McCain says he could support 16-month Iraq timetable

cawacko said:
I think she got it from the Cypress playbook (though Cypress was surely not alone in using it).
Click to expand...

Gumby doesn't have a playbook... he simply comes on line, sees what others from his side of the aisle are saying and then parrots them in an attempt to get their attention and affection. Which is why I call him a leg humper.
 
"while I thought the war was inevitable... "

That's the king of Bush apologies. With that one statement, you release Bush from all accountability regarding the decision to go to war itself, which is the defining moment of his Presidency. You let him off the hook.
 
Superfreak said:
Yes, because he is morphing his plan to what McCains was .... that the timing HAS to be based on conditions on the ground. That it cannot be some arbitrary "16 months". That it HAS to be flexible in case conditions on the ground change. Which has been McCains position all along.
Click to expand...


As I showed you previously, Obama's plan has been the same all along, since at least November 2006 when he delivered a speech detailing his Iraq policy at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. It's 16 months unless conditions require otherwise.

McCain seems to be saying forever unless conditions require otherwise but maybe 16 months is a reasonable goal as long as the word "16 months" come out of Maliki's mouth but if the word "16 months" come out of Obama's mouth then its irresponsible and reckless. Or something.

The key is that the baseline assumption for Obama is that we're out of there whereas the baseline assumption for McCain is that we're staying.
 
Onceler said:
"while I thought the war was inevitable... "

That's the king of Bush apologies. With that one statement, you release Bush from all accountability regarding the decision to go to war itself, which is the defining moment of his Presidency. You let him off the hook.
Click to expand...

See... this is your problem. Saying the war was inevitable in no way excuses Bush from having started the war when he did. It in no way excuses his lack of planning for the war. It in no way excuses the complete lack of an exit strategy. It in no way excuses him from considering any other potential outcomes than the rosie picture scenario.

The war could have been put off until after Afghanistan was resolved. It did not have to take place when it did.
 
"The war could have been put off until after Afghanistan was resolved. It did not have to take place when it did."

The Iraq War never had to take place. It was never inevitable.

You will always be wrong on this.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... do the search.... see what you come up with. Wanna bet you see a bunch of posts saying something to the effect of... while I thought the war was inevitable... it was poor timing to go in when we did coupled with a discussion on how poorly it was executed.... and likely followed with something on how there was no exit strategy.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point.
 
Onceler said:
"The war could have been put off until after Afghanistan was resolved. It did not have to take place when it did."

The Iraq War never had to take place. It was never inevitable.

You will always be +Dixie+ styled wrong on this.
Click to expand...

that's better
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... do the search.... see what you come up with. Wanna bet you see a bunch of posts saying something to the effect of... while I thought the war was inevitable... it was poor timing to go in when we did coupled with a discussion on how poorly it was executed.... and likely followed with something on how there was no exit strategy.
Click to expand...
This war was inevitable ONLY to Bush et al. It was never actually physically inevitable. Saddam was nasty, but contained, the administration cherry picked intel to make the situation look dire. The war in Iraq was ALL about image and lacked any substance whatsoever in the realm of the "War on Terra". Bush wanted a photo op, controlled media war, so he could say "see we are fightin' the evil doers and winning." In fact the evil doers were a couple of borders away, and after a strong start, some lies about how an NFL hero died, we let Afghanistan fall to the wayside, and the fight there now will probably be bloodier than it would have had to be had we done what was needed at the beginning. That point right there probably gives more weight to Darla's anti Afghanistan argument than anything. If it had been done properly and with the correct amount of shock on the Taliban, they might not have ever come back.
 
Onceler said:
"The war could have been put off until after Afghanistan was resolved. It did not have to take place when it did."

The Iraq War never had to take place. It was never inevitable.

You will always be wrong on this.
Click to expand...

IN YOUR OPINION it was not. It is an opinion you fucking moron. Your position of an eternal no fly zone might not have worked out so well either. You seem to forget that part of the reason Al Queda was attacking us was due to our presence in Saudi and Kuwait. Obviously Israel was the other part.

Neither of us can prove or disprove what "might have been". But your head is to far up your own ass to be able to see anything other than the shit you spew forth.
 
The sanctions would have been lifted in a few years. Multinational interests would have invested in Iraq making it very nasty to invade and occupy Iraq. hence the rush.
 
Superfreak said:
IN YOUR OPINION it was not. It is an opinion you fucking moron. Your position of an eternal no fly zone might not have worked out so well either. You seem to forget that part of the reason Al Queda was attacking us was due to our presence in Saudi and Kuwait. Obviously Israel was the other part.

Neither of us can prove or disprove what "might have been". But your head is to far up your own ass to be able to see anything other than the shit you spew forth.
Click to expand...

