I vaguely remember this. It was one of his stalling tactics. Bush had to assume he wanted this stall for a reason. Bush did the right thing. Stalling is a standard ploy of arabs. My dad does it all the time.
I think you and Lixy are mad because America is winning. The surge worked.
Obama was against the surge in Iraq, now wants a surge in Afghanistan. Could fighting actually be the way to win?
[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
In combat against your friends in Iraq and Afganistan.
You don’t know that. Not everybody shooting at foreign troops in Iraq is my friend.
He requested to visit them, then cancelled his visit by the way. That’s why it’s newsworthy.
You don’t know that either. For all we know, somebody in his campaigned requested the visit without Obama knowing about it.
And quit making me defend the prick![/quote]
I base my opinion purely on what you post.
You don’t know anything about the subject so why would I care what you think?
[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
In combat against your friends in Iraq and Afganistan.
You don’t know that. Not everybody shooting at foreign troops in Iraq is my friend.
He requested to visit them, then cancelled his visit by the way. That’s why it’s newsworthy.
You don’t know that either. For all we know, somebody in his campaigned requested the visit without Obama knowing about it.
And quit making me defend the prick![/quote]
I base my opinion ,of you, purely on what you post.
You don’t know anything about the subject so why would I care what you think?
[quote]orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
[/quote]
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.[/quote]
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
[quote]Standndeliver wrote:
I vaguely remember this. It was one of his stalling tactics. Bush had to assume he wanted this stall for a reason. Bush did the right thing. Stalling is a standard ploy of arabs. My dad does it all the time.
I think you and Lixy are mad because America is winning. The surge worked.
Obama was against the surge in Iraq, now wants a surge in Afghanistan. Could fighting actually be the way to win?[/quote]
Against terrorism? No.
Can´t “win” against an abstract concept.
And, so what if it was a stalling tactic? Not that we have any evidence for that except for your assumption, but Aznar practically begged Bush to wait a little longer to build a lasting coalition.
Bush was hell bent to go to war, being on a divine mission, and this problem could have been solved otherwise.
Alas, it wasn´t because Iraqi lives count for very little in Americas media and 50% STILL believe that Saddam was behind 9-11.
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
[/quote]
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
"Dear Wounded US Troops,
I can’t bring Katie and Matt and all my other peeps to visit you. Like to, but no pics of me preening for the cameras would be a waste of my time. And, I must admit, I luvz hangin’ with my European ‘partners’, they think the same about America as me and Michelle.
So, get better soon and, even though I voted against funding you, you are always foremost in my heart and in my prayers. Really.
And don’t forget to vote for me come November!
Your future Commander-in-Chief,
Barack (yea baby, thass me!!)"
[/quote]
I don’t like Obama, but I couldn’t care less about shit like this.
This is emotional garbage.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
"Dear Wounded US Troops,
I can’t bring Katie and Matt and all my other peeps to visit you. Like to, but no pics of me preening for the cameras would be a waste of my time. And, I must admit, I luvz hangin’ with my European ‘partners’, they think the same about America as me and Michelle.
So, get better soon and, even though I voted against funding you, you are always foremost in my heart and in my prayers. Really.
And don’t forget to vote for me come November!
Your future Commander-in-Chief,
Barack (yea baby, thass me!!)"
I don’t like Obama, but I couldn’t care less about shit like this.
This is emotional garbage.[/quote]
http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2008/07/john-sidney-mccains-abysmal-voting.html
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.[/quote]
Yeah, and we know that because the Bush administration would never lie to the public, especially not to cover up mistakes.
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.
Yeah, and we know that because the Bush administration would never lie to the public, especially not to cover up mistakes.[/quote]
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.[/quote]
That means we could have taken all of the time we wanted to build an international coalition.
So Bush went in immediately for no good reason. This ended up being the worst PR move in American history. Brilliant.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.
Yeah, and we know that because the Bush administration would never lie to the public, especially not to cover up mistakes.
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.[/quote]
You mean 4000 soldiers, a few hundred thousand civilians and a trillions of dollars would still be there?
Unthinkable!
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.
That means we could have taken all of the time we wanted to build an international coalition.
So Bush went in immediately for no good reason. This ended up being the worst PR move in American history. Brilliant.[/quote]
Sometimes doing the right thing is more important then PR.
Of course that won’t make sense to anyone who lives their lives based on what others think about them.
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.
Yeah, and we know that because the Bush administration would never lie to the public, especially not to cover up mistakes.
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.
You mean 4000 soldiers, a few hundred thousand civilians and a trillions of dollars would still be there?
Unthinkable![/quote]
And how many more would Saddam have murdered? What country would he have invaded next? He got Iran in the 80’s, Kuwait in the 90’s…
The right thing?
And STILL public enemy number one is at large.
Oh, that’s right, Bin Laden wasn’t Bush’s priority. Not before 9/11, or after.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Saddam offered to leave.
That offer was declined-
He was free to get on a plane any time he wanted. His demands were declined.
Which is exactly the same, because where was he supposed to go?
It is not about Saddam, it is about a peaceful change of leadership.
There would have been no peaceful change. Saddam was playing games. As usual.
Yeah, and we know that because the Bush administration would never lie to the public, especially not to cover up mistakes.
If we had waited for Saddam to leave we would still be waiting.
You mean 4000 soldiers, a few hundred thousand civilians and a trillions of dollars would still be there?
Unthinkable!
And how many more would Saddam have murdered? What country would he have invaded next? He got Iran in the 80’s, Kuwait in the 90’s…[/quote]
I’m going off the top of my head here but I’m pretty close, Saddam killed something north of 300,000 people in over three decades of rule. A very conservative estimate of extra Iraqi deaths since the U.S. invasion is 100,000, that’s over five years.
We didn’t kill those people, very very few of them anyway, but we can’t avoid some moral culpability for what happened after we invaded.
I don’t know why I keep going to bat for Obama, because he’s (marginally) worse than McCain, but the McCain campaign lied:
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2008/07/the_new_normal.html
It’s all opinion.
The only fact surrounding this incident are:
Obama had a visit to the hospital planned.
Obama was told he must follow the rules and protocol for hospital visits. Likely when the visit was planned, but certainly before the visit was scheduled.
Obama cancelled the visit and either went shopping or played basketball.
Both sides went into spin mode to take advantage of an obvious mistake. McCain to point it out and score points. Obama to make it appear like it wasn’t an error at all.
From Obama’s point of view it was a chance to score political points and appear like he is supporting the troops and thanking them for their service. When he couldn’t make it a campaign stunt and have the travelling press laud over him it ceased to have value and he changed plans.
It’s just politics. It’s quiet clear that Obama doesn’t support the troops mission and it is well known to them. The visit may not have went as he planned as those guys aren’t officers who have to attend a Senators visit, but grunts.
McCain as a wounded war veteran and also a sitting US Senator found this behavior unbelievable and pointed it out to his advantage.
I don’t think the Army hospital disinvited him. In fact it’s naive to think so. He cancelled the visit and that reinforced the opinion a lot of people already have about him and his competence to command the military.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
The right thing?
And STILL public enemy number one is at large.
Oh, that’s right, Bin Laden wasn’t Bush’s priority. Not before 9/11, or after.
[/quote]
Why doesn’t anyone think we should deal with more then one issue at a time? Do we need to wait on dealing with the rapes and robberies until we deal with the murders?
Hey, let’s quit dealing with crime while we focus on education.