OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main

Date: 06 Dec 2006 08:05:05
From: Grunty
Subject: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

My comments are marked >

"Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"

By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A long-awaited study expected to call for a U.S. change of
course in Iraq is intensifying pressure on President Bush to find a way
out of a war that has lost favor with the American public.

The high-profile Iraq Study Group planned to release its
recommendations Wednesday on a new Iraq strategy after briefing Bush
and congressional leaders.

The bipartisan commission is expected to advise gradually phasing the
mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and supporting
Iraqi units, with a goal of pulling back American combat troops by
early 2008.

> Isn't that the same "strategy" adopted with the South-Vietnamese
> puppet government ? Those old enough may miss the hippies and
> students crowding streets, parks and campuses. Let's hope that if
> such demonstrations begin to take place again, this govt won't offer
> the world a display of democracy and freedom of speech like that
> govt did back then, sending troops to the campus to kill students.

It is also expected to urge a more energetic effort to involve Iraq's
neighbors in ending violence there, including Iran and Syria, which the
U.S. considers pariah states.

> Now the US will *ask* the Axis of Evil for help to pacify a
> country which got destructed and messed up by the US illegal
> intervention in the first place.
> Curious world this is.

Bush has rejected establishing timetables for withdrawing troops and
has said he wasn't looking for "some kind of graceful exit out of
Iraq."

> He knows any exit out of Iraq will be anything but "graceful".
> It was escape from Saigon back then, it will likely be escape
> from Baghdad in a near future.

The commission also was to recommend that Bush threaten to reduce
economic and military support for the Iraqi government if it doesn't
meet certain benchmarks for improving security, The Washington Post
reported Wednesday.

> That'd be quite a threat! Please do Iraq people and the US
> taxpayer a favor - withdraw all economic and military support
> at once.

The Iraq Study Group - five Republicans and five Democrats - is led
by Bush family friend and Republican James A. Baker III, a former
secretary of state, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. It is the
first major bipartisan assessment of U.S. options in Iraq, and has
captured the attention of lawmakers and voters who saw last month's
Democratic congressional election sweep as a rejection of Bush's
steadfast commitment to the conflict.

The report comes as Robert Gates, who is coasting toward Senate
confirmation as replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
told lawmakers a fresh approach was needed in Iraq.

> "Fresh approach". I chuckle at those euphemisms.

In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, Gates said he
thought the U.S. was not winning --

> "GATES SAID HE THINKS THE U.S. ISN'T WINNING."
> This comes from the Defense Secretary - astonishing!
> I wonder why am I not hearing rightwingers yell at him -
> Traitor, non-supportive of the troops!
>
> Ok, not winning....now I guess...they're...at least...drawing??
> All those public billions spent, thousands lives lost, destruction
> inflicted - what average Joe could expect? At least a draw!!

contradicting Bush who said on Oct. 25, "Absolutely, we're winning."

> watching a football game as usual.

Gates was confirmed by the committee by a 24-0 vote.

The commission's findings and Gates' promise of change has added
political momentum for a new policy in Iraq, putting Bush on the
defensive.

> No, no. Commision, Gates, Bush, they're all just reacting
> to the hard reality. Hard reality put neocons on the defensive.

Since the election, Bush himself has acknowledged the need for new
approaches to the war and has initiated an administration assessment of
options in Iraq.

Yet he also has said the panel's voice will be just one of many on
which he will base his decisions.

> Surely, he will hear many other voices - the recent voters'
> voices in the first place, parents', brothers', sisters', sons'
> voices as well. Even the British Chief Commander's voice.
> Apparently, only voice he's gotta quit hearing is God's voice.

He has warned against a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq, while
congressional Democrats say some troops should leave right away to
pressure the Iraqi government to boost its own efforts.

> ... yadayada... Saigon... yadayada... Mogadishu... yadayada...

"We're going to give it a careful review," White House press secretary
Tony Snow said Tuesday. "As we have mentioned, there are other ongoing
studies within the administration."

> ... yadayada... WMDs... yadayada... Plame... yadayada...

A senior administration official said "there will be some disagreements
but a lot we can work with," but offered no detail. The official said
Bush's reaction was "generally pretty positive." The official refused
to be identified by name because the report was not to be released
until Wednesday.

The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American involvement in World
War II, and U.S. deaths have passed 2,900. A relentless insurgency and
the added complication of increased fighting between religious and
ethnic factions have raised questions about whether Iraq is embroiled
in a civil war and whether the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki will ever be able to calm the country.

Polls shows that only about one in three Americans approve of Bush's
handling of Iraq.

> Yet those account for a lot. The problem is they're allowed to vote.
> OK, ok... they're the price to be paid for democracy. Ok.

> The rest of the article is just about formalities.

Lawmakers including Sen. John Warner say they are eager to hear outside
voices on Iraq and step up congressional oversight. Warner, R-Va., a
Bush loyalist and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, on Tuesday
called on the president to consult with Democrats as well as
Republicans on Iraq. Warner also urged Gates not to try to sidestep
Congress or hold back honest advice for the president.

"You simply have to be fearless" when it comes to this job, Warner told
the defense secretary nominee.

As the Armed Services panel peppered Gates with questions, several
House Republicans met with Bush to discuss Iraq.

In a brief phone interview, House Armed Services Committee Chairman
Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said the president "made it clear he intends
to be successful in Iraq and he's not going to be in the business of
effecting some scheduled withdrawal."

Bush lunched alone Tuesday with Baker, who briefed him on the
commission's conclusions.

Some lawmakers have warned against the hype surrounding the Baker
commission, echoing administration remarks that it will be one of
several assessments done.

"They should not become a substitute for the call of the commander in
chief," Hunter said.

On Thursday, members of Baker's panel are expected to testify before
the Senate Armed Services Committee while Bush meets with British Prime
Minister Tony Blair to discuss Iraq.

The bipartisan group was initiated earlier this year by Rep. Frank
Wolf, R-Va., who returned from a trip to Iraq calling for a
high-powered bipartisan task force that could assess U.S. options. Wolf
added $1 million to a 2006 spending bill to fund the group.

___
taken from Yahoo News

Date: 06 Dec 2006 16:58:10
From: Rubber Biscuit
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

"Grunty" <gruntingdwarf@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1165421105.426863.70110@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> My comments are marked >

I'd have to give a shit to read past this point.

Date: 06 Dec 16:32:47
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

I havn't read the report yet. But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed. My comments at
http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html

On Dec 6 2006 10:05 AM, Grunty wrote:

> My comments are marked >
>
>
> "Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"
>
> By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
>
>
> WASHINGTON - A long-awaited study expected to call for a U.S. change of
> course in Iraq is intensifying pressure on President Bush to find a way
> out of a war that has lost favor with the American public.
>
> The high-profile Iraq Study Group planned to release its
> recommendations Wednesday on a new Iraq strategy after briefing Bush
> and congressional leaders.
>
> The bipartisan commission is expected to advise gradually phasing the
> mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and supporting
> Iraqi units, with a goal of pulling back American combat troops by
> early 2008.
>
> > Isn't that the same "strategy" adopted with the South-Vietnamese
> > puppet government ? Those old enough may miss the hippies and
> > students crowding streets, parks and campuses. Let's hope that if
> > such demonstrations begin to take place again, this govt won't offer
> > the world a display of democracy and freedom of speech like that
> > govt did back then, sending troops to the campus to kill students.
>
> It is also expected to urge a more energetic effort to involve Iraq's
> neighbors in ending violence there, including Iran and Syria, which the
> U.S. considers pariah states.
>
> > Now the US will *ask* the Axis of Evil for help to pacify a
> > country which got destructed and messed up by the US illegal
> > intervention in the first place.
> > Curious world this is.
>
> Bush has rejected establishing timetables for withdrawing troops and
> has said he wasn't looking for "some kind of graceful exit out of
> Iraq."
>
> > He knows any exit out of Iraq will be anything but "graceful".
> > It was escape from Saigon back then, it will likely be escape
> > from Baghdad in a near future.
>
> The commission also was to recommend that Bush threaten to reduce
> economic and military support for the Iraqi government if it doesn't
> meet certain benchmarks for improving security, The Washington Post
> reported Wednesday.
>
> > That'd be quite a threat! Please do Iraq people and the US
> > taxpayer a favor - withdraw all economic and military support
> > at once.
>
> The Iraq Study Group - five Republicans and five Democrats - is led
> by Bush family friend and Republican James A. Baker III, a former
> secretary of state, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. It is the
> first major bipartisan assessment of U.S. options in Iraq, and has
> captured the attention of lawmakers and voters who saw last month's
> Democratic congressional election sweep as a rejection of Bush's
> steadfast commitment to the conflict.
>
> The report comes as Robert Gates, who is coasting toward Senate
> confirmation as replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
> told lawmakers a fresh approach was needed in Iraq.
>
> > "Fresh approach". I chuckle at those euphemisms.
>
> In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, Gates said he
> thought the U.S. was not winning --
>
> > "GATES SAID HE THINKS THE U.S. ISN'T WINNING."
> > This comes from the Defense Secretary - astonishing!
> > I wonder why am I not hearing rightwingers yell at him -
> > Traitor, non-supportive of the troops!
> >
> > Ok, not winning....now I guess...they're...at least...drawing??
> > All those public billions spent, thousands lives lost, destruction
> > inflicted - what average Joe could expect? At least a draw!!
>
> contradicting Bush who said on Oct. 25, "Absolutely, we're winning."
>
> > watching a football game as usual.
>
> Gates was confirmed by the committee by a 24-0 vote.
>
> The commission's findings and Gates' promise of change has added
> political momentum for a new policy in Iraq, putting Bush on the
> defensive.
>
> > No, no. Commision, Gates, Bush, they're all just reacting
> > to the hard reality. Hard reality put neocons on the defensive.
>
> Since the election, Bush himself has acknowledged the need for new
> approaches to the war and has initiated an administration assessment of
> options in Iraq.
>
> Yet he also has said the panel's voice will be just one of many on
> which he will base his decisions.
>
> > Surely, he will hear many other voices - the recent voters'
> > voices in the first place, parents', brothers', sisters', sons'
> > voices as well. Even the British Chief Commander's voice.
> > Apparently, only voice he's gotta quit hearing is God's voice.
>
> He has warned against a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq, while
> congressional Democrats say some troops should leave right away to
> pressure the Iraqi government to boost its own efforts.
>
> > ... yadayada... Saigon... yadayada... Mogadishu... yadayada...
>
> "We're going to give it a careful review," White House press secretary
> Tony Snow said Tuesday. "As we have mentioned, there are other ongoing
> studies within the administration."
>
> > ... yadayada... WMDs... yadayada... Plame... yadayada...
>
> A senior administration official said "there will be some disagreements
> but a lot we can work with," but offered no detail. The official said
> Bush's reaction was "generally pretty positive." The official refused
> to be identified by name because the report was not to be released
> until Wednesday.
>
> The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American involvement in World
> War II, and U.S. deaths have passed 2,900. A relentless insurgency and
> the added complication of increased fighting between religious and
> ethnic factions have raised questions about whether Iraq is embroiled
> in a civil war and whether the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister
> Nouri al-Maliki will ever be able to calm the country.
>
> Polls shows that only about one in three Americans approve of Bush's
> handling of Iraq.
>
> > Yet those account for a lot. The problem is they're allowed to vote.
> > OK, ok... they're the price to be paid for democracy. Ok.
>
>
> > The rest of the article is just about formalities.
>
> Lawmakers including Sen. John Warner say they are eager to hear outside
> voices on Iraq and step up congressional oversight. Warner, R-Va., a
> Bush loyalist and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, on Tuesday
> called on the president to consult with Democrats as well as
> Republicans on Iraq. Warner also urged Gates not to try to sidestep
> Congress or hold back honest advice for the president.
>
> "You simply have to be fearless" when it comes to this job, Warner told
> the defense secretary nominee.
>
> As the Armed Services panel peppered Gates with questions, several
> House Republicans met with Bush to discuss Iraq.
>
> In a brief phone interview, House Armed Services Committee Chairman
> Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said the president "made it clear he intends
> to be successful in Iraq and he's not going to be in the business of
> effecting some scheduled withdrawal."
>
> Bush lunched alone Tuesday with Baker, who briefed him on the
> commission's conclusions.
>
> Some lawmakers have warned against the hype surrounding the Baker
> commission, echoing administration remarks that it will be one of
> several assessments done.
>
> "They should not become a substitute for the call of the commander in
> chief," Hunter said.
>
> On Thursday, members of Baker's panel are expected to testify before
> the Senate Armed Services Committee while Bush meets with British Prime
> Minister Tony Blair to discuss Iraq.
>
> The bipartisan group was initiated earlier this year by Rep. Frank
> Wolf, R-Va., who returned from a trip to Iraq calling for a
> high-powered bipartisan task force that could assess U.S. options. Wolf
> added $1 million to a 2006 spending bill to fund the group.
>
> ___
> taken from Yahoo News
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com

_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 08:42:28
From: mo_charles
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

> I havn't read the report yet. But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
> press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed. My comments
at
> http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html

so the report's political, and we're screwed. deep.

mo_charles

---
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 18:04:04
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 10:42 AM, mo_charles wrote:

> > I havn't read the report yet. But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
> > press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed. My comments
> at
> > http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html
>
> so the report's political, and we're screwed. deep.

The really sad part is that it's apparently to deep for our career politicians
and for our major news organizations.

The Emporer has a fine new set of clothes.

>
> mo_charles
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com

_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 12:40:25
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Wed, 06 Dec 06 18:04:04 GMT, Gary Carson
<garycarson@alumni.northwestern.edu > wrote:

>
>On Dec 6 2006 10:42 AM, mo_charles wrote:
>
>> > I havn't read the report yet. But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
>> > press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed. My comments
>> at
>> > http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html
>>
>> so the report's political, and we're screwed. deep.
>
>The really sad part is that it's apparently to deep for our career politicians
>and for our major news organizations.
>

Career politicians have no use for any discussion unless it gives them
an opening to get face time on TeeVee to bloviate how smart they are,
and to validate their own political agenda.

The major news organizations have no use for any discussion unless it
gives them a snappy headline to validate their own political agenda.

>The Emporer has a fine new set of clothes.
>

Both sides of the political spectrum will take what they want from the
report, and disregard the part that they don't want to hear.

On the one hand, <blah blah blah >
On the other hand, <yadda yadda yadda >

Bush will do what he thinks is right, and disregard the rest.
Seeming to listen to the commission gives him cover to do that.
He can either recite "blah blah" OR "yadda yadda" as justification.

Whether we are "screwed" or not isn't influenced one whit by that
report.

Besides that minor little quibble, I agree with your assessment.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 19:43:11
From: Tom White
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

Gary Carson <garycarson@alumni.northwestern.edu > wrote:
+ I havn't read the report yet.? But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
+ press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed.? My comments at
+ http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html

We Can't Afford to Leave

As the debate over Iraq intensifies, leading Democrat
Silvestre Reyes is calling for the deployment of more U.S.
troops.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16062351/site/newsweek/

Now that the Democrats have to sober up from their pre-election
Bush Bashing Bacchanalia and make decisions more consequential
than where in the freezer to put the bribe money, you'll be
seeing more leads like that.

Date: 06 Dec 19:55:29
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

One of the good things about having a draft is that it ensures that we'll have
both soldiers and vets who are willing to say out loud, "Are you guys fucking
nuts?". With a volunteer army we get a cadre who can be depended on to say ,
"Yes, sir. This won't have a negative effect on my upcoming promotion and/or
pension check, will it?"

On Dec 6 2006 1:43 PM, Tom White wrote:

> Gary Carson wrote:
> + I havn't read the report yet.? But after breifly watching the Baker et. al.
> + press conference about it my best guess is that we're screwed.? My comments
> at
> + http://americantradition.blogspot.com/2006/12/these-guys-are-full-of-it.html
>
> We Can't Afford to Leave
>
> As the debate over Iraq intensifies, leading Democrat
> Silvestre Reyes is calling for the deployment of more U.S.
> troops.
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16062351/site/newsweek/
>
> Now that the Democrats have to sober up from their pre-election
> Bush Bashing Bacchanalia and make decisions more consequential
> than where in the freezer to put the bribe money, you'll be
> seeing more leads like that.
Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com

_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 12:05:26
From: mo_charles
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

> One of the good things about having a draft is that it ensures that we'll
have
> both soldiers and vets who are willing to say out loud, "Are you guys fucking
> nuts?". With a volunteer army we get a cadre who can be depended on to say
,
> "Yes, sir. This won't have a negative effect on my upcoming promotion and/or
> pension check, will it?"

one of the good things about having an army of liberal armchair generals
is that we can pretty much convince ourselves that no war's ever worth
fighting. hey gary, will this nation ever be able to fight a war again?

mo_charles

-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 20:33:13
From: Gary Carson
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:05 PM, mo_charles wrote:

> > One of the good things about having a draft is that it ensures that we'll
> have
> > both soldiers and vets who are willing to say out loud, "Are you guys
> > fucking
> > nuts?". With a volunteer army we get a cadre who can be depended on to say
> ,
> > "Yes, sir. This won't have a negative effect on my upcoming promotion
> > and/or
> > pension check, will it?"
>
> one of the good things about having an army of liberal armchair generals
> is that we can pretty much convince ourselves that no war's ever worth
> fighting. hey gary, will this nation ever be able to fight a war again?

Not unless we get rid of this bunch of clowns who run the military.

Those idiots actually are proud of not having lost a battle. But all it means
is that they aren't trying to win the war, you can't win a war if you won't risk
losing a battle.

Support the troops my ass.

Liberals aren't the problem. Conservatives aren't the problem. Gutless bums in
uniform are the problem. And God giving Georgie Boy bad advice isn't helping
much.

Gary Carson
http://www.garycarson.com

_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 07 Dec 10:55:56
From: Bryan Kimmes
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:05 PM, mo_charles wrote:

> > One of the good things about having a draft is that it ensures that we'll
> have
> > both soldiers and vets who are willing to say out loud, "Are you guys
> > fucking
> > nuts?". With a volunteer army we get a cadre who can be depended on to say
> ,
> > "Yes, sir. This won't have a negative effect on my upcoming promotion
> > and/or
> > pension check, will it?"
>
> one of the good things about having an army of liberal armchair generals
> is that we can pretty much convince ourselves that no war's ever worth
> fighting. hey gary, will this nation ever be able to fight a war again?
>
> mo_charles

I know you said "hey gary", but I am going to answer anyway.

No the United States will not be able to fight a war in the immediate future.
There isn't another military in the world to fight against in a 'traditional'
war.

Now this Iraq type 'war', I suspect we will have one waiting for us in any
country we invade/overthrow, and I'm not sure they are winnable 'wars'.

Bryan

_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 18:03:54
From: Grunty
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

FL Turbo wrote:

> On 6 Dec 2006 08:05:05 -0800, "Grunty" <gruntingdwarf@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >My comments are marked >
> >
> >
> >"Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"
> >
>
> Yeah.
> As if the pressure on Bush hadn't been ramping for the last 5 years
> already.
>
> As.if.

Certainly, but this is first time he feels forced to admit that things
aren't going well. Maybe the election results helped.

[snip]

> >The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American involvement in World
> >War II, and U.S. deaths have passed 2,900.
>
> WWII.
> 407,300 deaths.
>
> Korean war.
> 36,500 deaths.
>
> Vietnam.
> 58,000 deaths.
>
> Put that in your database.
>
You really thought that the "American involvement" part referred to the
casualties count? I guess it rather referred to the money count.

The money spent from the public treasury to finance the invasion and
occupation, and buy the services rendered by the contractors - the
oil&army-related companies (Halliburton, Security agencies,
industrial-military-complex in general).

[snip]

> >___
> >taken from Yahoo News
>
> If all you know is what the AP and Yahoo News tell you.......

Much of that was predictable right at the time the invasion was
launched. When it makes it to AP or Y in such terms, it's that the
matter goes real bad.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 17:43:03
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> Are you sure you want to open up
> that Negerian uranium can of worms?

Yes. Let's open it.

We all know it was just one of many willful lies told by the
Administration to hustle us into war for oi--

Excuse me..."Iraqi Freedom."

...the fact that they "corrected" it after the fact or acknowledged
"mistakes" in hindsight is of no consequence. They DIDN'T CARE if
their lies might be exposed later. Whatever bullshit serves their
purpose of the moment is the bullshit we're served.

And now...all those dead people.

Date: 07 Dec 11:11:21
From: Bryan Kimmes
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 7:43 PM, OrangeSFO wrote:

> WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:
>
> > Are you sure you want to open up
> > that Negerian uranium can of worms?
>
>
> Yes. Let's open it.
>
> We all know it was just one of many willful lies told by the
> Administration to hustle us into war for oi--
>
> Excuse me..."Iraqi Freedom."
>
> ....the fact that they "corrected" it after the fact or acknowledged
> "mistakes" in hindsight is of no consequence. They DIDN'T CARE if
> their lies might be exposed later. Whatever bullshit serves their
> purpose of the moment is the bullshit we're served.
>
> And now...all those dead people.

But John Q Public can drive his H3, your priorities are out of order sir.

Bryan

_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:39:02
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 5:29 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> I'm not going to post every one of them here.

Forget "every one of them". You haven't even posted as single decent
example in support of your hyperbolic assertion.

> I've given you examples, with facts to back them up. You can research further if you wish.

Like I said....you're hoping someone will buy your "please support my
claim for me" bullshit.

> Nope. When I talk about things that I claim to be an authority on, I
> rarely find that I've gotten my facts ass-backwards.

It's difficult to find that out when you don't bother presenting any
supporting facts to begin with.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:20:47
From: WuzYoungOnceToo2
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 5:10 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> Nope. My only goal in supplying this tidbit was to support my statement
> that he lies.

Actually, your claim was that he "has been caught countless times in
lies and hypocricy". I'd say you've failed miserably in your goal.

> Call it a mis-statement on his part or whatever you like,
> but he makes a lot of "misstatements".

So does everyone when talking impromptu. We're all liars and hypocrits
I guess.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:38:00
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 4:20 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 5:10 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Nope. My only goal in supplying this tidbit was to support my statement
> > that he lies.
>
> Actually, your claim was that he "has been caught countless times in
> lies and hypocricy". I'd say you've failed miserably in your goal.
>
> > Call it a mis-statement on his part or whatever you like,
> > but he makes a lot of "misstatements".
>
> So does everyone when talking impromptu. We're all liars and hypocrits
> I guess.

By the way, you are pretty good at dodging and weaving, but a terrible
debator.

Good day to you, sir.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:29:52
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 4:20 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 5:10 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Nope. My only goal in supplying this tidbit was to support my statement
> > that he lies.
>
> Actually, your claim was that he "has been caught countless times in
> lies and hypocricy". I'd say you've failed miserably in your goal.

I'm not going to post every one of them here. I've given you examples,
with facts to back them up. You can research further if you wish.

>
> > Call it a mis-statement on his part or whatever you like,
> > but he makes a lot of "misstatements".
>
> So does everyone when talking impromptu. We're all liars and hypocrits
> I guess.

Nope. When I talk about things that I claim to be an authority on, I
rarely find that I've gotten my facts ass-backwards. Even when I'm asked
a question and have to give an "impromptu" answer.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

---
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:52:14
From: WuzYoungOnceToo2
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 4:33 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> Here's another one (matter of opinion, I guess?)
>
> Radio host Rush Limbaugh falsely declared that President George W. Bush,
> in a State of the Union address, "disowned" fraudulent intelligence
> concerning alleged Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium from Africa. In fact,
> Bush did just the opposite: He touted the flawed intelligence as evidence
> of the Iraqi threat..
>
> Limbaugh's false assertion came in response to a caller to the June 18
> broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show:
>
> CALLER: Well, he [Bush] has misinformed the American public.
>
> [...]
>
> LIMBAUGH: On what? What did he misinform us about?
>
> [...]
>
> CALLER: I'm just talking about the false claim of uranium from Niger, that
> one that was very specific and stated --
>
> LIMBAUGH: That was a British government claim, and Bush disowned it in a
> State of the Union speech.
>
> Bush said in his 2003 State of the Union address:
>
> "Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula
> and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. ... The
> International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam
> Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design
> for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of
> enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that
> Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from
> Africa."

Certainly a misstatement by Limbaugh (if the transcript is accurate),
but hardly an onerous "lie". After the SOTU address in question the
White House did in fact state that the citing of the report in that
speech was a mistake. In any event, the caller in that transcript is
offering the larger factual error. Are you sure you want to open up
that Negerian uranium can of worms?

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:10:24
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 3:52 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 4:33 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Here's another one (matter of opinion, I guess?)
> >
> > Radio host Rush Limbaugh falsely declared that President George W. Bush,
> > in a State of the Union address, "disowned" fraudulent intelligence
> > concerning alleged Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium from Africa. In fact,
> > Bush did just the opposite: He touted the flawed intelligence as evidence
> > of the Iraqi threat..
> >
> > Limbaugh's false assertion came in response to a caller to the June 18
> > broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show:
> >
> > CALLER: Well, he [Bush] has misinformed the American public.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > LIMBAUGH: On what? What did he misinform us about?
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > CALLER: I'm just talking about the false claim of uranium from Niger, that
> > one that was very specific and stated --
> >
> > LIMBAUGH: That was a British government claim, and Bush disowned it in a
> > State of the Union speech.
> >
> > Bush said in his 2003 State of the Union address:
> >
> > "Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula
> > and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. ... The
> > International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam
> > Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design
> > for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of
> > enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that
> > Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from
> > Africa."
>
> Certainly a misstatement by Limbaugh (if the transcript is accurate),
> but hardly an onerous "lie". After the SOTU address in question the
> White House did in fact state that the citing of the report in that
> speech was a mistake. In any event, the caller in that transcript is
> offering the larger factual error. Are you sure you want to open up
> that Negerian uranium can of worms?

Nope. My only goal in supplying this tidbit was to support my statement
that he lies. Call it a mis-statement on his part or whatever you like,
but he makes a lot of "misstatements".

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

_______________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:26:32
From: WuzYoungOnceToo2
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 4:13 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> Dude, go to this linkwww.google.com

Sorry, but I'm going to have to deduct points for beginning a statement
with "Dude".

> Query: Rush Limbaugh and Lies, you will have reading material for weeks.

In other words, you don't have anything specific and hope to convince
someone that it's my responsibility to substantiate your claim for you
by sifting through thousands of blog entries, op-ed pieces and other
bullshit. Are you new to this?

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:40:09
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:33:19
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 3:26 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 4:13 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Dude, go to this linkwww.google.com
>
> Sorry, but I'm going to have to deduct points for beginning a statement
> with "Dude".
>
> > Query: Rush Limbaugh and Lies, you will have reading material for weeks.
>
> In other words, you don't have anything specific and hope to convince
> someone that it's my responsibility to substantiate your claim for you
> by sifting through thousands of blog entries, op-ed pieces and other
> bullshit. Are you new to this?

Here's another one (matter of opinion, I guess?)

Radio host Rush Limbaugh falsely declared that President George W. Bush,
in a State of the Union address, "disowned" fraudulent intelligence
concerning alleged Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium from Africa. In fact,
Bush did just the opposite: He touted the flawed intelligence as evidence
of the Iraqi threat..

Limbaugh's false assertion came in response to a caller to the June 18
broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show:

CALLER: Well, he [Bush] has misinformed the American public.

[...]

LIMBAUGH: On what? What did he misinform us about?

[...]

CALLER: I'm just talking about the false claim of uranium from Niger, that
one that was very specific and stated --

LIMBAUGH: That was a British government claim, and Bush disowned it in a
State of the Union speech.

Bush said in his 2003 State of the Union address:

"Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula
and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. ... The
International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam
Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design
for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of
enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that
Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from
Africa."

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:53:38
From: WuzYoungOnceToo2
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 3:47 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> No, to debate implies that there is an argument to the contrary. There is not.

Well, that's true. You didn't offer anything that could legitimately
be called an argument. Just drive-by claims without substantiation.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:28:29
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:53 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 3:47 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > No, to debate implies that there is an argument to the contrary. There is
not.
>
> Well, that's true. You didn't offer anything that could legitimately
> be called an argument. Just drive-by claims without substantiation.

Here's a quickie for ya:

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

From the June 17 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show:

LIMBAUGH: The [9-11 Commission] report said that Mohamed Atta did meet
with an Iraqi Intelligence Agency, or agent, in Prague on April 9th of
2001. We've known this for a long time.

From the 9-11 Commission "Staff Statement 16":

We have examined the allegation that Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence
officer in Prague on April 9. Based on the evidence available -- including
investigation by Czech and U.S. authorities plus detainee reporting -- we
do not believe that such a meeting occurred.

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

Difference in opinion, eh? Sounds like misinformation, to me. I guess
that's just MY "opinion", though.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 14:13:45
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:37:53
From: WuzYoungOnceToo2
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 3:30 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
>
> By the way, I'm not here to debate his credibility...

Of course not. That's why you proceeded to do precisely that.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:47:26
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:37 PM, WuzYoungOnceToo2 wrote:

> On Dec 6, 3:30 pm, "MysteriAce" <a9c1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > By the way, I'm not here to debate his credibility...
>
> Of course not. That's why you proceeded to do precisely that.

No, to debate implies that there is an argument to the contrary. There is
not.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

_____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:45:18
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On 6 Dec 2006 08:05:05 -0800, "Grunty" <gruntingdwarf@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>My comments are marked >
>
>
>"Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"
>

Yeah.
As if the pressure on Bush hadn't been ramping for the last 5 years
already.

As.if.

>By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
>

Oh, lovely.
The famous AP.

Long time AP watchers have noted the slide of the AP from a "Just the
facts, Ma'am" news gathering organization, into an organization with
correspondents having a political agenda.

>
>WASHINGTON - A long-awaited study expected to call for a U.S. change of
>course in Iraq is intensifying pressure on President Bush to find a way
>out of a war that has lost favor with the American public.
>
>The high-profile Iraq Study Group planned to release its
>recommendations Wednesday on a new Iraq strategy after briefing Bush
>and congressional leaders.
>
>The bipartisan commission is expected to advise gradually phasing the
>mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and supporting
>Iraqi units, with a goal of pulling back American combat troops by
>early 2008.
>
>> Isn't that the same "strategy" adopted with the South-Vietnamese
>> puppet government ? Those old enough may miss the hippies and
>> students crowding streets, parks and campuses. Let's hope that if
>> such demonstrations begin to take place again, this govt won't offer
>> the world a display of democracy and freedom of speech like that
>> govt did back then, sending troops to the campus to kill students.
>

"Sending troops to the campus to kill students"?
GMAFB.

There was only one big incident at Kent State, where students were
killed by National Guardsmen who got freaked out by a mob throwing
rocks at them.

Strangely, when the Draft was ended, no more huge student protests.
We still don't have a draft.

>It is also expected to urge a more energetic effort to involve Iraq's
>neighbors in ending violence there, including Iran and Syria, which the
>U.S. considers pariah states.
>
>> Now the US will *ask* the Axis of Evil for help to pacify a
>> country which got destructed and messed up by the US illegal
>> intervention in the first place.
>> Curious world this is.
>

What is really curious is how there could actually be people stupid
enough to think that Iran and Syria either could or would offer any
"help" to the US.

>Bush has rejected establishing timetables for withdrawing troops and
>has said he wasn't looking for "some kind of graceful exit out of
>Iraq."
>
>> He knows any exit out of Iraq will be anything but "graceful".
>> It was escape from Saigon back then, it will likely be escape
>> from Baghdad in a near future.
>

If we do indeed follow the disgraceful precedence of the Dugout from
Saigon with a similar retreat in Iraq, I will have to admit that the
USA is totally screwed.

>The commission also was to recommend that Bush threaten to reduce
>economic and military support for the Iraqi government if it doesn't
>meet certain benchmarks for improving security, The Washington Post
>reported Wednesday.
>
>> That'd be quite a threat! Please do Iraq people and the US
>> taxpayer a favor - withdraw all economic and military support
>> at once.
>

As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today, that would
be the worst kind of stupidity.
"Punish your allies and reward your enemies".

Straight out of the Blame America First handbook of Noam Chomsky.

>The Iraq Study Group - five Republicans and five Democrats - is led
>by Bush family friend and Republican James A. Baker III, a former
>secretary of state, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. It is the
>first major bipartisan assessment of U.S. options in Iraq, and has
>captured the attention of lawmakers and voters who saw last month's
>Democratic congressional election sweep as a rejection of Bush's
>steadfast commitment to the conflict.
>

Pffft.
It has captured the attention of politicians who are afraid to advance
any specific solutions of their own.

All of the Usual Suspects will continue to throw out the same rhetoric
that they have been doing all along.

>The report comes as Robert Gates, who is coasting toward Senate
>confirmation as replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
>told lawmakers a fresh approach was needed in Iraq.
>
>> "Fresh approach". I chuckle at those euphemisms.
>

I chuckle right along with you.

>In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, Gates said he
>thought the U.S. was not winning --
>
>> "GATES SAID HE THINKS THE U.S. ISN'T WINNING."
>> This comes from the Defense Secretary - astonishing!
>> I wonder why am I not hearing rightwingers yell at him -
>> Traitor, non-supportive of the troops!
>>

You probably only saw the headlines reported by the AP, the NYT, and
Yahoo news, that eagerly put that up for your edification.