No. Once no wmds were found, the opinion that the Iraq war was unnecessary, became fact.

The resistance to this fact from war-supporters, is just their human failings showing themselves – they retain the inability to admit error. It shows an inherent stubbornness that appears to be part and parcel of being a con, but it is otherwise completely meaningless. It changes nothing.

The Iraq war has been proven to be unnecessary. You and others were wrong. We were right. History shall so record.

In other words SF, to put this in language Cawacko will understand – no matter how much you twist and dance, the last two drops end up in your pants.
 
Socrtease said:
This war was inevitable ONLY to Bush et al. It was never actually physically inevitable. Saddam was nasty, but contained, the administration cherry picked intel to make the situation look dire. The war in Iraq was ALL about image and lacked any substance whatsoever in the realm of the "War on Terra". Bush wanted a photo op, controlled media war, so he could say "see we are fightin' the evil doers and winning." In fact the evil doers were a couple of borders away, and after a strong start, some lies about how an NFL hero died, we let Afghanistan fall to the wayside, and the fight there now will probably be bloodier than it would have had to be had we done what was needed at the beginning. That point right there probably gives more weight to Darla's anti Afghanistan argument than anything. If it had been done properly and with the correct amount of shock on the Taliban, they might not have ever come back.
Click to expand...


Again, as it was run by Bush, no the war was not inevitable. But again, as I have stated many times in the past, with no response from those who continue to say it was not inevitable....

How fucking long were we supposed to "contain" Saddam? How long were we to maintain an occupation of the no fly zones? How long? Till Saddam died? Till his kids were also dead?

AS I STATED... there was NO need to go into Iraq WHEN we did. We should have, as you have also stated, maintained our focus on Afghanistan. What part of that do you all not comprehend?

Saying the war (IN MY OPINION) was inevitable in no way suggests that what Bush did was correct. But no matter how many times I state this, I still get the same sanctimonious crap from people like you... who are simply restating exactly what I did, with the exception of saying that the war in Iraq was not inevitable.

Containment is NOT a permanent solution.
 
Darla said:
No. Once no wmds were found, the opinion that the Iraq war was unnecessary, became fact.

The resistance to this fact from war-supporters, is just their human failings showing themselves – they retain the inability to admit error. It shows an inherent stubbornness that appears to be part and parcel of being a con, but it is otherwise completely meaningless. It changes nothing.

The Iraq war has been proven to be unnecessary. You and others were wrong. We were right. History shall so record.

In other words SF, to put this in language Cawacko will understand – no matter how much you twist and dance, the last two drops end up in your pants.
Click to expand...


Summed up very well; mega-ditto's on this.
 
Darla said:
No. Once no wmds were found, the opinion that the Iraq war was unnecessary, became fact.

The resistance to this fact from war-supporters, is just their human failings showing themselves – they retain the inability to admit error. It shows an inherent stubbornness that appears to be part and parcel of being a con, but it is otherwise completely meaningless. It changes nothing.

The Iraq war has been proven to be unnecessary. You and others were wrong. We were right. History shall so record.

In other words SF, to put this in language Cawacko will understand – no matter how much you twist and dance, the last two drops end up in your pants.
Click to expand...

Hence the catch 22.... had we not built up forces on his border and had we not gone in... we would not know what we do today... We would still be sitting on the border, occupying the no fly zones, talking about how we had Saddam contained, all the while our presence in Saudi and Kuwait would have continued to result in bombings of our assets, like the embassies, the WTC, the Pentagon, the USS Cole etc....
 
"Hence the catch 22.... had we not built up forces on his border and had we not gone in... we would not know what we do today"

Someone doesn't know their history.

In March of 2003, Hans Blix reported to Congress that they had UNFETTERED access to ALL suspected sites.

How can you debate this when you don't even know that?
 
Onceler said:
"Hence the catch 22.... had we not built up forces on his border and had we not gone in... we would not know what we do today"

Someone doesn't know their history.

In March of 2003, Hans Blix reported to Congress that they had UNFETTERED access to ALL suspected sites.

How can you debate this when you don't even know that?
Click to expand...

LMAO..... ah yes, the wonderful UN who in three months suddenly was able to ascertain what in 12 years they could not.

and again Lorax... he would not have had that "unfettered access" had we not put 100,000 troops on the border.
 
Superfreak said:
Hence the catch 22.... had we not built up forces on his border and had we not gone in... we would not know what we do today... We would still be sitting on the border, occupying the no fly zones, talking about how we had Saddam contained, all the while our presence in Saudi and Kuwait would have continued to result in bombings of our assets, like the embassies, the WTC, the Pentagon, the USS Cole etc....
Click to expand...

bullcrap, the inspectors were back in and doing their job but Bush would not give them enough time to prove his claims were lies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top