John Murtha on Dick Cheney

[Nepa]

"I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there. I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

[jt1]

Dude, everyone knows that Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror. There were absolutely no other alternatives, period. And yes Islamic jihadists must be eliminated. We have a right as free people to form whatever alliances we want and if the Jihadists want to kill us for whom we support then they must be destroyed.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, everyone knows that Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror.

[/ QUOTE ]


Are you a vet? or are you a chickenhawk?

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, everyone knows that Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror. There were absolutely no other alternatives, period. And yes Islamic jihadists must be eliminated. We have a right as free people to form whatever alliances we want and if the Jihadists want to kill us for whom we support then they must be destroyed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you writing this from the combat zone?

[andyfox]

If Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror, the administration should have been prepared. Instead, it chose to exaggerate the threat posed by Iraq to the United States, to put exclamation points on intelligence that should have had question marks, and to ignore occupation planning, for fear the American people would not have supported the invasion.

And now it chooses to smear critics. This is utterly disgraceful and contemptible behavior from our leaders.

"We want to make sure that we support our troops that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.” Dennis Hastert.

Who doesn't support the troops? Hastert was speaking about the Republican resolution concocted in the wake of Mr. Murtha's comments of yesterday. Mr. Murtha has always said the troops have done a great job, it's the administration he thinks has done a poor one. By insinuating that by voting against the Republican bill one doesn't support the troops, Mr. Hastert shows he doesn't understand what America is about. He should resign from his post.

Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel. "He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.

Cowards accuse Marines with two purple hearts and a bronze star of being cowards.

“In Washington there are some who say that the sacrifice is too great, and they urged us to set a date for withdrawal before we have completed our mission," the president said. "Those who are in the fight know better."

Mr. Bush shouldn't be lecturing Mr. Murtha about sacrifice.

"Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America. So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. The eve of an historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists. After seeing his statement, we remain baffled --nowhere does he explain how retreating from Iraq makes America safer." [White House Press Spokesman]

The cheapest shot of all. Equate Mr. Murtha with Michael Moore. If you have a suggestion that involves setting a date to pull out, you're surrendering to the terrorists. Isn't it possible that Mr. Murtha is still trying to supoprt a strong America, that he sees the Iraq situation as a detriment to a strong America?

The administration has gone off the deep end. Stansfield Turner has correctly characterized Mr. Cheney as the Vice President for Torture. A week of shame and ignominy for the Bush administration.

[zipo]

>>eryone knows that Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror. There were absolutely no other alternatives, period. And yes Islamic jihadists must be eliminated.<<


It is true that we must ruthlessly and relentlessly hunt down and kill all islamic terrorists, their financiers, and their supporters/cheerleaders wherever they are around the globe.

However, it is not the case that war against Iraq to oppose Sadaam was necessary in this war on terror - and it is embarassingly clear that the US execution of the post-war reconstruction/stabilization in Iraq was simply a horrendous cluster-f*ck due to decisions made by incompetent chickenhawks in Washington.

Sadly, while Iraq was not a seething nest of terrorists and terror supporters before the invasion, it certainly is now.

So, we're stuck. We simply have to stay in Iraq now until all the terrorists there are killed.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, everyone knows that Iraq was the only way to go in fighting the war on terror.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, everyone knows that internet poker is rigged.

Those two statements are exactly equal as far as lacking foundation and lacking common sense. "Everyone knows" means I believe it and I have no proof.

Assuming that the Administration acted in good faith that Iraq had, or was getting, WMDs, there was no evidence that those weapons were an immediate terrorist threat.

The invasion of Iraq was at best premature and poorly planned and implemented. Devoting those resources to finishing the job with Osama and Al Qaida would have put a short-term lid on terrorism and allowed a longer term approach to Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

A smarter mix of diplomacy, manipulation, and limited action could have soon forced the UN to take action, i.e., authorize the US to take action.

[tolbiny]

I thought this post was dripping with sarcasm, but four or five responses, including the intro ducktion to a ph'd thesis by andyfox. what did i miss?

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this post was dripping with sarcasm, but four or five responses, including the intro ducktion to a ph'd thesis by andyfox. what did i miss?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I am sorry for being a troll. It's my first time; I won't do it again.

I will say one thing, though, writing that remark helped realize a point that BluffTHIS! tried to make to me once. I made a point about our relationship with Israel and He said that 'we have a right to support any nation that we want.' And I thought, 'what does this have to do with anythign?'

I now realize that if we accept Al Qaida's condemnation of our relationship with Israel we are giving them the right to dictate our foreign policy.

Now, personally, I don't agree with that, mainly because, I find that the concepts modern nationhood and freedom to be two mutually exclusive ideas. But if you begin with his premise that America is a free and soverign nation then you must accept that the said statement is logicaly sound. Very sophisticated as well. I respect him for having such a logical and sophisticated idea.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, everyone with Parkinson's or Alzheimer's knows that Iraq was the only way to go on fighting the war on terror. There were absolutely no other alternatives to waste a ton of money, get a coupla thousand unlucky guys killed off, alienate the whole world, and make a worse mess of it, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP