Colin Powell says we are losing in Iraq and more US troops is not the answer:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/17/...in2274583.shtml

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/12/17/p...nt_n_36552.html

In the bizarro right wing zionist koo-koo world, they are winning because the the "tarists" are being tortured and killed for Jeeezus and zion.

The folowing is neither, a condemnation of what he said, nor a rebuff of why he said it, nor lastly, even an opine as to if he was right in what he said.

For he has well earned a right of opine by his long and elustrious service to this country offered I am sure sincerely as to any issue concerning the military and its war efforts.

I saw the interview. Yet, in listening, I ponder if in this seemingly epiffany in near opposite of Powell's Military doctrine and hisitory, which, Colin Powell, I am to believe. The one who said what said yesterday, that Iraq is lost and there is not a need to add more effort there.

Or the one who said many things to the contrary, among them the following, that seems from a person, in its long historical context of comments, far less like the one I heard yesterday?

"Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier."

"Fit no stereotypes. Don't chase the latest management fads. The situation dictates which approach best accomplishes the team's mission."

"When we are debating an issue, loyalty means giving me your honest opinion, whether you think I'll like it or not. Disagreement, at this stage, stimulates me. But once a decision has been made, the debate ends. From that point on, loyalty means executing the decision as if it were your own.

and;

“Don't be buffaloed by experts and elites. Experts often possess more data than judgment. Elites can become so inbred that they produce haemophiliacs who bleed to death as soon as they are nicked by the real world.”

and;

“The commander in the field is always right and the rear echelon is wrong, unless proved otherwise.”

and;

“The purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced - the just demands of peace and security will be met - or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power.”


---Colin Powell[/i]


Similarly, it was he that laid forth a US incooperated Military Doctrine, called The Powell Doctrine, also known as the Powell Doctrine of Overwhelming Force.

Which he was elaborated in the run up to the 1990-1991 Gulf War. It is based in large part on the Weinberger Doctrine, devised by Caspar Weinberger, former Secretary of Defense and Powell's former boss.

The questions posed by the Powell Doctrine, which should be answered affirmatively before military action, are:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?

2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?

3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

7. Is the action supported by the American people?

8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

The fifth point of the Doctrine is normally interpreted to mean that the U.S. should not get involved in peacekeeping or nation-building exercises.

Powell expanded upon the Doctrine, asserting that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve overwhelming force against the enemy, minimizing US casualties and ending the conflict quickly by forcing the weaker force to capitulate. This is well in line with Western military strategy dating at least from Carl von Clausewitz's On War. However, in the context of the Just War theory, the doctrine of overwhelming force may violate the principle of proportionality.

Yet as Secetary of State, he seems to perhaps argued his beliefs behind closed doors, but in public, in perhaps loyality as a good soldier, obeyed orders and was instrutmental in leading the way, to were are today in Iraq.

I am reminded of an interview by Vietnam's defense Secretary McNamara recently, who in near single manneredness pushed the way towards the US efforts in 1966 - 1969 Vietnam. Who now, in an eppiffany, in his last years, perhaps to leave a differing legacy, seem to convey, his ideas that lead me and hundreds of thousands like me there, were miscalculations and false reading of the American people's willingness to pay the cost and sustain the efforts required for affectiveness in the effort. Efforts, he mostly created and daily managed as if a floor supervisor at an meat slaughtering plant.

Yet, here we are once again, listening to those that lead us, in efforts once again concluded far after the events begin, that the efforts were but a miscalculation of the will of the people to pay the price.

When the lesson is, the people have proven that these generation's of Americans, have no such will, except, perhaps? When the blood is and or might be flowing on their own streets. Then, I would wonder even then, if they would the put the cell phone down, slumber awake from their self indulgence, stop the Ipod and or even look up or note what may be occurring around them.

Prefering, unlike the greatest generation, that gave them allthe have, the mantra of me-ism to their we-ism. just like we see in the Iraqis, and their neighborhood friends and proxies doing in varying self interests and jocking for power nightly on our TV.

