English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The Bush administration has now set a 12-18 months timetable for Iraq security forces to get their act together. For the past 3 years Bush has said that it is wrong to set a timetable because it benefits terrorist planning. This couldn’t be a cheap political trick, could it?

2006-10-24 03:18:31 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

------------------------

paradigm_...

Here are a couple of quick definitions of ‘timetable’.

- A schedule listing events and the times at which they will take place
http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/TIMETABLE

- A schedule listing events and the times at which they will take place
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/timetable

2006-10-24 03:41:34 · update #1

------------------------

paradigm_...

And a few quotes:

In 1999, Bush Demanded A Timetable

In 1999, George W. Bush criticized President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo, and yet he refuses to apply the same standard to his war.

George W. Bush, 4/9/99:

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

And on the specific need for a timetable, here’s what Bush said then and what he says now:

George W. Bush, 6/5/99


“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

[Seattle Post-Intelligencer on 6/5/99]

AND LATER?

George W. Bush, 6/24/05:

“It doesn’t make any sense to have a timetable. You know, if you give a timetable, you’re — you’re conceding too much to the enemy.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/06/28/in-1999-bush-demanded-a-timetable/

2006-10-24 03:42:24 · update #2

-------------
kimht -

Where have you been? The civil war started the day Saddam was removed from power - as everyone with any knowledge of the region predicted.

You will know that it is really under way when the Shi'a and Sunni temporarily unite to kill all of the Kurds and reclaim the northern oil fields. Then they can return to their own war.

2006-10-24 07:34:04 · update #3

11 answers

Isn't that typical? Go to someones home, mess it up and leave. Yes, Iraq had a dictator. But for the most part it was functioning. People lived, children went to school and there was security.

Fast forward a few years, the connection with Al-Queda has not materialized, the aim to reduce WMDs was false, the infrastructure is destroyed thanks to the bombing, anarchy replaced dictatorship, children are dying and people are barely living a normal life.

This is not a time for political tricks. Now is the time to pony up to mistakes and get into gear.

BTW Iraqi's did not ask to be liberated! Iraqi's in no way shape or form asked for the mess they are in now. And do not be deluded to think this is Bush's fault. US is a democracy and the goverment is a representative of the people. This mess is squarely the fault of the PEOPLE of the US.

2006-10-24 03:29:15 · answer #1 · answered by Know-it-all 4 · 0 0

There is a difference between setting a timetable of when to leave and setting goals as to what you want to see accomplished so you can leave. I would expect you to know the difference, but then you may be young and not know the difference.

Here are some quotes to ponder:

We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it—and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits down on a hot stove lid. She will never sit on a hot stove lid again—and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore. –Mark Twain

The deadliest enemies of nations are not their foreign foes; they always dwell within their borders. And from these internal enemies civilization is always in need of being saved. The nation blessed above all nations is she in whom the civic genius of the people does the saving day by day, by acts without external picturesqueness; by speaking, writing, voting reasonably; by smiting corruption swifly, by good temper between parties; by the people knowing true men when they see them, and preferring them as leaders to rabid partisans or empty quacks.
---William James

A sense of duty pursues us ever....If we take to ourselves the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, the duty performed or the duty violated is still with us, for our happiness or our misery. If we say the darkness shall cover us, in the darkness as in the light our obligations are yet with us.
--Daniel Webster

Once we have a war there is only one thing to do. It must be won. For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war.
--Ernest Hemingway

If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man.
--Mark Twain

2006-10-24 03:22:26 · answer #2 · answered by paradigm_thinker 4 · 0 0

It's the results that might inform the tale. Conservatives feel that political fundamentalist Islam might take over and use Petro-bucks to fund terrorism in every single place the sector. If this honestly occurred, the Democrats might, of path, declare they have been adverse to all of it alongside.

2016-09-01 01:53:53 · answer #3 · answered by polka 4 · 0 0

He Cut and Ran from Military duty in 1972-73, so why not now- he has more Troops on duty for photo ops, than he has in Iraq- good riddance.

2006-10-24 03:23:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

So you Dem's have done your job. Cutting and running is obviously not the right thing to do. But hey, who are we to say what's right.We are headed for a down fall and it's not the Republicans fault!!

2006-10-24 03:22:41 · answer #5 · answered by only p 6 · 0 1

He is going to advance in a different direction

2006-10-24 03:20:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

this is not running but letting them know that civil war can happen at their own planning
USA shd not involved itself in caused this conflit

2006-10-24 03:55:01 · answer #7 · answered by kimht 6 · 0 0

FROM WHAT I SAW IT WAS THE IRAQI'S SAYING THAT,I DIDNT SEE BUSH BESIDE HIM AND NEITHER DID YOU LIAR! AND IT'S ABOUT TIME THE IRAQI'S STOOD UP FOR THEMSELVES DONT YA THINK? I MEAN WE LIBERATED THEM IN 3 WEEKS AND 3 YEARS LATER THEY STILL HAVEN'T GOT THERE SH!T TOGETHER!HMMMMMMMMM FOOD FOR THOUGHT!

2006-10-24 03:23:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it is better to be thought a fool then to open ones mouth and remove all doubt

2006-10-24 03:40:26 · answer #9 · answered by Soy jesus 1 · 0 0

He has no clue what to do, he is just a clueless leader.

2006-10-24 03:23:42 · answer #10 · answered by tcmoosey 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers