Dean says we cant win in Iraq

[Cerbaho-WG]

See, this is why I f***ing HATE Dean. I'm as left as they come and this guy is just f***ing idiotic.

[Balta1701]

Like when GWB told the media he didn't think the Global War on Terror was winnable?  :rolly

No, more like the President saying "We do not torture."

[kapkomet]

No, more like the President saying "We do not torture."

:rolly

 

And yes, that's appropriate here. How long are you going to kick the s*** out of that horse?

[Balta1701]

:rolly

 

And yes, that's appropriate here.  How long are you going to kick the s*** out of that horse?

Until we stop doing it.

[juddling]

Until we stop doing it.

LIke it or not, it has been done before Bush, and will continue to be done after Bush. We just hear about it now because it is harder to keep secrets nowadays. If you think we DIDN'T do it before Bush, you need to put down the latte and wake up.

[Balta1701]

LIke it or not, it has been done before Bush, and will continue to be done after Bush.  We just hear about it now because it is harder to keep secrets nowadays.  If you think we DIDN'T do it before Bush, you need to put down the latte and wake up.

And I'll say the exact same thing about the next executive branch that either turns its head the other way or actively encourages that behavior.

[kapkomet]

And I'll say the exact same thing about the next executive branch that either turns its head the other way or actively encourages that behavior.

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right here, but videotaping behadings and passing them around the world like candy is torture. Rape rooms and guns to your head and shooting your relatives to make you sing like a canary is torture. Sleep deprevation and things of that nature, which is condoned as allowable interrogation techniques and that sort of thing doesn't rise to that level. If idiots break that law beyond that, they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law. You are implying that George Bush himself is authorizing this stuff by always putting his name with the quote. Go ahead, Flaxx, join in the fun, because you think the exact same thing.

[Balta1701]

I'm not saying two wrongs make a right here, but videotaping behadings and passing them around the world like candy is torture.  Rape rooms and guns to your head and shooting your relatives to make you sing like a canary is torture.  Sleep deprevation and things of that nature, which is condoned as allowable interrogation techniques and that sort of thing doesn't rise to that level.  If idiots break that law beyond that, they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law.  You are implying that George Bush himself is authorizing this stuff by always putting his name with the quote.  Go ahead, Flaxx, join in the fun, because you think the exact same thing. 

The executive Administration of George W. Bush has threatened to veto John McCain's anti-torture provision within the defense appropriations bill entirely because it does not include a statement exempting the CIA. Regardless of whether or not you support that proposal...the Administration is clearly asking for the right to inflict physical harm as a method of extracting information. Therefore, either Mr. Bush is actively supporting that sort of behavior, or he is turning his head while others within his administration actively support it being legal.

[SoCalSouthSider59]

 

Sorry, i couldn't resist.........

 

 

[Balta1701]

Bart: Mom, what if there's a really bad crummy guy who's going to jail

      but I know he's innocent?

Marge: Well, Bart, your uncle Arthur used to have a saying: "Shoot 'em

      all and let God sort 'em out."  Unfortunately, one day put his

      theory into practice.  It took 75 federal marshalls to bring him

      down.  Now let's never speak of him again.

        [hums as she dusts]

Bart: Mom.  ...Mom.  ...Mom!

Marge: Huh?

Bart: What if I can get this guy off the hook?  Should -- should I do

      it?

Marge: Honey, you should listen to your heart, and not the voices in

      your head like a certain uncle did one grey December morn.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Go ahead, Flaxx, join in the fun, because you think the exact same thing. 

What I think is the the President is fully complicit in the acts carried out by or at the behest of the administration, either before or after the fact.

 

Signing off on a policy of fixing the facts around the war, and accepting the Ashcroft/Gonzales torture loopholes as a central part of the handling of a new category of foriegn combatant are examples of complicity before the fact. Failure to demand an aggressive and complete seeking out the truth when allegations of prisoner abuse, massacre of civilians, extraordinary rendition, etc., surface is complicity after the fact. Failure to allow an unfettered look at the intelligence "lapses" and the "accidental" outing of covert CIA agents is obstruction and complicity either before of after the fact.

