So what do you think about the surge?

bitteroldhag · January 13, 2007

The post on GWB as the worst president in history is getting long, so I thought I'd move along and maybe can discuss the latest on Iraq. I was against the war in Iraq from the beginning and I still am. I think the surge is a method to blame the Iraqis for failure. But everyone seems to be overlooking the fact that the U.S. committed outright aggression when it invaded Iraq for flimsy reasons. I think we're getting what we deserve. Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, but there are a lot of bad guys in office around the world. Why pick on him? Well, there's all that oil. So we're going to waste some more lives to make sure we can get out of Iraq by blaming the Iraqis. Shades of Vietnam!! This is so cynical and horrible that I can't believe we are doing it again.

Kelsy · January 13, 2007

I agree.

GWB is the worst president in the history of this country. He is a disgrace and this war is embarassing. I am so tired of hearing his speeches about not giving up on the Iraqi people and we can't withdraw now because then we won't "win".. Does he not realize that there is NO win? Saddam is gone.. SO? The terrorism in Iraq will not just stop. Our troops can not stay there forever..

Only until Bush's term is up, then he can throw everything on the next president's lap and wash his hands clean. Every year he's said they're going to pull out and now he wants to send what? 20,000 more over there???? wth.

Tired_Old_Man · January 13, 2007

There are two types of Defeat:

One type of Defeat (I'll call it type one) is when a country invades your country and takes over your country. That is a defeat that is hard to live with because you will have to change your whole life-style to comply with the rules set forth by the victorious invaders.

The other type of Defeat (I'll call it type two) is when your country invades a country but is unable to subdue it and force its rules on to the other country. In that case you come home and admit defeat, but there are few consequences except being embarrassed and having to admit you were wrong.

George W. BuSh can not see the difference between type one and type two and he tries to blur the distinction between them by saying that if we lose in Iraq (type two defeat) we will be fighting them in the streets of the USA.

Neither the insurgents, nor the Shiite death squads, nor the Sunni death squads, nor Al-Qaida have aircraft carriers to launch attacks from or troop carrying ships to bring an army to the shores of the USA. They do not have missiles that can reach our shores.

George W. BuSh did not read his father's book (“A World Transformed” coauthored by Brent Scowcroft) which predicted what would happen if the US Military took out Saddam Hussein.

George W. BuSh claims he listened to the “Iraqi Study Group's” report in which BuSh's father's advisors and other bipartisan members gave advice on how to proceed in Iraq.

George W. BuSh will not talk to Iran and Syria as the “Iraqi Study Group” suggested, but instead threatens war against them as a way of solving the Iraq debacle.

George W. BuSh said he would listen to everyone, but when the generals in Iraq said "no more troops" he replaced them.

Why did George W. BuSh replace a Army General in Iraq with a Navy Admiral, William J. Fallon to fight a ground war in Iraq? Is it because he knew he was going to bomb Iran with planes from US Navy aircraft carriers and that Admiral Fallon started his carrier as a Navy fighter pilot?

We must oppose this escalation of the war in Iraq. It will soon become a war with Iran and Syria and could escalate into WW3.

The main agenda in this country at the present is to make the wealthy people wealthier, make the poor people poorer and more subordinate, and to destroy the middle class by driving it into the class of poor people. War is a means of keeping the poor people in line and a means by which Big Business reaps the harvest while raping the poor.

Last night I took part in a demonstration against the Iraq war (and its escalation) at the South end of the Roosevelt Bridge in Stuart, Florida. We had about 7 or 8 members from my Church group; Reverend Gregory Wilson's "Liberal Universalist Fellowship of Port Saint Lucie", 4 or 5 from the "DCPSL" and most importantly about 50 people total. I guesstimate that for every negative response we received (people signaling President BuSh's IQ with a hand gesture), we had 30 or more positive responses (thumbs up or horn honking). A man even came out of a local restaurant to serve us Snacks.

I am sorry many people are missing the chance for comradery and positive political activism. I hope we will have more chances to act in a similar measure and most of all that these demonstrations will result in ending the carnage and stopping its spread to other countries in the Middle-East.

anne francisco · January 13, 2007

Lots of Bush haters.........

Tired_Old_Man · January 13, 2007

Lots of Bush haters.........

Not a BuSh hater. I just hate the BuSh decisions.

green · January 13, 2007

I am always baffled when I read posts from Americans which express real fears that the United States could be overrun by Islamic terrorists who will force them to abandon their several Gods - Jesus and Mammon - and to start praying to Allah.

As TOM has pointed out, those guys don't have the manpower nor the technology to invade let alone successfully take over this continent. And yet there is this pervasive state of paranoia.... Go figure.

Remember boys and girls, these folk haven't managed to wipe Israel off the map yet and this country is much smaller than America and it lives in the same neighbourhood.

anne francisco · January 14, 2007

your not a tired old man your a dirty old man

beachgirl · January 14, 2007

Not all of us are Bush haters.

anne francisco · January 15, 2007

dirty old man you need a real life and get over President Bush was voted in twice!!!!!!!! by the way we haven't been attacked sense 9/11 and attacked is the key word here....over 2000 people was killed by those poor people with no technology and manpower !!!!!! My husband was in Vietnam and is 100% disabled and he says the reason we lost is because we left without winning the war !!!!! I would rather fight them over there then here in our own backyard like Israel!!!!!!! So what exactly have you given for all your freedoms besides a lot of hot air........

Tired_Old_Man · January 15, 2007

After the WTC was attacked in 1993, there were no attacks on US soil for 6 years and 7 months, and Clinton did not invade Iraq.

Since 911, we have had no attacks on US soil for 5 years and 4 months, so that proves nothing about BuSh's Illogical Illegal Iraqi Invasion. It only proves that Al-Quaida takes its time. BuSh must wait for 15 months and hope, because he has done little to protect the US from invasion.

As for Vietnam, the servicemen who insist we could have won there if we had just kept fighting need to get over it and stop basing their self-worth on winning or losing a war which should not have been fought. We could have dropped atomic bombs on Vietnam, but that would have not been anything except a inhumane statement and would have shown a callous disregard for human life, or maybe a callous disregard for life that does not look like us.

But we left, saving the lives of many soldiers and now we are becoming trading partners with Vietnam. Soon you will have the opportunity to buy consumer goods manufactured in Vietnam.

All of the reasons for fighting in Vietnam have been proven false. The "Domino Effect" never happened. A Half million lives were destroyed because of a stupid government policy.