I would tell you the Rest of the Story, but I ain't Paul Harvey.

>> Ok, not winning....now I guess...they're...at least...drawing??
>> All those public billions spent, thousands lives lost, destruction
>> inflicted - what average Joe could expect? At least a draw!!
>
>contradicting Bush who said on Oct. 25, "Absolutely, we're winning."
>

WTF would you expect him to say?

>> watching a football game as usual.
>
>Gates was confirmed by the committee by a 24-0 vote.
>
>The commission's findings and Gates' promise of change has added
>political momentum for a new policy in Iraq, putting Bush on the
>defensive.
>

As if Bush hasn't had to defend himself from Moonbats all along?
As.if.

>> No, no. Commision, Gates, Bush, they're all just reacting
>> to the hard reality. Hard reality put neocons on the defensive.
>
>Since the election, Bush himself has acknowledged the need for new
>approaches to the war and has initiated an administration assessment of
>options in Iraq.
>
>Yet he also has said the panel's voice will be just one of many on
>which he will base his decisions.
>
>> Surely, he will hear many other voices - the recent voters'
>> voices in the first place, parents', brothers', sisters', sons'
>> voices as well. Even the British Chief Commander's voice.
>> Apparently, only voice he's gotta quit hearing is God's voice.
>
>He has warned against a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq, while
>congressional Democrats say some troops should leave right away to
>pressure the Iraqi government to boost its own efforts.
>

Dennis Kuchinich doesn't count.
Michael Moore doesn't count.

>> ... yadayada... Saigon... yadayada... Mogadishu... yadayada...
>
>"We're going to give it a careful review," White House press secretary
>Tony Snow said Tuesday. "As we have mentioned, there are other ongoing
>studies within the administration."
>
>> ... yadayada... WMDs... yadayada... Plame... yadayada...
>

Hey, whatever happened to Secret Agent 000, Valerie Plame?

>A senior administration official said "there will be some disagreements
>but a lot we can work with," but offered no detail. The official said
>Bush's reaction was "generally pretty positive." The official refused
>to be identified by name because the report was not to be released
>until Wednesday.
>
>The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American involvement in World
>War II, and U.S. deaths have passed 2,900. A relentless insurgency and
>the added complication of increased fighting between religious and
>ethnic factions have raised questions about whether Iraq is embroiled
>in a civil war and whether the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister
>Nouri al-Maliki will ever be able to calm the country.
>

WWII.
407,300 deaths.

Korean war.
36,500 deaths.

Vietnam.
58,000 deaths.

Put that in your database.

>Polls shows that only about one in three Americans approve of Bush's
>handling of Iraq.
>

Those polls never tell you the Rest of the Story.
Namely, the number of people that think we aren't harsh enough.
It's left for the sheeple to assume that all of those people think we
should withdraw.

>> Yet those account for a lot. The problem is they're allowed to vote.
>> OK, ok... they're the price to be paid for democracy. Ok.
>
>
>> The rest of the article is just about formalities.
>
>Lawmakers including Sen. John Warner say they are eager to hear outside
>voices on Iraq and step up congressional oversight. Warner, R-Va., a
>Bush loyalist and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, on Tuesday
>called on the president to consult with Democrats as well as
>Republicans on Iraq. Warner also urged Gates not to try to sidestep
>Congress or hold back honest advice for the president.
>
>"You simply have to be fearless" when it comes to this job, Warner told
>the defense secretary nominee.
>
>As the Armed Services panel peppered Gates with questions, several
>House Republicans met with Bush to discuss Iraq.
>
>In a brief phone interview, House Armed Services Committee Chairman
>Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said the president "made it clear he intends
>to be successful in Iraq and he's not going to be in the business of
>effecting some scheduled withdrawal."
>
>Bush lunched alone Tuesday with Baker, who briefed him on the
>commission's conclusions.
>
>Some lawmakers have warned against the hype surrounding the Baker
>commission, echoing administration remarks that it will be one of
>several assessments done.
>
>"They should not become a substitute for the call of the commander in
>chief," Hunter said.
>
>On Thursday, members of Baker's panel are expected to testify before
>the Senate Armed Services Committee while Bush meets with British Prime
>Minister Tony Blair to discuss Iraq.
>
>The bipartisan group was initiated earlier this year by Rep. Frank
>Wolf, R-Va., who returned from a trip to Iraq calling for a
>high-powered bipartisan task force that could assess U.S. options. Wolf
>added $1 million to a 2006 spending bill to fund the group.
>
>___
>taken from Yahoo News

If all you know is what the AP and Yahoo News tell you.......

Date: 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,

You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
you.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:06:22
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22 -0800, "MysteriAce"
<a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid > wrote:

>> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,
>
>You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
>lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
>you.
>
>~ MysteriAce
>

Oh, I see.
A guy who has had a radio program for well over 10 years.

Translated into hours, that is about ....
Oh, wait till I get my calculator.
.
.

Hmmm.
.
.
3 hours a day, 15 hours a week.
.
52 weeks in a year.
.
(Carry the one....)
.
.
7800 hours at the least.

The best you can do is mumble something about:
"Countless times" of "lies and hypocrisy"?

Pffft.
He has been wrong about a whole lot of things, but he has outlasted
all his critics.

He has even spawned a whole new industry at MediaMatters, who are paid
to listen intently every day, and pick nits about every sentence he
utters.

MediaMatters is hopelessly outmatched, as are you.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:30:46
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:06 PM, FL Turbo wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22 -0800, "MysteriAce"
> <a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,
> >
> >You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
> >lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
> >you.
> >
> >~ MysteriAce
> >
>
> Oh, I see.
> A guy who has had a radio program for well over 10 years.
>
> Translated into hours, that is about ....
> Oh, wait till I get my calculator.
> .
> ..
>
> Hmmm.
> .
> ..
> 3 hours a day, 15 hours a week.
> .
> 52 weeks in a year.
> .
> (Carry the one....)
> .
> ..
> 7800 hours at the least.
>
> The best you can do is mumble something about:
> "Countless times" of "lies and hypocrisy"?
>
> Pffft.
> He has been wrong about a whole lot of things, but he has outlasted
> all his critics.
>
> He has even spawned a whole new industry at MediaMatters, who are paid
> to listen intently every day, and pick nits about every sentence he
> utters.
>
> MediaMatters is hopelessly outmatched, as are you.

By the way, I'm not here to debate his credibility, I just find it amazing
that you (or anyone else, for that matter) think he has any.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

-------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 16:03:16
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:30:46 -0800, "MysteriAce"
<a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid > wrote:

>On Dec 6 2006 2:06 PM, FL Turbo wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22 -0800, "MysteriAce"
>> <a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,
>> >
>> >You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
>> >lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
>> >you.
>> >
>> >~ MysteriAce
>> >
>>
>> Oh, I see.
>> A guy who has had a radio program for well over 10 years.
>>
>> Translated into hours, that is about ....
>> Oh, wait till I get my calculator.
>> .
>> ..
>>
>> Hmmm.
>> .
>> ..
>> 3 hours a day, 15 hours a week.
>> .
>> 52 weeks in a year.
>> .
>> (Carry the one....)
>> .
>> ..
>> 7800 hours at the least.
>>
>> The best you can do is mumble something about:
>> "Countless times" of "lies and hypocrisy"?
>>
>> Pffft.
>> He has been wrong about a whole lot of things, but he has outlasted
>> all his critics.
>>
>> He has even spawned a whole new industry at MediaMatters, who are paid
>> to listen intently every day, and pick nits about every sentence he
>> utters.
>>
>> MediaMatters is hopelessly outmatched, as are you.
>
>By the way, I'm not here to debate his credibility, I just find it amazing
>that you (or anyone else, for that matter) think he has any.
>

Okedokee.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 13:27:21
From: MysteriAce
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:06 PM, FL Turbo wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22 -0800, "MysteriAce"
> <a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,
> >
> >You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
> >lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
> >you.
> >
> >~ MysteriAce
> >
>
> Oh, I see.
> A guy who has had a radio program for well over 10 years.
>
> Translated into hours, that is about ....
> Oh, wait till I get my calculator.
> .
> ..
>
> Hmmm.
> .
> ..
> 3 hours a day, 15 hours a week.
> .
> 52 weeks in a year.
> .
> (Carry the one....)
> .
> ..
> 7800 hours at the least.
>
> The best you can do is mumble something about:
> "Countless times" of "lies and hypocrisy"?
>
> Pffft.
> He has been wrong about a whole lot of things, but he has outlasted
> all his critics.
>
> He has even spawned a whole new industry at MediaMatters, who are paid
> to listen intently every day, and pick nits about every sentence he
> utters.
>
> MediaMatters is hopelessly outmatched, as are you.

