Death toll in Afghanistan now stands at 1,000.

Politics 27 replies 1,053 views
Mr. 300's avatar
Mr. 300
Posts: 3,090
Jun 1, 2010 7:49pm
KnightRyder;375747 wrote:too bad most of your quotes speak of ,"development " or his "search for weapons of mass destruction " or capacity to bulid them. by the way who in their right mind put Saddam Hussein in power? did the left do that also? yea the proof is in the puddin man. you on the right need to realize your boy bush was a total screw up, a mere joke on world the stage. you piss and moan about obama in a attempt to give Bush's presidency some credence. but that cant change the fact that he and his pals on the right lied to start a war and wrecked the economy. do you remember osama bin laden public enemy no.1? it didnt take bush long to forget about him? cant find him? a 6'5 arab that puts out more video than beyonce and Bush and his cronies cant find him? Bush will go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever. if not the worst. and you can tell your grand kids you voted for him.
Thanks so much for totally ignoring the facts. A wise man once said "if someone is going to make a fool of himself, just step out of the way and let him do it". You Mr Ryder have stepped right through. As Fish said, failure in oh so many ways.
dwccrew's avatar
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Jun 1, 2010 8:00pm
Glory Days;375051 wrote:the problem is, Bush wasnt gathering the intel himself. it was being gathered by many different agencies who shared the information with more than just Bush and his cronies. i am sure there were several congressional committees that saw the same exact intel Bush saw. i think complaining that Bush lied to the democrats or whatever is just a political cop out for them. they knew if the war went well, they could just ride the curtails, if it went south, blame Bush and get political points saying he lied.
believer;375079 wrote:C'mon...C'MON!

Again I'll be the first to admit that Bush should have concentrated his efforts in Afghanistan but don't downplay the fact that key figures on the left (the Clintons, Princess Pelosi, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, John Kerry, etc.) were privy to the same perhaps faulty international intelligence data on Iraq WMD's that Bush used to justify the invasion....and they knew these things BEFORE Bush even took office. Yet these same people - most of whom initially supported the invasion - were just as quick to deny it when WMD's weren't found for political expediency...hiding behind the nonsensical "Bush lied, people died" mantra.

Bush and his "cronies" weren't the only ones to "lie" about it.

Perhaps they all had the same information, although I doubt that they were as privvy to some of the intel that Bush and his closest advisors were, the fact remains that Bush is the one that made the final decision to go into Iraq. Not anyone from the media, Congress, etc. Yes, they may have been in favor of it, but Bush was the Commander-in-Chief at the time the boys were deployed. Wasted time and resources in Iraq when the real campaign was neglected in Afghanistan. Now Afghanistan is turning into a wasted effort, sadly for our troops that are still stuck there.
fish82's avatar
fish82
Posts: 4,111
Jun 1, 2010 8:55pm
dwccrew;375882 wrote:Perhaps they all had the same information, although I doubt that they were as privvy to some of the intel that Bush and his closest advisors were, the fact remains that Bush is the one that made the final decision to go into Iraq. Not anyone from the media, Congress, etc. Yes, they may have been in favor of it, but Bush was the Commander-in-Chief at the time the boys were deployed. Wasted time and resources in Iraq when the real campaign was neglected in Afghanistan. Now Afghanistan is turning into a wasted effort, sadly for our troops that are still stuck there.

Had Iraq not happened, we'd still be in the exact same position in Afghanistan. History has proven time and again it's an unwinable theater for any kind of ground ops. The only option would have been to bomb the shit out of them, and then leave...with a friendly reminder that we'd be happy to come back and do it some more if they choose to screw with us again.
dwccrew's avatar
dwccrew
Posts: 7,817
Jun 1, 2010 8:58pm
fish82;375965 wrote:Had Iraq not happened, we'd still be in the exact same position in Afghanistan. History has proven time and again it's an unwinable theater for any kind of ground ops. The only option would have been to bomb the shit out of them, and then leave...with a friendly reminder that we'd be happy to come back and do it some more if they choose to screw with us again.

How can you say we'd be in the same situation? We certainly wouldn't be. I agree that it is unwinnable on the ground but had we not had a majority of our military and resources in Iraq we could have done exactly what you said (bomb ths shit out of them). Instead, the Bush Admin chose to waste time and resources in Iraq and neglect Afghanistan.

I believe had we focused on Afghanistan, the war would be long over and we would have a much more efficient government set up in Afghanistan. We blew our chances and allowed the Taliban to re-group instead of crushing them when we had the chance.
KnightRyder's avatar
KnightRyder
Posts: 1,428
Jun 1, 2010 10:02pm
Mr. 300;375856 wrote:Thanks so much for totally ignoring the facts. A wise man once said "if someone is going to make a fool of himself, just step out of the way and let him do it". You Mr Ryder have stepped right through. As Fish said, failure in oh so many ways.

start presenting facts and i will pay attention to them , all you give is innuendo. funny you use the word the fool , you are biggest fool that posts on this site. now that is a fact for your ass. you ignore the whole bush presidency like it never happened.