Quagmire....

**Storekeeper** · 29-09-2006, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by stroller

What's depressing about this for "our Democrats"?
Please explain, SK.

Can you read ? Breakthrough is the key word in the article ...

If you don't like the article then just say so or don't read it.

Aren't you a moderator ? I'm getting sick of your subtle form of personal attacks.

**Whiteshiva** · 29-09-2006, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by stroller

What's depressing about this for "our Democrats"?
Please explain, SK.

My guess: He honestly believes that if you are against the war in Iraq, you are automatically a terrorist sympathizer.

Nah - it doesn't make sense to me either.....

**stroller** · 29-09-2006, 08:48 AM

It's not about like or dislike, I asked for clarification. I suspect there is a whole load of assumptions behind this little subsentence - specially noting the source of the article.

How is this breakthrough depressing for "our Democrats"?

**ChiangMai noon** · 29-09-2006, 08:49 AM

because the democrats would like to see the terrorists win???

**stroller** · 29-09-2006, 09:11 AM

Ahh, so it's the familiar binary neo-con thinking again: either you are a Bush supporter or a terrorist lover.
I wonder whether the US-Democrats know that they are terrorist supporters?
I also wonder what SK's position on this is, since he's the one who posted the quote?

**raycarey** · 29-09-2006, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Stroller

What's depressing about this for "our Democrats"? Please explain, SK.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I'm getting sick of your subtle form of personal attacks.

sniff, sniff, boo hoo!

how is this a personal attack?

**barbaro** · 29-09-2006, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by raycarey

State of Denial

is a new book by bob woodward.

I expect to have it in about 4 weeks.

**raycarey** · 29-09-2006, 12:12 PM

^

the kissinger connection is unbelievable.

and the fact that US troops are being attacks by iraqis every 15 minutes is a far way from being 'greeted as liberators'.

**barbaro** · 29-09-2006, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by raycarey

^

the kissinger connection is unbelievable.

Kissinger is a very over-rated man.

His diplomacy was not spectacular.

He has been criticized for many deaths.

The fact that W. Bush has been consulting with him is weird.

**Boon Mee** · 29-09-2006, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

because the democrats would like to see the terrorists win???

Well, they don't call the Democrats the party of cut & run for nothing...

**raycarey** · 29-09-2006, 09:46 PM

who's 'they'?

**barbaro** · 30-09-2006, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

because the democrats would like to see the terrorists win???

Well, they don't call the Democrats the party of cut & run for nothing...

I think it's beyond "cut & run."

If the U.S. forces stay, they will continue to be drained finacially, and logistically. Equipment is wearing out. There isn't enough money to keep funding it without bad PR.

It doesn't matter if they stay or go.

There aren't enough troops in Iraq.

It's already too late to control the Shiite militias, sectarian violence, and Jihadist in the Al-Anbar province.

In the last two weeks there have been several reports released by military generals, civilian Pentagon officials, and journalists.

2007 WILL be WORSE.

**Butterfly** · 30-09-2006, 01:48 PM

Interesting theory. I found this in another forum. The exit strategy is IRAN.

McCaffrey's report raises the possibility that US forces will have to fight their way out of Iraq. He says, "A U.S. military confrontation with Iran could result in [the radical Islamic Mahdi Army's] attacking our forces in Baghdad or along our 400-mile line of communications out of Iraq to the sea." The Bush Administration needs Iranian cooperation for the eventual safe exit of our troops, as General McCaffrey advises. This assumes that the Iranians will not risk World War III by trying to entrap our hostage Army in a humiliating Dunkirk-in-the-desert. After successful negotiations, the United States should be able to withdraw via the southern exit route leading through Kuwait to the Persian Gulf and the blue waters beyond.

Will Iran taking over Iraq ? that would save the day for the US.

**barbaro** · 30-09-2006, 01:52 PM

^ Interesting article, BF.

Do you have a link so I can read more?

**Butterfly** · 30-09-2006, 01:58 PM

nope, but let me dig for more from that "special" forum

**Butterfly** · 30-09-2006, 02:04 PM

ok found it here at the bottom of the page. It's part of a 4 page story on The Nation (US)

Revolt of the Generals

**raycarey** · 30-09-2006, 02:19 PM

yeah, but those generals are probably just terrorist lovers who hate the troops.

**stroller** · 30-09-2006, 02:38 PM

The US have plenty of 'inactive' troops stationed in the Far East. Why don't they just order some of those over to Iraq, where they'd be a much needed contingent, and could take the burden off the young volunteers who are out of their depth there?

And what happened to all the guys who were idling their time away in occupied Germany, why not send those over to earn their keep?

**Boon Mee** · 30-09-2006, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

And what happened to all the guys who were idling their time away in occupied Germany, why not send those over to earn their keep?

Can't leave Germany. One never knows when the Hun might roll the tanks again...

**stroller** · 01-10-2006, 06:13 AM

Talking of which, I think we have an obligation to return a favour, and help free the US from the looming fascism.

**man with no head** · 01-10-2006, 10:54 AM

Merely looming?

The only difference between the U.S. and Germany of the 1930s is that we haven't rounded people up and thrown them into camps yet.

Well, not on U.S. soil anyways.

**raycarey** · 01-10-2006, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by surasak

yet.

sadly it appears it's only a matter of time.

**man with no head** · 01-10-2006, 11:06 AM

Which is why it's near time to abandon ship before it sinks completely.

**stroller** · 01-10-2006, 11:35 AM

Now you're getting hysteric, folks.
And where do you want to go to? Thailand with its military regime? - welcome to reality.

This is 2006, and I don't believe the neo-con minority have the power to establish absolute rule in the US. The apparent strength of the religious fanatics in the provinces is rather worrysome, though.

I do believe it will take time to get back on track after the next election, though.

**man with no head** · 01-10-2006, 12:01 PM

I think if you took the United States and broke it into several smaller nations it would be a step forward.

Thread: Quagmire....

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions