You bet he is. After the November elections, the fantasy of firing Rumsfeld, and the wonderful report on Iraq by friends of Bush's father ( Jim Baker etc. ), Bush gets to continue on as before until his term is up! Wasn't that a neat bit of thought manipulation by BushCo. We can expect more of the same, more of the Plundering Herd running amok around the middle east and with the US Treasury to the tune of billions every week, while we get to "debate" whether it is wise to send in more, or pull out troops out. It almost sounds like they have us asking whether we want Iraq to be pregnant or not. The Congressional Committees better be sharpening their pencils and readying the subpoenas, or this once great Republic may stand no more.
2006-12-27 02:00:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by michaelsan 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
Until I got to the subtext, I actually thought you had a reasonable question. Then came the ranting of a fool.
The problem is that you haven't a clue what 4th generation war is. It might have been better not to have gone into Iraq, at least not when we did, but since we're there there's bloody little to do but make the proper adjustments and continue. If we don't, eventually you'll not have the right to make a criticism. I'd suggest you get in practice by assuming that a "cut and run" proponent assume he has no right to his opinion, as that will eventually be the outcome, anyway. Can you say,"Sharia?"
2006-12-27 03:38:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's make one thing perfectly clear here. We are entrenched in Iraq. We can not leave until the successful conclusion of the Iraq War. No matter how long it takes.
To do that we would be giving victory to the insurgency. We must stay or we wind up losing a war like we did in Vietnam. Yes the United States lost in Vietnam and if we are not careful. IF we are not very careful then we could lose this war as well.
Wars become unpopular when the side of "right" begins to lose. We were losing so many young men in Vietnam that the war became grossly unpopular just as the Iraq war has become.
2006-12-27 02:02:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by mikeae 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
Stay the course is dead and has been for more than a month. We are about to see a change of strategy in Iraq. Now whether this change will produce a different result that what we have seen to date remains a matter for the future, but it is a change none the less.
2006-12-27 02:00:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Please.... Bush couldn't stay on course with a GPS system stapled to his forehead. To stay on course, there must, in fact, be a course. To this day, all these years after "we" committed to "helping" the Iraqi people achieve liberty and justice "blah, blah, blah. "we" are no closer to achieving stability and democracy in the region than we were on the day that they captured the "soon to be dead" Saddam Hussein. I support our troops and our country and reluctantly "our" president. Not George Bush per se, but, I respect the office of the president. It's time that we just tell it like it is. We got rid of their human rights annihilator and military regime. End of story. We need to take our troops, pack up as much oil and gas as they can stuff into all the ships and tankers and planes etc. and say thanks for the memories, have a nice f******* day. We are not fighting terrorism by "staying the course in Iraq". What we are doing is getting alot of American and a few foreign mega corporations even richer and fatter than they were before the "war" ended. The problem with our military technology is that nobody can f*** with us, which makes for a very short and unprofitable war. So the need then becomes to "stay the course" and ensure democracy and peace and hope and all that other bull sh** that no one over there really gives a sh** about, except our "boys" (and girls). As far as "Bush coming to his senses"... His senses are going to make him listen to whatever it takes to get him through the rest of his term without getting himself impeached. He's probably saying to himself... "I think I can, I think I can" get through this. Good luck, Mr Bush.
2006-12-27 02:23:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Adam in Vegas 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think so, and expect to see him maybe vary the delivery a bit also.
The only mistake I see Bush making is that he is being too sensitive to world opinion, the anti-war/american crowd, and the news media.
If he just went into Iraq and did whatever it took to finish we could quite easily do it.
Last war we won was WW2, since then we took this mentality that we are going to just occupy and hold a country.
Sherman says that to win a war you must make it so horrible and devasting that your enemy just does not wish to carry the fight no longer. That is what we did in all the wars then we built them back up better than before, just ask Japan and Germany. And most of Europe.
If I lived in another country and had to go to war with another, I would hope it was the United States. I would surrender cause I know I am going to be provide well for, and when they get done kicking my ***, they are going to rebuild my country.
Read the book "The Mouse that Roared" it pretty well sums this up.
2006-12-27 02:02:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by AN 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
The interior of sight study is President bush is thinking a troop withdrawal, based upon a checklist he's waiting for from commonplace Petraus(sic). This became his assertion in may additionally. He reported he could evaluate troop withdrawals, based on the placement on the floor in Iraq, as pronounced via his Generals. and don't difficulty, comments are that 10000 troops would be sent returned to afganistan...
2016-10-28 11:20:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are obviously senseless as you seem to have no grasp of the perilous situation in many regions, the bad guys want to take over by any means including nuclear armaments, do some research on Abraham Lincoln he was not very popular the civil war.....anti war riots in New York, General George McClellan a disgraced failure earlier in the war running on a anti war platform against Lincoln for the presidency.....is our president taking the moral high ground? I think so!
2006-12-27 02:14:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Define: Stay the course
If you mean that he is keeping his promise to American allies then yes he is staying the course.
If by "stay the course" you mean "do the exact thing he's been doing for the past 3 years", I think you'll see a slight change in military strategy in the next few days.
2006-12-27 02:00:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Anyone who believes we can just walk away from this now is just plain deluded and has not used a simple thought process to determine what the ramifications might be. He seems to be changing strategy. This is a good thing. Maybe, if we are fortunate, we will actually fight this as a war, ignoring PC ideas and crush the enemy, just hammer them until they lose the will to fight. Not holding my breath though.
2006-12-27 02:09:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rich B 5
·
1⤊
0⤋