Thread: The Petraeus/Crocker show - what did you think ?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

^
Well, did Petraeus get a fair hearing?
Based on the likes of the Hildabeast, the answer is a resounding NO.

Hilary has been pro war from the start. She's just keeping quiet about it now as it is poltical suicide to be associated with the war (see Mc Cain's floundering campain)

Not many liked McCain to begin with. When the others candidates entered and got some media attention he dropped in the order pretty quick.

Originally Posted by mad_dog

it is poltical suicide to be associated with the war (see Mc Cain's floundering campain)

huh? his stance of the war plays well to republican voters. mccain's campaign went off the rails when he got behind GWB's immigration policy, and then he found out that his aides had burned through all his cash. however, it's far too early to count him out yet.

Originally Posted by attaboy

When the others candidates entered and got some media attention he dropped in the order pretty quick.

what are you on about? are you referring to thompson? i hope not, because thompson just 'entered' last week. giuliani? romney? they've been ahead of mccain from the start. so tell us attaboy who are you referring to?

You have a habit of selectively quoting people. The rest of my post clearly states I'm talking about McCain. My post is two sentences. How did you miss it?

are you really that daft?

who are the other candidates you refer to?

Originally Posted by attaboy

the others candidates entered and got some media attention

clear enough?

ray, McCain never really stopped running from 2004. He was in the media. He was meeting with Bush. He was tauted as the man to beat. Romney and Guiliani entered he steadily declined when people had a choice.

Originally Posted by attaboy

ray, McCain never really stopped running from 2004.

errrr........the only thing he ran for in 2004 was his senate seat.

are you drunk?

just got a red from attaboy.
55555.

What are you implying ray? I redded you on another topic as a favor to Earl. You really can't be trusted to convey the straight scoop. I'm afraid all your posts regardless of content should be accompanied with a link or vouched for by DrBob.

Originally Posted by attaboy

I redded you on another topic as a favor to Earl.

5555555

but hey, tell us more about how mccain is still running from 2004.

Originally Posted by attaboy

I redded you on another topic as a favor to Earl

Oh. Dear.

If Earl asked you to jump off... no wait, never mind.

almost beyond belief isn't it?

^
I have to say I find it all very sad to be honest.

Is that all you got ray? A 4 instead of a 0? Don't let go of that bone ray. It's all you got. You never know where your next meal is coming from. Maybe you ought to consider becoming a "freegan".

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by attaboy

I redded you on another topic as a favor to Earl

Oh. Dear.

If Earl asked you to jump off... no wait, never mind.

You two base all your assumptions on your personal experiences don't you? It must be rough and slow going.

Originally Posted by attaboy

You two base all your assumptions on your personal experiences don't you? It must be rough and slow going

Is that actually supposed to mean something? Logic not your strong, attaboy?

^ You selective quote like ray.

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Now off to jail with you

earl's a mod? when did that happen?

btw earl, thanks for the green.
simp.

The Petraeus/Crocker... 13-09-2007 12:27 PM Mr Earl

ray you were the one who brought it up. So you were the one who basically asked for it.

Originally Posted by attaboy

^ You selective quote like ray.

I do? What part of your quote did I miss then?

I think you'll find I quoted what you posted verbatim. And it's not like any other meaning could be inferred from it in any event, because it's a meaningless rant.

Any other hackneyed comments you want to get off your chest while you're at it?

Originally Posted by attaboy

So you were the one who basically asked for it.

i asked earl for a green?

Originally Posted by mad_dog

As I understand it his policy reguarding Iraq is to increase troop levels way beyond "surge" levels. I this would not be a popular policy IMHO. Elections cannot be won by only appealling to "republican voters" Ray.

do you understand how the electoral process in america works? in the republican primaries a candidate moves hard to the right (and a dem moves to the left)....and make no mistake, the republicans support the war---because it's their war. if he gets the nomination (unlikely) he'd try to move back towards the center in the general election , but he'd get crushed for his previous statements/positions..... and as you pointed out, he might very well be crazy.

his chance was in 2000, but karl rove took care of that with racist dirty tricks in s. carolina.
one thing is for sure, he's too old to be president.

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by mad_dog

As I understand it his policy reguarding Iraq is to increase troop levels way beyond "surge" levels. I this would not be a popular policy IMHO. Elections cannot be won by only appealling to "republican voters" Ray.

1)do you understand how the electoral process in america works? in the republican primaries a candidate moves hard to the right (and a dem moves to the left)....2)and make no mistake, the republicans support the war---because it's their war. if he gets the nomination (unlikely) he'd try to move back towards the center in the general election , but he'd get crushed for his previous statements/positions..... and as you pointed out, he might very well be crazy.

his chance was in 2000, but karl rove took care of that with racist dirty tricks in s. carolina.
one thing is for sure, he's too old to be president.

1) Yes, but the electoral college thingy is confusing.
2) You may be right... according to the September 8th edition of the Economist 30% of Americans: "approve of the way GWB is handling the situation in Iraq"

As far as McCain goes it wasn't his Beach Boys impression that concerned me , it was his Bagdhad trip report.

'Nice town , nice people , sure I was wandering around the market looking at carpets. It's perfectly safe. General Petraeus strolls around all the time , no body armour , no escort' This convinced me the guy was either stupid or senile or both. I remember CNN rubbed that one in a little bit. I wonder if Fox News was a little kinder or just pretended they hadn't noticed the way you would if a lady farted at the dinner table.

I've seen a lot more snippets of General P the last day or so and would freely admit he seems to me to be competent and , within the political constraints he MUST be under , frank and believable.

His deal with the Sunni militia in Anbar is pragmatism at it's finest. Maybe if he was allowed to talk to the likes of al Sadr fewer of his men would be going home as freight.

Boony's rants about 'cut and run Democrats' and gets mocked for it (OK Boony IS fair game) but this might be a cause for real concern.

There is undoubtedly disillusion in the US about this war , lies have been told and stories changed on a regular basis and America's finest are coming home to be buried with full military honours , and there is a risk that the next administration (even a Republican one) will say 'fuck this for a game of soldiers' and retreat in the best order possible.

People on this forum have said , in the best possible faith , that civil war is inevitable and US troops are not helping.

This would put Iraq (at the very least temporarily) in failed state status.

Now I saw another news report today which was interesting. The Saudi's are concerned enough about the possible downside in the Iraq situation to move more and more troops up to their oilfields.

So , even if you care not about the slaughter which would be involved in an Iraqi civil war , consider how far the Gulf oil fields are from the Iraqi borders and whether you can produce enough ethanol to keep your gas guzzlers on the road. You MIGHT be sorry you've been so nasty to that Chavez fellow.

If anyone can find a torrent for this new release I'd be grateful:

Originally Posted by NathairCeann

Now I saw another news report today which was interesting. The Saudi's are concerned enough about the possible downside in the Iraq situation to move more and more troops up to their oilfields.

So , even if you care not about the slaughter which would be involved in an Iraqi civil war , consider how far the Gulf oil fields are from the Iraqi borders and whether you can produce enough ethanol to keep your gas guzzlers on the road. You MIGHT be sorry you've been so nasty to that Chavez fellow.

If the Shiites set up an Islamic state in Iraq how long will it take them to wind up enough to have a crack at securing Mecca for the true-believers?