I don't have to cite examples. His lies and hypcricies are well
documented. The fact that he's been on the air for so long is nothing
short of a travesty, although I do support his right to say whatever he
wants to say.

But that doesn't make what he says true. Nor does being on the air for
thousands of hours. He just makes shit up to support whatever stance he
wants to take on popular issues.

It's funny, too, that you acknowledge that he's been "wrong about a lot of
things" but still view him as a great commentator.

~ MysteriAce

"Ashes and diamonds
Foe and friend
We were all equal in the end"

----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

Date: 06 Dec 2006 15:46:10
From: FL Turbo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:27:21 -0800, "MysteriAce"
<a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid > wrote:

>On Dec 6 2006 2:06 PM, FL Turbo wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 12:16:22 -0800, "MysteriAce"
>> <a9c1edc@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today,
>> >
>> >You mean the same Rush Limbaugh who has been caught countless times in
>> >lies and hypocricy? That one? Yeah, there's a "great commentator" for
>> >you.
>> >
>> >~ MysteriAce
>> >
>>
>> Oh, I see.
>> A guy who has had a radio program for well over 10 years.
>>
>> Translated into hours, that is about ....
>> Oh, wait till I get my calculator.
>> .
>> ..
>>
>> Hmmm.
>> .
>> ..
>> 3 hours a day, 15 hours a week.
>> .
>> 52 weeks in a year.
>> .
>> (Carry the one....)
>> .
>> ..
>> 7800 hours at the least.
>>
>> The best you can do is mumble something about:
>> "Countless times" of "lies and hypocrisy"?
>>
>> Pffft.
>> He has been wrong about a whole lot of things, but he has outlasted
>> all his critics.
>>
>> He has even spawned a whole new industry at MediaMatters, who are paid
>> to listen intently every day, and pick nits about every sentence he
>> utters.
>>
>> MediaMatters is hopelessly outmatched, as are you.
>
>I don't have to cite examples. His lies and hypcricies are well
>documented. The fact that he's been on the air for so long is nothing
>short of a travesty, although I do support his right to say whatever he
>wants to say.
>

Yeah, riiiight.
No need to cite any example when you KNOW.
Pffft.

>But that doesn't make what he says true. Nor does being on the air for
>thousands of hours. He just makes shit up to support whatever stance he
>wants to take on popular issues.
>

Well, yeah.
He uses whatever he thinks is the most valid stance.
There is such a thing as Diversity of Opinion.

There is no need to make things up to recognize that there are indeed
differing opinions.

Just because you only know of only one opinion doesn't mean that
someone with a different opinion "makes shit up".

>It's funny, too, that you acknowledge that he's been "wrong about a lot of
>things" but still view him as a great commentator.
>

If you can find any political guru that has been right about
everything, come back and we can talk.

Date: 07 Dec 2006 14:55:47
From: KilgoreTrout
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 2:45 PM, FL Turbo wrote:

>
> As the great commentator Rush Limbaugh pointed out today, that would
> be the worst kind of stupidity.
> "Punish your allies and reward your enemies".

Are you still *listening* to Rush?

I find him much more entertaining to *watch*!

Fer instance, here is a shot of the "great commentator" pretending to have
Parkinson's Disease:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvFlUJc2QW0&mode=related&search=

It doesn't get much funnier than that! Quite a role model ya got for
yerself, Fran!

________________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

Date: 08 Dec
From: RMHisCOOL
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6 2006 11:05 AM, Grunty wrote:

> My comments are marked >
>
>
> "Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"
>
> By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
>
>
> WASHINGTON - A long-awaited study expected to call for a U.S. change of
> course in Iraq is intensifying pressure on President Bush to find a way
> out of a war that has lost favor with the American public.

Since when does the American public have any say in anything? Since when have
they even been considered knowledgable in world events?

>
> The high-profile Iraq Study Group planned to release its
> recommendations Wednesday on a new Iraq strategy after briefing Bush
> and congressional leaders.
>
> The bipartisan commission is expected to advise gradually phasing the
> mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to training and supporting
> Iraqi units, with a goal of pulling back American combat troops by
> early 2008.

I don't equate "gradually phasing the mission of U.S. troops...to training and
supporting Iraqi units" to "time to fold". I'm sure enemies of the United
States like hearing your version better though.

>
> > Isn't that the same "strategy" adopted with the South-Vietnamese
> > puppet government ? Those old enough may miss the hippies and
> > students crowding streets, parks and campuses. Let's hope that if
> > such demonstrations begin to take place again, this govt won't offer
> > the world a display of democracy and freedom of speech like that
> > govt did back then, sending troops to the campus to kill students.

I like how you neglect to mention the fact that the head of the North Vietnamese
Army was interviewed, and said that the demonstrations in America provided the
will to stay strong, knowing that the Americans were not insurmountable.

>
> It is also expected to urge a more energetic effort to involve Iraq's
> neighbors in ending violence there, including Iran and Syria, which the
> U.S. considers pariah states.

Anybody who reads anything about the world knows how much any effort by Syria
and Iran can be trusted.

>
> > Now the US will *ask* the Axis of Evil for help to pacify a
> > country which got destructed and messed up by the US illegal
> > intervention in the first place.
> > Curious world this is.

Yeah, I'm sure that's what's happening.

>
> Bush has rejected establishing timetables for withdrawing troops and
> has said he wasn't looking for "some kind of graceful exit out of
> Iraq."
>

Regardless of what anybody thinks about the war, I don't think anybody thinks we
could exit "gracefully".

> > He knows any exit out of Iraq will be anything but "graceful".
> > It was escape from Saigon back then, it will likely be escape
> > from Baghdad in a near future.

The only thing these two conflicts (that you seem intent on comparing) have in
common is the fact that public disdain strengthens the enemy.

>
> The commission also was to recommend that Bush threaten to reduce
> economic and military support for the Iraqi government if it doesn't
> meet certain benchmarks for improving security, The Washington Post
> reported Wednesday.

Didn't you just say we needed less troops? Doesn't that imply that we're not
needed as much? So why would we have to threaten the Iraqi gov't?

>
> > That'd be quite a threat! Please do Iraq people and the US
> > taxpayer a favor - withdraw all economic and military support
> > at once.
>
The US taxpayer clearly said on November 6 that they don't mind taxes so much.

> The Iraq Study Group - five Republicans and five Democrats - is led
> by Bush family friend and Republican James A. Baker III, a former
> secretary of state, and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. It is the
> first major bipartisan assessment of U.S. options in Iraq, and has
> captured the attention of lawmakers and voters who saw last month's
> Democratic congressional election sweep as a rejection of Bush's
> steadfast commitment to the conflict.
>
> The report comes as Robert Gates, who is coasting toward Senate
> confirmation as replacement for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
> told lawmakers a fresh approach was needed in Iraq.
>
What does this have to do with anything else you've said?

> > "Fresh approach". I chuckle at those euphemisms.
>
Good one.

> In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, Gates said he
> thought the U.S. was not winning --
>
> > "GATES SAID HE THINKS THE U.S. ISN'T WINNING."
> > This comes from the Defense Secretary - astonishing!
> > I wonder why am I not hearing rightwingers yell at him -
> > Traitor, non-supportive of the troops!
> >
> > Ok, not winning....now I guess...they're...at least...drawing??
> > All those public billions spent, thousands lives lost, destruction
> > inflicted - what average Joe could expect? At least a draw!!
>

That's such a well-illustrated point. If one guy thinks we're not winning, then
its game over fact right?

> contradicting Bush who said on Oct. 25, "Absolutely, we're winning."
>

I can't believe two people could possibly say things that contradict!

> > watching a football game as usual.
>
> Gates was confirmed by the committee by a 24-0 vote.
>
> The commission's findings and Gates' promise of change has added
> political momentum for a new policy in Iraq, putting Bush on the
> defensive.
>
> > No, no. Commision, Gates, Bush, they're all just reacting
> > to the hard reality. Hard reality put neocons on the defensive.
>
This coming from the group who thinks reality should be government taxing the
shit out of everybody and providing them with the basics of life?

> Since the election, Bush himself has acknowledged the need for new
> approaches to the war and has initiated an administration assessment of
> options in Iraq.
>
Wow, he's going to listen to other points of view and take that into
consideration! Isn't that a good thing?

