ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
dear plantation owner: please do stop calling me "BOY" before things get truly personal for you...
anyhow, you righties continue to lose the debate when you create an argument that your opponent never said... the very definition of a strawman argument, which you've perfected, RW....
Bush NEVER let his generals fully run the show... never.... you remember when they wanted more troops to START the occupation, don't you? you remember what your president directed?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
i knew you wouldn't answer the challenge... more strawman nonsense from a poster who can't debate the issues... my hero is not Keith Olbermann, so you continue to look ridiculous... you're a debater who makes some good points and can form a coherent sentence, but who truly has limited options when challenged...
might wanna do yourself a favor and avoid questioning my intellect... it's been displayed beyond a doubt that i'm not stupid...
i knew you wouldn't answer the challenge... more strawman nonsense from a poster who can't debate the issues... my hero is not Keith Olbermann, so you continue to look ridiculous... you're a debater who makes some good points and can form a coherent sentence, but who truly has limited options when challenged...
might wanna do yourself a favor and avoid questioning my intellect... it's been displayed beyond a doubt that i'm not stupid...
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. While you're at it, keep starting threads where no one replies, except for you to yourself.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Deescalation is there plan? They've withheld details? Hmm... We're honing in on 4 years, and they're still waiting for what exactly? Are you trying to tell me that the Dems do have a detailed plan, but that they are playing politics with it? Oh, I sure hope that's not true. Soldiers are dying over there, and if the Dems do have a detailed plan and are withholding it, that'd be reprehensible.
I remember seeing Howad Dean on Hardball the night of the election in November, and Mathews asked him point blank, what is the Dems plan for Iraq, and he refused to answer it. During Dean's response, they cut to Mathews face, and I remember he was shaking his head in frustration. I'm all for people putting idea's forward, but I honestly haven't seen anything put forth by the Dems on this. If their plan is to withdraw, then why don't they all come out and say it? To date, their plan has been to point at how lousy the others guy's is. Sadly, it's worked with the general populace, but has done nothing to help the situation. Remember, I'm for whatever succeeds. GW so far hasn't done to good, but the Dems are non-existent. The war isn't a partisan issue for me. It's an american issue. I don't care if Al Gore ocmes out with a plan, so long as it works.
Fact is, George W Bush and neo-cons like you got us into this quagmire, and now you all are trying to pass the buck.
What I am suggesting is that the plan is closer to what they've been given by a bipartisan Baker Hamilton group. Playing politics? Isn't that what Bush has done with this since selling the war on a series of lies, and being advised by Rove to "Run on the war". That you have the gall to blame Dems for playing politics when Bush refused to fire the Sec Def for as long as he did (until after the election) says it all. And the fact that he waited another two months while our soldiers were getting killed and maimed before the great decider decided that they need "reinforcements". And the fact that for 3 years he's been saying "stay the course", when it was obvious to everyone not braindead that the course was toward anarchy and failure. Only to change course when the politics of the nation changed.
Now, Im sure you will continue your tactic of obfuscating the fact that Bush's war is probably already lost, and that the only real meaningful way for us to save some semblance of "victory" in this is to engage in diplomacy in ways that Bush has been extremely inept at and completely unwilling to do. (Too much work)
I know. Its easier for you to blame Democrats.
You best get on board with the bipartisan program...the train is leaving the station Real, and noone particulalry cares for you neo-cons anymore.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fact is, George W Bush and neo-cons like you got us into this quagmire, and now you all are trying to pass the buck.
Comical. If calling me a neocon makes you feel better, so be it, good for you. Regardless of what you decide to call me, it doesn't change the facts of the discussion. Furthermore, I wasn't in favor of invading Iraq, so try to get your accusations straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by All_Around_Brown
What I am suggesting is that the plan is closer to what they've been given by a bipartisan Baker Hamilton group. Playing politics? Isn't that what Bush has done with this since selling the war on a series of lies, and being advised by Rove to "Run on the war". That you have the gall to blame Dems for playing politics when Bush refused to fire the Sec Def for as long as he did (until after the election) says it all. And the fact that he waited another two months while our soldiers were getting killed and maimed before the great decider decided that they need "reinforcements". And the fact that for 3 years he's been saying "stay the course", when it was obvious to everyone not braindead that the course was toward anarchy and failure. Only to change course when the politics of the nation changed.