 

The "not a details guy" President is more interested in hearing what he wants to hear than he is in hearing honest assessments. People's careers have come to grinding halts when they have given viewpoints that dissent with those of the administration. The President has surrounded himself with people that will take care of the details and to only tell him what he wants to hear, and people who he knows don't mond getting their hands dirty if it furthers the current agenda.

 

Whether GWB is actually the guy waterboarding detainees or hooking their genitals up to electrodes or not, the culture of corruption that has taken root in his watch is the direct result of indifference to details like respect for human rights and international law.

[kapkomet]

Shocked balls. What a concept.

 

(You like how I cherry picked that out???)

[kapkomet]

Shocked balls. What a concept.

 

(You like how I cherry picked that out???)

[FlaSoxxJim]

Shocked balls.  What a concept.

 

(You like how I cherry picked that out???) 

Yes.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Shocked balls.  What a concept.

 

(You like how I cherry picked that out???) 

Again, yes.

[kapkomet]

ZPPPPPPPPPPT. Did you say something?

 

[YASNY]

Howard Dean. What a joke. This guy had the nerve to compare it to Viet Nam as an unwinnable war. He's certainly an expert on history and the Viet Nam War. He said something along the lines of 25000 young Americans lost their lives in Nam. Considering the number was closer to 50000 tells you this dips*** doesn't have a clue about the Viet Nam War, and therefore probably knows jacks*** about Iraq.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Howard Dean.  What a joke.  This guy had the nerve to compare it to Viet Nam as an unwinnable war.  He's certainly an expert on history and the Viet Nam War.  He said something along the lines of 25000 young Americans lost their lives in Nam.  Considering the number was closer to 50000 tells you this dips*** doesn't have a clue about the Viet Nam War, and therefore probably knows jacks*** about Iraq.

 

 

Howard Dean doesn't know very much, doesn't want to know very much and never will. He's there to do just what he's doing and thats make outrageous comments just like that in order to stir up his base and get the same leftist retards who gave him money online to do the same for the party as a whole. Hes a hack and nothing more.

[Texsox]

This depends on what we call victory. We haven't been able to stop crime in our country. Gangs terrorize neighborhoods, drive by shooting, innocent person tied to fence post and killed because he was gay, dragged behind a pick up because he was black, beaten because he dared teach an anti-religious view of our origins. So if we are trying to wipe all crime from Iraq, we can't. And much of this is criminal, we aren't fighting an army.

 

We removed Hussein, that was a victory. But removing all the terrorist gangs? We can't.

 

YASNY, you are right, if someone doesn't know about Viet Nam, how could they know about Iraq? Misquoting the death numbers is just plane stupid and sloppy. That's why I thought Kerry had a better handle on what to do in Iraq. He fought in Viet Nam, He had people shooting at him. Bush stayed stateside, occasionally flying a plane. Who had the better clue?

[kapkomet]

YASNY, you are right, if someone doesn't know about Viet Nam, how could they know about Iraq? Misquoting the death numbers is just plane stupid and sloppy. That's why I thought Kerry had a better handle on what to do in Iraq. He fought in Viet Nam, He had people shooting at him. Bush stayed stateside, occasionally flying a plane. Who had the better clue?

The REAL answer is neither of these two dimwits have a clue.

[Texsox]

The REAL answer is neither of these two dimwits have a clue.

 

They have clues, but their conclusions may not be right. Same with Bush, the various military leaders, and advisers. With all the suggestions, someone has proposed the best path, but it will be ignored if it came from the wrong side of the aisle or if it comes with a political price tag.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

This depends on what we call victory. We haven't been able to stop crime in our country. Gangs terrorize neighborhoods, drive by shooting, innocent person tied to fence post and killed because he was gay, dragged behind a pick up because he was black, beaten because he dared teach an anti-religious view of our origins. So if we are trying to wipe all crime from Iraq, we can't. And much of this is criminal, we aren't fighting an army.