> Yet he also has said the panel's voice will be just one of many on
> which he will base his decisions.
>
Oh my god, the president might listen to more than one opinion!

> > Surely, he will hear many other voices - the recent voters'
> > voices in the first place, parents', brothers', sisters', sons'
> > voices as well. Even the British Chief Commander's voice.
> > Apparently, only voice he's gotta quit hearing is God's voice.
>
Don't forget the Armed Forces' voices.

> He has warned against a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq, while
> congressional Democrats say some troops should leave right away to
> pressure the Iraqi government to boost its own efforts.
>
Yeah, leaving them completely will make them stronger. Only a democrat could
believe that.

> > ... yadayada... Saigon... yadayada... Mogadishu... yadayada...
>
> "We're going to give it a careful review," White House press secretary
> Tony Snow said Tuesday. "As we have mentioned, there are other ongoing
> studies within the administration."
>
> > ... yadayada... WMDs... yadayada... Plame... yadayada...
>

Are there points here? Or random words that would make lefties applaud you?

> A senior administration official said "there will be some disagreements
> but a lot we can work with," but offered no detail. The official said
> Bush's reaction was "generally pretty positive." The official refused
> to be identified by name because the report was not to be released
> until Wednesday.
>
> The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American involvement in World
> War II, and U.S. deaths have passed 2,900. A relentless insurgency and
> the added complication of increased fighting between religious and
> ethnic factions have raised questions about whether Iraq is embroiled
> in a civil war and whether the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister
> Nouri al-Maliki will ever be able to calm the country.
>
If you want to compare it to World War II please include the death tolls.

> Polls shows that only about one in three Americans approve of Bush's
> handling of Iraq.
>
> > Yet those account for a lot. The problem is they're allowed to vote.
> > OK, ok... they're the price to be paid for democracy. Ok.
>
>
> > The rest of the article is just about formalities.
>
> Lawmakers including Sen. John Warner say they are eager to hear outside
> voices on Iraq and step up congressional oversight. Warner, R-Va., a
> Bush loyalist and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, on Tuesday
> called on the president to consult with Democrats as well as
> Republicans on Iraq. Warner also urged Gates not to try to sidestep
> Congress or hold back honest advice for the president.
>
> "You simply have to be fearless" when it comes to this job, Warner told
> the defense secretary nominee.
>
> As the Armed Services panel peppered Gates with questions, several
> House Republicans met with Bush to discuss Iraq.
>
> In a brief phone interview, House Armed Services Committee Chairman
> Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said the president "made it clear he intends
> to be successful in Iraq and he's not going to be in the business of
> effecting some scheduled withdrawal."
>
> Bush lunched alone Tuesday with Baker, who briefed him on the
> commission's conclusions.
>
> Some lawmakers have warned against the hype surrounding the Baker
> commission, echoing administration remarks that it will be one of
> several assessments done.

And yet I can think of one person who's pretty hyped up about it.
>
> "They should not become a substitute for the call of the commander in
> chief," Hunter said.
>
> On Thursday, members of Baker's panel are expected to testify before
> the Senate Armed Services Committee while Bush meets with British Prime
> Minister Tony Blair to discuss Iraq.
>
> The bipartisan group was initiated earlier this year by Rep. Frank
> Wolf, R-Va., who returned from a trip to Iraq calling for a
> high-powered bipartisan task force that could assess U.S. options. Wolf
> added $1 million to a 2006 spending bill to fund the group.
>
> ___
> taken from Yahoo News

Rory

_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

Date: 07 Dec 2006 17:10:18
From: Grunty
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

Robert Burns, AP military writer wrote:

> Bush met at the White House with British Prime
> Minister Tony Blair, a key Bush ally in Iraq.
> Speaking to reporters, Bush referred to this as a
> "difficult moment for America and Great Britain."

Bush and Blair
B & B
Why am I getting evocations of Beavis & Butthead

Date: 07 Dec 2006 15:23:32
From: WuzYoungOnceToo
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

On Dec 6, 7:43 pm, "OrangeSFO" <intangible...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> Yes. Let's open it.
>
> We all know it was just one of many willful lies told by the
> Administration to hustle us into war for oi--

I knew I'd get at least one sucker to bite. Now try googling the
relevant keywords and educate yourself on the developments that have
come to light on the subject since that SOTU address.

Date: 08 Dec 2006 19:24:31
From: Grunty
Subject: Re: OT- Iraq: Time to Fold

Rory,

Thanks for your comments, but I got the impression you were sometimes
responding to both my comments, and to the original AP text as if it
was my own. Perhaps my fault, for using the reverse convention -
leaving the original AP text unmarked and marking > my comments, which
could induced to confusion.
So, now I marked the AP text with quotes, showing as >>"
My original comments to AP text show as >>>

RMHisCOOL wrote:

> On Dec 6 2006 11:05 AM, Grunty wrote:
>
> > "Iraq report to ramp up pressure on Bush"
> >
> > "By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
> >
> >
> > "WASHINGTON - A long-awaited study expected to call
> > "for a U.S. change of course in Iraq is intensifying pressure
> > "on President Bush to find a way out of a war that has lost
> > "favor with the American public.
>
> Since when does the American public have any say in anything?
> Since when have they even been considered knowledgable in
> world events?
>
> > "The high-profile Iraq Study Group planned to release its
> > "recommendations Wednesday on a new Iraq strategy
> > "after briefing Bush and congressional leaders.
> >
> > "The bipartisan commission is expected to advise gradually
> > "phasing the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq from combat to
> > "training and supporting Iraqi units, with a goal of pulling
> > "back American combat troops by early 2008.
>
> I don't equate "gradually phasing the mission of U.S. troops...
> to training and supporting Iraqi units" to "time to fold".

Ok. "Time to fold" is hyperbole for like "the beginning of the end",
directly relating to the comparison with the declining period of
Vietnam war.

> I'm sure enemies of the United States like hearing your
> version better though.

First, don't equate the U.S. as a nation with its actual
administration. This admin doesn't represent the interests of the
American people. You should say "enemies of the corporations behind the
actual administration", but I understand it is a bit lengthy.

Second, "my version" would be liked both by enemies (combatants and
their supporters) as well as ex-friends (France, Germany, Russia - the
Old Europe remember?) whose corporations were put out of the Iraq
business by the invasion and replaced by their US competitors. This
political and military blunder created many more enemies and
adversaries than those who did exist before.

> > > Isn't that the same "strategy" adopted with the
> > > South-Vietnamese puppet government ?
> > > Those old enough may miss the hippies and students
> > > crowding streets, parks and campuses. Let's hope that
> > > if such demonstrations begin to take place again, this
> > > govt won't offer the world a display of democracy and
> > > freedom of speech like that govt did back then, sending
> > > troops to the campus to kill students.

> I like how you neglect to mention the fact that the head of
> the North Vietnamese Army was interviewed, and said that
> the demonstrations in America provided the will to stay strong,
> knowing that the Americans were not insurmountable.

You way overrate the role of the demonstrations in America. Actually
they weakened US' will to fight by creating conscience about an absurd
war, rather than strengthening Vietnamese's. Viet's and Iraqis did/do
not need any political demonstrations in America to support their will
to fight - they just had/have to look around themselves.
American public instead, became/become more and more critic about a war
they got/get to see as increasingly prejudicial to them.

> > "It is also expected to urge a more energetic effort to
> > "involve Iraq's neighbors in ending violence there, including
> > "Iran and Syria, which the U.S. considers pariah states.
>
> Anybody who reads anything about the world knows how
> much any effort by Syria and Iran can be trusted.

At this point it isn't a matter of trust, not anymore margin left to
trust. It's just objectivity. Iran and Syria support the insurgency,
therefore they only could influence to calm the situation down. Only a
solid withdrawal schedule could commit the insurgency to a pacification
process - call it an armistice.

> > > Now the US will *ask* the Axis of Evil for help to pacify
> > > a country which got destructed and messed up by the
> > > US illegal intervention in the first place.
> > > Curious world this is.
>
> Yeah, I'm sure that's what's happening.

Well, it actually happened. Iraqi Prime Minister talked to Tehran and
Damascus about them contributing to the pacification. He doesn't make a
move without some degree of approval by the US govt. The recommendation
of the Commission just formalizes those contacts.

