Tidal Fish Forum banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Bush: Troops to Stay in Iraq Through '08
AP - 19 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Tuesday that American forces will remain in Iraq for years and it will be up to a future president to decide when to bring them all home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,995 Posts
Handing it off is exactly what Clintoon did with the Cole bombing... and George the terrorist fighting President did nothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
[Q]djones originally wrote:
captaingeorge:

I found the AP story after reading your post, but I'm a little confused-did he say this during or after the press conference?
[/Q]During, I believe. He also said this:

Pressed on whether that meant a complete withdrawal would not happen during his presidency, Bush said, "I can only tell you that I will make decisions on force levels based upon what the commanders on the ground say."
White House officials worried Bush's remarks would be read as saying there would not be significant troop reductions during his presidency. They pointed to comments Sunday by Gen. George W. Casey, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, who said he expected a substantial troop reduction "certainly over the course of 2006 and into 2007."

Where the heck is he coming from??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
[Q]RLGFlagship originally wrote:
He's not perfect, but he is more than just good enough? Some arm chair QBs are never satisfied
[/Q]

Good enough? I guess that depends if you consider one of, if not the worst POTUS in history good enough
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,995 Posts
So Much For

[Q]Fritzer originally wrote:
[Q]djones originally wrote:

Fritzer:

Big difference with keeping troops in Iraq as opposed to the places you named: the locals aren't trying to kill them in England, Germany, Japan, and Korea, and they not killing each other as in Iraq, whether you call it sectarian violence or civil war.
[/Q]

Not now, but they were when we started the occupations. As for not being a civil war - if Korea wasn't a civil war, the definition of civil war needs reexamination.
[/Q]

Not being a smart guy with a PHD... but could someone tell me exactly when we occupied England?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
762 Posts
So Much For

Happy to help out, no need to be embarrassed. After Cornwallis surrendered to George Washington, John Paul Jones and a group American Minutemen sailed over for the occupation. Ben Franklin staged marathon orgies with French hookers right in Buckingham Palace.

Better stop this. Some here will take it seriously. Good point. Having troops there by treaty hardly constitutes an occuption.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,995 Posts
So Much For

Whew... I feel better now. Those neocons and their ability to rewrite history had me wondering. I figured next we'd have Pocahontas paddeling a canoe east, across the Atlantic discovering the new world.[smile]
 

·
Tidal Fish Subscriber - I'm cool!
Joined
·
14,062 Posts
So Much For

So according to the assembled BS wisdom, you leave troops where they're not needed and take them away from places that can benefit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
So Much For

[Q]Fritzer originally wrote:
So according to the assembled BS wisdom,
[/Q]As opposed to your UN-assembled BS wisdom?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
Korea was certainly a civil war. Having said that I am at a loss as to how this has any application to the one in Iraq.

It would be inadviseable to announce any future troop movements. The Top Secret security of this White House is laughable enough without intentionally disclosing military troop plans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
I agree, shoulda nuked the whole damn place. But if we did that some liberal would chain themselves down, because of all the sand fleas we would kill.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top