Is Bush telling us...

[farp]

Is the President telling us that Iraq will be more dangerous after we pull out of Iraq? First he told us Saddam had WMDs, and Saddam didn't. Then he told us Iraqis desired freedom and democracy, but instead they sought sectarian violence. Now he says that leaving Iraq will be a catastrophic disaster...a blood bath, a terrorist breeding ground. If all those pin-head, ivy-league, D.C. imbreds were so inaccurate predicting our engagement, I don't think they can definitively prognosticate the result of our departure.

The U.S. government that saw Iraqi WMDs 2002 once again sees itself as an Iraqi political clairvoyant. When Bush threatens that leaving Iraq will result in global violence and instability, and he expects us to agree with that arrogance, it makes me question if our government and our politicians’ have a grip of reality.

Plus, does the President think we are chumps when he claims that Iraq is more dangerous now than it was before the invasion? Is this his excuse to continue and escalate the war?

I have always believed the river provides peace and knowledge. Unless it’s the Potomac, I still believe it.

[marko]

farp, I agree with you... just wanted to add some stuff.

Then he told us Iraqis desired freedom and democracy, but instead they sought sectarian violence.

My guess is Iraqi's do desire freedom... freedom from the US... http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pi...nt=250&lb=brme And I doubt very much that Iraqis "seek" to have sectarian violence... my guess is that there is more to it than the act of "seeking." This sectarian violence has roots that date back to over a thousand years ago. Yes, it's stupid... but then again, most religious conflicts are just that - barbaric egoic stupidy.

And to add to your first paragraph: Bush was warned -before the invasion- by intelligence experts that this mess would happen and that he would "open the gates of hell." (words coming directly from the Arab foreign ministers in Cairo in 2002) Isn't it ironic that he is using what he was warned about before the invasion as his reason to escalate the war?

Part of what is happening in the Middle East is the great unraveling of a problem that started after WWI when a couple of white Europeans penned in country boundaries that suited "their" interests and not the interests of a culture and people that they knew nothing about nor for that matter cared anything about.

Plus, does the President think we are chumps when he claims that Iraq is more dangerous now than it was before the invasion? Is this his excuse to continue and escalate the war?

First question: Yes. Maybe not chumps, but more along the lines of amnesiacs. Americans seem to have a serious problem remembering things - especially history.

Second question: Yes. They didn't label it the "Long War" in hopes that it would be over soon.
---

[ToddG]

Originally Posted by farp

Is the President telling us that Iraq will be more dangerous after we pull out of Iraq? First he told us Saddam had WMDs, and Saddam didn't. Then he told us Iraqis desired freedom and democracy, but instead they sought sectarian violence. Now he says that leaving Iraq will be a catastrophic disaster...a blood bath, a terrorist breeding ground. If all those pin-head, ivy-league, D.C. imbreds were so inaccurate predicting our engagement, I don't think they can definitively prognosticate the result of our departure.

The U.S. government that saw Iraqi WMDs 2002 once again sees itself as an Iraqi political clairvoyant. When Bush threatens that leaving Iraq will result in global violence and instability, and he expects us to agree with that arrogance, it makes me question if our government and our politicians’ have a grip of reality.

Plus, does the President think we are chumps when he claims that Iraq is more dangerous now than it was before the invasion? Is this his excuse to continue and escalate the war?

I have always believed the river provides peace and knowledge. Unless it’s the Potomac, I still believe it.

Mr. Tomorrow has answers! Click here

[farp]

ToddG: that’s a great cartoon although I think the artist's depictions of McCain and Lieberman are bit too flattering.

marko: I agree that the Iraqis did not “seek” sectarian violence, but considering how prevalent it is, how could all those Ivy League educated people not know that type of animosity was there before the war? I would understand it if it happened in Bum F**K Egypt, but this was a country that they supposedly had studied thoroughly prior to the invasion. I’m not cynical enough to believe that Bush didn’t care about the consequences since I really doubt he would have started this war unless he thought it was going to be a “gold star” on his presidential legacy. However; I’m starting to think that an Ivy League education should exempt you from upper echelon government positions.

Also, I think it is stunning that the democrats are arguing that we should pull out of Iraq because American lives are more valuable than the sum of Iraqi lives that would be lost in a civil war. I’m not really a liberal or a conservative, but the democrat’s embryonic insinuation that Iraq’s aren’t worth helping is one of the most interesting political turns of this whole bloody mess.

[BUSTERonBUFFALO]

Sodamn Insanes bluff to W. that he had WMD has got to go down in history as one of the stupidest mistakes ever known to man.

Sodamn Insane would still be in power right now if he had just let UN inspectors verify that he in fact did not have WMD. Instead he bluffed his way into war and getting his arse kicked bad. So bad that he lost power. He lost his mansions. He lost his sons. He was forced into hiding in holes like a rat. He was captured and humiliated on worldwide TV. He was put through a humiliating Amercing lead trial. He was hung like a cowboy from the old West. His worst moment was spread around the world by a western camera phone. His brother lost his life too.(head also)

However you see USA's invasion of Iraq. Most people feel that if Sodamn had simply let in the inspectors, W.'s war plans would have been defused.

[kayakArkansas]

Ahhhhhhhh......it all becomes clear to me now.......it's all Saddam's fault! Man, and I was busy being pissed that I voted in a Texan certified retard for a US prez......Damn you Saddam!!!! I hope you're burning in a hot little place in hell for what you made our country do with your silly little "bluff".......

[BUSTERonBUFFALO]

What kind of self esteem problems does somebody have to have to always blame themselves first?

[DanOrion]

I'm pretty sure we would have gone into Iraq inspectors or no inspectors. Next very bad idea: Iran. Given the way war drums are beating right now, this is gonna be one fucked up summer. Iran -> Iraq; US -> Iran; Iran -> Isreal...and that's when it's gonna get pretty interesting. There's two many religious freaks in power hell-bent on starting an apocalypse, I'm getting worried they might succeed.

[marko]

BusteronBuffalo: If only it were that simple.

Read this article: It is an interview with Scott Ritter. He was the top UN weapon's inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998. He was the guy who called bullcrap on the Bush admin before the invasion of Iraq.... http://www.zmag.org/content/showarti...7&ItemID=11993


--

[BUSTERonBUFFALO]

And here is a copy of the 17 actual UN resolutions that lead up to Sodamn Insane getting his ass kicked.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...azz:ubl243.107

I think you missed the point of my pun. I'm not giving W. a pass. The point is Sodamn Insane played cat and mouse for years and eventually lost that game. The ball was last in Sodamn's court, he had the last chance to avoid war.