> > "Bush has rejected establishing timetables for withdrawing
> > "troops and has said he wasn't looking for "some kind of
> > "graceful exit out of Iraq."
>
> Regardless of what anybody thinks about the war, I don't think
> anybody thinks we could exit "gracefully".
>
> > > He knows any exit out of Iraq will be anything but
> > > "graceful". It was escape from Saigon back then,
> > > it will likely be escape from Baghdad in a near future.
>
> The only thing these two conflicts (that you seem intent on
> comparing) have in common is the fact that public disdain
> strengthens the enemy.

(Again, Iraqis insurgents aren't American people's "enemy", as
Vietnamese weren't either.)

You say, the only thing in common? Besides that point, commented in the
first paragraphs, I can see at least two similarities:

1. You miss the little fact that in both cases there's a widespreading
insurgency against an occupant army. A great difference is that in Iraq
the insurgency is bloody divided into sectarian groups, while
Vietnamese insurgent groups acted in agreement. But, the longer the US
stay in Iraq the more likely Sunnis and Shiies will eventually come to
a minimum agreement. I guess this scenario is what the Coalition
intelligence fears the most.

2. Both wars were launched upon fabricated or provoked incidents -
Tonkin and WMDs.

> > "The commission also was to recommend that Bush
> > "threaten to reduce economic and military support
> > "for the Iraqi government if it doesn't meet certain
> > "benchmarks for improving security, The Washington
> > "Post reported Wednesday.
>
> Didn't you just say we needed less troops? Doesn't that
> imply that we're not needed as much? So why would we
> have to threaten the Iraqi gov't?

The commission said that, not me.

> > > That'd be quite a threat! Please do Iraq people and
> > > the US taxpayer a favor - withdraw all economic and
> > > military support at once.
> >
> The US taxpayer clearly said on November 6 that they
> don't mind taxes so much.
>
> > "The Iraq Study Group - five Republicans and five
> > "Democrats - is led by Bush family friend and Republican
> > "James A. Baker III, a former secretary of state, and
> > "former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. It is the first major
> > "bipartisan assessment of U.S. options in Iraq, and
> > "has captured the attention of lawmakers and voters
> > "who saw last month's Democratic congressional
> > "election sweep as a rejection of Bush's steadfast
> > "commitment to the conflict.
> >
> > "The report comes as Robert Gates, who is coasting
> > "toward Senate confirmation as replacement for
> > "Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, told lawmakers
> > "a fresh approach was needed in Iraq.
> >
> What does this have to do with anything else you've said?

So continues the article.

> > > "Fresh approach". I chuckle at those euphemisms.
> >
> Good one.
>
> > "In a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday,
> > "Gates said he thought the U.S. was not winning --
> >
> > > GATES SAID HE THINKS THE U.S. ISN'T WINNING.
> > > This comes from the Defense Secretary - astonishing!
> > > I wonder why am I not hearing rightwingers yell at him -
> > > Traitor, non-supportive of the troops!
> > >
> > > Ok, not winning....now I guess...they're...at least...
> > > drawing?? All those public billions spent, thousands
> > > lives lost, destruction inflicted - what average Joe
> > > could expect? At least a draw!!
>
> That's such a well-illustrated point. If one guy thinks we're
> not winning, then its game over fact right?
>
> > "contradicting Bush who said on Oct. 25,
> > "Absolutely, we're winning."
>
> I can't believe two people could possibly say things that
> contradict!
>
> > > watching a football game as usual.
> >
> > "Gates was confirmed by the committee by a 24-0 vote.
> > "The commission's findings and Gates' promise of change
> > "has added political momentum for a new policy in Iraq,
> > "putting Bush on the defensive.
> >
> > > No, no. Commision, Gates, Bush, they're all just
> > > reacting to the hard reality. Hard reality put neocons
> > > on the defensive.
> >
> This coming from the group who thinks reality should be
> government taxing the shit out of everybody and providing
> them with the basics of life?
>
> > "Since the election, Bush himself has acknowledged the
> > "need for new approaches to the war and has initiated
> > "an administration assessment of options in Iraq.
> >
> Wow, he's going to listen to other points of view and take
> that into consideration! Isn't that a good thing?
>
> > "Yet he also has said the panel's voice will be just one
> > "of many on which he will base his decisions.
> >
> Oh my god, the president might listen to more than one
> opinion!
>
> > > Surely, he will hear many other voices - the recent
> > > voters' voices in the first place, parents', brothers',
> > > sisters', sons' voices as well. Even the British Chief
> > > Commander's voice. Apparently, only voice he's gotta
> > > quit hearing is God's voice.
> >
> Don't forget the Armed Forces' voices.
>
> > "He has warned against a hasty withdrawal of U.S.
> > "troops in Iraq, while congressional Democrats say
> > "some troops should leave right away to pressure
> > "the Iraqi government to boost its own efforts.
> >
> Yeah, leaving them completely will make them stronger.
> Only a democrat could believe that.
>
> > > ... yadayada... Saigon... yadayada... Mogadishu...
> >
> > "We're going to give it a careful review," White House
> > "press secretary Tony Snow said Tuesday. "As we have
> > "mentioned, there are other ongoing studies within the
> > "administration."
> >
> > > ...yadayada... WMDs... yadayada... Plame... yadayada
>
> Are there points here? Or random words that would make
> lefties applaud you?

First yadayada's referred to the "hasty withdrawal" warning by Bush.
Second yadayada's referred ironically to the "other ongoing studies
within the administration."

> > "A senior administration official said "there will be
> > "some disagreements but a lot we can work with,"
> > "but offered no detail. The official said Bush's reaction
> > "was "generally pretty positive." The official refused to
> > "be identified by name because the report was not to
> > "be released until Wednesday.
> >
> > "The Iraq war has surpassed the length of American
> > "involvement in World War II, and U.S. deaths have
> > "passed 2,900. A relentless insurgency and the added
> > "complication of increased fighting between religious
> > "and ethnic factions have raised questions about
> > "whether Iraq is embroiled in a civil war and whether
> > "the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri
> > "al-Maliki will ever be able to calm the country.
> >
> If you want to compare it to World War II please include
> the death tolls.

You may see the death tolls in FLTurbo's reply to me, and the real
meaning of the "American involvement" in my reply to his.

> > "Polls shows that only about one in three Americans
> > "approve of Bush's handling of Iraq.
> >
> > > Yet those account for a lot. The problem is they're
> > > allowed to vote.
> > > OK, ok... they're the price to be paid for democracy. Ok.
> > >
> > > The rest of the article is just about formalities.
> >
> > "Lawmakers including Sen. John Warner say they
> > "are eager to hear outside voices on Iraq and step
> > "up congressional oversight. Warner, R-Va., a Bush
> > "loyalist and Senate Armed Services Committee
> > "chairman, on Tuesday called on the president to
> > "consult with Democrats as well as Republicans on
> > "Iraq. Warner also urged Gates not to try to sidestep
> > "Congress or hold back honest advice for the president.
> >
> > "You simply have to be fearless" when it comes to
> > "this job, Warner told the defense secretary nominee.

On second reading this made me laugh.
"You simply have to be fearless", Warner told the defense secretary
nominee.
Hah!! As if the former DS feared anything/anybody/anytime! Rummy, who
rebuked those soldiers in Iraq, when they dared to moan to him about
reinforcing the armour of the Humvies!
I guess at this point Gates shrewdly thought, "you're such a cordial
guy Mr. Warner!"

> > "As the Armed Services panel peppered Gates with
> > "questions, several House Republicans met with Bush
> > "to discuss Iraq.
> >
> > "In a brief phone interview, House Armed Services
> > "Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said
> > "the president made it clear he intends to be successful
> > "in Iraq and he's not going to be in the business of
> > "effecting some scheduled withdrawal."
> >
> > "Bush lunched alone Tuesday with Baker, who briefed
> > "him on the commission's conclusions.
> >
> > "Some lawmakers have warned against the hype
> > "surrounding the Baker commission, echoing administration
> > "remarks that it will be one of several assessments done.
>
> And yet I can think of one person who's pretty hyped up
> about it.
> >
> > "They should not become a substitute for the call of the
> > "commander in chief," Hunter said.
> >
> > "On Thursday, members of Baker's panel are expected
> > "to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee
> > "while Bush meets with British Prime Minister Tony Blair
> > "to discuss Iraq.
> >
> > "The bipartisan group was initiated earlier this year
> > "by Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., who returned from a trip
> > "to Iraq calling for a high-powered bipartisan task force
> > "that could assess U.S. options. Wolf added $1 million
> > "to a 2006 spending bill to fund the group.
> >
> > ___
> > taken from Yahoo News
>
> Rory