Um, you said the dems have a more detailed plan that they were withholding. If they are withholding a plan while criticizing another, is playing politics no? Does their playing politics at all mean that GW hasn't? Of course not, and never did I say that politics haven't been a part of the GOP position. Matter of fact, I've said that politics have been a factor in this war from day 1. Remember the voting anyone? My question is clear, what is the Dems plan, and do they even have one? To which I feel they don't. You feel they do and are withholding it, that's shameful is all I've said. Again, to me, Iraq is not about politics, or partisanship as it is with you, and most others in here. For me, the most important aspect of Iraq is success. How can we best succeed. I know it's not for you, but for me it is.
As for the Hamilton Baker report, why is it gospel? Why is it right? Their plan relies on a number of factors, and different players, to go along, and help our cause. Why would they? Last I checked, I don't think Israel is going to give back the Golan Heights, nor do I think Syria is going to incriminate itself in admitting it assasinated Harriri. Think Iran is going to help us weaken Al-Sadr too? Or think they'll help us stop the flow of weapons and arms that are coming in from it's own government? I don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by All_Around_Brown
Now, Im sure you will continue your tactic of obfuscating the fact that Bush's war is probably already lost, and that the only real meaningful way for us to save some semblance of "victory" in this is to engage in diplomacy in ways that Bush has been extremely inept at and completely unwilling to do. (Too much work)
I know. Its easier for you to blame Democrats.
You best get on board with the bipartisan program...the train is leaving the station Real, and noone particulalry cares for you neo-cons anymore.
Again, call me a neocon if it makes you feel better. I'm confident enough in my charactor, are you?
Blame the Democrats for what? I asked what their plan was, or if they had one. You said you suspected they did, and were waiting to let us know what it was. We're going on 4 years, and some of us are still waiting. Wanna fill us in on the details? I know you dislike GW, but I can't fathom how an american would not want us to succeed in Iraq. I'd rather we weren't there, but we are unfortunately, and we're not leaving tomorrow either.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Comical. If calling me a neocon makes you feel better, so be it, good for you. Regardless of what you decide to call me, it doesn't change the facts of the discussion. Furthermore, I wasn't in favor of invading Iraq, so try to get your accusations straight.
Um, you said the dems have a more detailed plan that they were withholding. If they are withholding a plan while criticizing another, is playing politics no? Does their playing politics at all mean that GW hasn't? Of course not, and never did I say that politics haven't been a part of the GOP position. Matter of fact, I've said that politics have been a factor in this war from day 1. Remember the voting anyone? My question is clear, what is the Dems plan, and do they even have one? To which I feel they don't. You feel they do and are withholding it, that's shameful is all I've said. Again, to me, Iraq is not about politics, or partisanship as it is with you, and most others in here. For me, the most important aspect of Iraq is success. How can we best succeed. I know it's not for you, but for me it is.
As for the Hamilton Baker report, why is it gospel? Why is it right? Their plan relies on a number of factors, and different players, to go along, and help our cause. Why would they? Last I checked, I don't think Israel is going to give back the Golan Heights, nor do I think Syria is going to incriminate itself in admitting it assasinated Harriri. Think Iran is going to help us weaken Al-Sadr too? Or think they'll help us stop the flow of weapons and arms that are coming in from it's own government? I don't.
Again, call me a neocon if it makes you feel better. I'm confident enough in my charactor, are you?
Blame the Democrats for what? I asked what their plan was, or if they had one. You said you suspected they did, and were waiting to let us know what it was. We're going on 4 years, and some of us are still waiting. Wanna fill us in on the details? I know you dislike GW, but I can't fathom how an american would not want us to succeed in Iraq. I'd rather we weren't there, but we are unfortunately, and we're not leaving tomorrow either.
I'll get back to this later. But from your statements, I interpreted you as wanting to use the military to spread democracy wherever and whenever.
That would put you pretty firmly in the neo-conservative camp.
If I misunderstood you, then I apologize. I don't know at this point what the Dem "plan" is, but there is one plan that has not been tried yet and that is the Baker-Hamilton plan.
I suspect they will adopt this as an official position as it is bipartisan. Bush on the other hand has only one plan. Stay the course.
Real, you claim you are well versed in the issue. Maybe you can comment on the permanence of US bases in Iraq and what that means to you.
As far as your comment on the flow of arms into Iraq from Iran, as of right now...thats a complete fabrication. So Im calling you out as a purveyor of disinformation...another hallmark of neo-conservatives.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by All_Around_Brown; 01-25-2007 at 09:05 AM..
Re: Jim Webb's response: We will show him the way
Linear Mode
