority of americans threw out the repubs in November. That is why 75% of americans are against the escalation. That is why 12-15 repub congresspeople are against the escalation. That is why our coalition of the willing is losing Britain's support. That is why folks in New Mexico are beginning impeachment proceedings. That is why even right wing talk show host (tweety matthews) are questioning the presidents decisions. Yep, everybody for you, huh? Next time you have a reunion, given so few people support your position, you could have it in a phone booth and still have room left over. yeah, that's right navydad, the whole of america support mr bush's WOT. Yep, that's right - NOT!

Stratrat,

If you are correct, then why isn't Congress moving to cut off funds, and why aren't a million people in DC demonstrating against the President's plan?

Tom,

Just one incident of very many...you really got to shut off the TV, stay away from Daily Kos and find out what is going on over there...

Hey Mark.

It was nice to sit back and watch someone else tear these kooks a new recatal orfice..but in a diplomatic way of course.

I'm still trying to figure out who Tweety Matthews is???

Is this pendejo talking about Chris Matthews? Because if he/she/it is, they're really off base.

Stratrat,

If you are correct, then why isn't Congress moving to cut off funds, and why aren't a million people in DC demonstrating against the President's plan?

Posted by: Mark Noonan

That is coming sir. As soon as bullets start flying and bombs start dropping on Iran and Syria. We cannot defeat the enemy without resorting to a draft. That much is clear. That topic will probably be the 'flash point' which generates the reaction you spoke of. The American people are a very patient group. They are also a loyal group who generally trust what their commander in chief says to them. That has changed, though. We are trusting fewer and fewer administration spokespeople, we are doubting the capacity of the administration more and more. As the public becomes more familiar with Mr Bush's plan to invade other countries - without consulting with Congress - the volume will increase. I promise you that.

Hey Mark.

It was nice to sit back and watch someone else tear these kooks a new recatal orfice..but in a diplomatic way of course.

I'm still trying to figure out who Tweety Matthews is???

Is this pendejo talking about Chris Matthews? Because if he/she/it is, they're really off base.

Posted by: navydad

The curious thing was nobody responded to the assertions I wrote about. The public IS turning away from the war. The repubs are starting to turn away from the war. So that is what is missing: Your POV on these changes occuring. I'm not being snarky to you or the President. I commented about some changing attitudes, and silence and insults is what I get. I don't mind navydad being rude to me - he probably is a rude person. To call me names, when you never responded to my reasonable comments, seems a little backwards. Reasonable comments should generate reasonable responses. Maybe you don't have any reasonable responses.

Stratrat- I've been telling them for a couple weeks now. They aren't getting it. Reality checks don't fly when the feed bin is laced with $$$$.

So let me answer it for them:

1) Why is public support waning?

because in November of 2006 (prior to the midterms) we were "winning the war" as of 3 weeks later we "not winning, but not losing".

I do not think the American people just can adjust that fast to such a drastic turn of events- in three weeks! It's almost sureal.
--

2) Why are we not winning the war?

Because we have no idea what "success in Iraq means" nor do we even know what "the mission" is. even though it was accomplished once.
--

3) Rummie's replacement won't tell us what the "National Interest" is.

Why is that? I mean i am an American. You guys (except Canuck) are Americans, Congress is American. Why are we NOT privy to the "national Interest" ???????????????????
--

4) On that mission it is perpetually in flux.

The enitre charade has changed from WMD's, to liberating Iraq/ousting Saddam, to building a government, to fighting the war on Terror, to preventing a civil war, to slowing a civil war, to keeping Iranians and other terroist from embarking on the wide open Iraq, to ending the civil war that formerly was being slowed- that was formerly being prevented, to now adding more troops to protect the one's that are dying. And this is the mouse that lived in the house the.... get the point?

5) The Iraqi people do not and WILL NOT comply with Bush. Any one wonder why?

Well let me tell you why- BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT W TAKING THEIR OIL!
--

6) The civil war is another **SMOKE SCREEN** by W.

Yes kiddos. Stealing Iraqs Oil and using out troops to protect it is about as criminal and un-patriotic attempt to destoy America that i have ever seen. In the LEAST and impeachable neccesity.

----

OK gang, i took my meds, i laid out some facts on a point by point outline. Are you satisfied now? Instead of my typical rant i offer you something to contend with. Now let's hear the spin.

sorry, my bad. You can spin the truth!

And considering some of the points i make that you in no-logical intellable way can spin, i am shocked to see you continue to jump in the fire with Bush and let him use you, yes you guys are being USED by Bush for his fling. No wonder the others on the right are sick of W.

well, how about some real responses? or will we get no- answer or just smart allick comments from navy or god is great?

Stratrat

Tell us who Tweety Matthews is and I'll respond.

BTW - i did decide that my argument was so on-point i decided to send it to more than a few media outles. I think the message of "we the people" is spoken loud in it. And since the republicans (in genneral) refuse to expalin some serious issues, i decided to answer it for them.

Might see it on t.v. or in the press :-)

Or on America's funniest retard videos!

No one cares what you think BS. Even your own side thinks you're a boob. I'm glad you're not on our side and I believe I can speak for others here.

Navy- you see now why i ANSWERED for the right?

i supose on my 6 ints, those that have been brow beatun upoonmyself and others by those so concerned. Well, i presented 6 points, but alas, none can be spun as i expected. None can be answered, none can be denied.

thanks Navy, now we all in this small chunk of America can see where you stand.

:-)

One commenter above questioned why the populace of the US has not demonstrated en masse against the war and posited that the war cannot be too unpopular without a hugely outspoken "peace" movement.
It would be my guess that the reason why is that so far the Bush/Cheny administration has been able to effectively insulate the public from any widespread sacrifice. To far and away most American's the war in Iraq is some nasty business taking place in a land far away. Aside from the military actually doing the fighting and their families the rest of us have been mostly spared any inconveniences wars usually create.

Of course, should Bush/Cheny decide to mix it up with Iran then all of that will change. Any military conflict with Iran cannot help but to negatively impact the world oil markets in a huge way. Say good bye to the status quo while a worldwide economic depression is ushered in, courtesy of Dubya and Dick.

It is clear that President Bush is not going to allow concerns about the diplomatic niceties to interfere with victory in Iraq and the larger War on Terrorism - Iran and Syria are responsible for the lion's share of the trouble in Iraq, and we're not going to allow them safe haven anymore.

Even as the Army has radically changed their instructional courses to deal with "political niceties" of cultures different to our own, and to greatly skew their course offerings toward counter-insurgency curricula.

Clearly you hoist the flag to favor might over right, power over strength and the knife over the 'niceties'.

How is it that you people can value the "freedom" of Iraqis more than you value the freedom of Americans?