 

We removed Hussein, that was a victory. But removing all the terrorist gangs? We can't.

 

YASNY, you are right, if someone doesn't know about Viet Nam, how could they know about Iraq? Misquoting the death numbers is just plane stupid and sloppy. That's why I thought Kerry had a better handle on what to do in Iraq. He fought in Viet Nam, He had people shooting at him. Bush stayed stateside, occasionally flying a plane. Who had the better clue?

 

 

In Vietnam we fought with both hands tied behind our backs. The politicians lost us that war not the military. In Iraq the military is being given more or less free reign to fight. Apples meet oranges.

[Controlled Chaos]

Defeated by Dean

Dec 7, 2005

by Cam Edwards ( bio | archive | contact )

 

Compare and contrast the following quotes:

 

Quote #1- “The idea that the Americans are going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong.”

 

Quote #2- “There is no doubt that the space in which the terrorists can move has begun to shrink and that the grip around the throats of the enemy has begun to tighten. With the deployment of soldiers and police, the future for the terrorists has become frightening.”

 

Who said quote #1? If you guessed Osama bin Laden, you’d be wrong. It wasn’t a terrorist. It wasn’t even Baghdad Bob. It was Howard Dean, the face of the Democratic party.

 

 

Actually, quote #1 isn’t an exact quote. What Howard Dean said this week was, “The idea that we’re going to win the war in Iraq is an idea that is just plain wrong.” But changing “we” to “Americans” doesn’t change the substance of the statement. America cannot win this war, according to Dr. Dean.

 

The second quote? Again, it’s a paraphrase. The actual quote is this: “There is no doubt that the space in which we can move has begun to shrink and that the grip around the throats of the mujahidin has begun to tighten. With the deployment of soldiers and police, the future has become frightening.” The author was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, writing to senior al Qaeda officials. Replace the “we” with “terrorists”, and you have a statement worthy of Donald Rumsfeld.

 

Here’s another quote, this time from Ayman al-Zawahiri in a letter to al-Zarqawi. “"I say to you: that we are in a battle, and that more than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media." Knowing that, you can’t help but wonder how al Qaeda officials reacted to Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who recently commented, “How can we have ‘Victory in Iraq’ if the man in command has already brought us defeat?”

 

He went on to say, "’Defeat’ may be too strong a word, but if so, that's only for the moment. If, in fact, U.S. troops pull out of Iraq anytime before their mission is accomplished — the plan of some Democrats and the wish of a few Republicans — then defeat is surely what this debacle will be called. Even if that does not happen, any victory that comes three years and more than 2,000 U.S. military deaths later than promised cannot be considered a triumph. Call it what you will, but at the very least it's a tragedy.” Why on earth would Cohen set the possible outcomes as either defeat or tragedy? Coming from him, “No good can come from our effort in Iraq” sounds less like a prediction and more a desperate prayer.

 

The answer to why Dean, Cohen, and the Democratic spin machine are now pushing the president to accept defeat is, of course, politics. Politically speaking, the left wing of the Democrat Party may have painted itself into a corner. Back in November, Tim Russert asked Howard Dean about a couple of poll numbers. On the issue of national defense, according to a poll Russert cited, Americans trust Republicans 43% to 22%. On the War on Terror, Americans trust Republicans 35% to 26%. Confronted with those numbers, Dean clearly had to make a choice. He could try to change the perception of the Democrat Party, or he could try to convince Americans that retreat is preferable to continued fighting. With his statement this week, Dean has made his choice. Isn’t it sad that the leader of a major political party in this country is more pessimistic about our chances for success than the guy we’re actually fighting?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I think its really ironic and funny that Osama Bin Laden likes our chances of winning a lot better than Howard Dean does.

[Heads22]

I think its really ironic and funny that Osama Bin Laden likes our chances of winning a lot better than Howard Dean does.

 

 

Where does he say that?