I don't want a Liberal in the White House. I want someone who has some 
foresight in regards to what is best for this country.  I find it  very  
conveniently coincidental that two industries most associated by the 
President (oil) and Vice-President (Military services and supply) are 
the ones that have faired the best  during their administration.  I 
wonder what motivated them to push for this war.  Because I don't see 
the justification, especially when the time line for the initiation of 
the war is taken into consideration.




Sam wrote:
> 1. The great oracle
>  1.a It must be wonderful to have the ability to see into the future
> and/or to be such a great military planner.
>  1.b You've never been correct to date on any of your predictions
>  1.c Are you cut-n-pasting from tmp.com?
>
> 2. yada yada
>  2.a you're constant whining about the bad war and the bad president
> is worse then listening to my four year old complaining about sharing
> toys with her friends.
>  2.b doesn't matter what happens, until a liberal is in the Whitehouse
> you will whine like a baby.
>
> 3. You keep mentioning Darfur
>  3.a Do you thing the UN's actions in Darfur is insufficient?
>  3.b You supported Kerry's idea that the UN should control the worlds
> armies, has that view changed?
>
> 4. Why do you number your points?
>  4.a You just learned outlines in school
>  4.b you think it looks professional
>  4.c all of the above
>
>
> On 5/11/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> (1.) Iraq policy is an issue about leadership.
>>
>>       (1.1) We don't have the military capacity for the mission we've
>> taken on.  The President should've considered that possibility up
>> front rather than firing the generals that brought it up.  He
>> should've "listened to the generals".
>>
>>       (1.2) Iraq is not question is not war, there is no war; there's
>> only a security issue for a Middle Eastern country which makes their
>> need no different than, say, Darfur.  We've been there long enough to
>> compensate them for Bush's fuck up.  At this point we're simply their
>> security bitch.
>>
>>       (1.3) If we're going to continue in Iraq, then we'll need more
>> troops.  If we can't get them by asking for volunteers, then we need a
>> draft.  If we're unwilling start a draft, then we need a policy
>> change.
>>
>>      (1.4) Bush's policy is on its last possible leg: Patraeus, and
>> the deadline is September.  "The surge" won't work due to a simple
>> fact: security in Baghdad is not an obstacle to solving the Iraq
>> problem.
>>
>>      (1.5) The are only 2 solutions to the Iraq Problem:
>>            (1.5.1) Level it.  Requires no Iraqi cooperation.
>>            (1.5.2) Bring in 500,000 troops who can stay a minimum of
>> 50 years and whose mission is to secure the borders and every town and
>> city within.  Requires majority Iraqi support which, at this point,
>> looks like we're losing.
>>
>> CONCLUSION: Begin a phased withdrawal immediately.
>>     
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Create Web Applications With ColdFusion MX7 & Flex 2. 
Build powerful, scalable RIAs. Free Trial
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJS 

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:234542
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to