I can hardly believe I once thought Colin Powell would make a good U.S. President. That was then and this is now. Now we know he was just another lame brained sucker for Bush's lies.

TUM DII DAI DII, TUM CHUA DAI CHUA!



THA T
IS
ALL!

Bush's 'new way forward' is into quicksand.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1214-29.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1220-28.htm

More troops will only be a mistake if we keep on not fighting this war. If these troops are to be deployed on the borders with Iran and Syria with orders to shoot anything that moves then I support it. If these troops are sent there to pick their noses in the safe havens then I say no. Wars are won by killing people. Our enemy understands this. Why don't we??

It certainly isn't the troops that are not fighting the war, it's the vast incompetence of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld that has not fought the Iraq war or the so called war on terror. Bush thinks he's like a rock against terror, but the truth is that he's dumb as a rock. The reason he's called "W" is because he can spell that.

An appeal for redress from the war in Iraq:

http://www.appealforredress.org/

http://www.appealforredress.org/php/sponso...ganizations.php

Put on the spot, our punk president lies yet again:

http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/punk.html

Columnist joins Scarborough in expressing alarm about Bush and Iraq war:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1003524431

Bush could never come up with a winning strategy for Iraq. After more than four years, why would anyone think he's capable of doing it now. He is a pusilanimous moron and a total loser that has never done anything right in his privileged, delusional existence.

http://www.phonyfighterpilot.com/

U.S. troops tell defense secretary that they want more soliders sent to Iraq
By Associated Press
Thursday, December 21, 2006 -

BAGHDAD, Iraq - If American troops who ate breakfast Thursday with new Defense Secretary Robert Gates have their way, he will recommend sending in reinforcements - and soon.

Gates conferred with U.S. military commanders and Iraqi leaders on what the United States should do next in the grinding war. He also spent an hour with about a dozen soldiers at Camp Victory, eating scrambled eggs and gathering advice from those closest to the action.

When he asked them whether adding forces would help, he got a roomful of nods, and a smattering of “Yes, sir” responses.

“More troops would help us integrate the Iraq Army into patrols more,” said Pfc. Cassandra Wallace, from the 10th Mountain Division

http://news.bostonherald.com/international...rticleid=173322

Iraqi Shiites ask Sistani to bless broad coalition

Shiites from the Iraqi Parliament's largest bloc met Thursday, seeking a blessing from Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani for a coalition strong enough to cross sectarian lines and push Moqtada al-Sadr to lay down his arms. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with Premier Nuri al-Maliki Thursday and said they discussed how the US could help him better secure Baghdad, but not additional troops. Meanwhile, a suicide bomber killed 15 police officers and recruits near the Iraqi police academy off Palestine Street in the heart of Baghdad, the Interior Ministry said.

Delegates from seven Shiite parties that comprise the United Iraqi Alliance gathered in Najaf to discuss the country's predicament in front of their most senior cleric, Sistani, whose word is considered binding by many Shiites.

They sought Sistani's blessing for a governing coalition taking shape among Shiites, Kurds and one Sunni party - seen as a last-ditch effort at rare cooperation across the sectarian divide. Though Sistani will likely approve the deal, he fears the coalition could weaken the Shiite bloc, officials close to him said on condition of anonymity.

The coalition, though not yet finalized, could govern Iraq more efficiently than the government of Maliki, who has been criticized for ties to the radical and anti-American Sadr.

"We will inform the grand ayatollah about the political process, a Cabinet reshuffle, the security situation and ask Sadr to end the boycott and return to the political process," said Ali al-Adib, a member of Maliki's Daawa party and the Shiite parliamentary bloc.

Last month Sadr's political

movement withdrew from the government and efforts to bring them back have so far failed.

Sources in the UIA acknowledged that Sadr's Mehdi Army militia was a serious threat to the government and the bloc risks losing everything.

"There are efforts to convince Moqtada's group to stop their actions. The state has limited patience with these actions, it cannot be patient for ever," said MP Sami al-Askari of the UIA.

"All we ask of him [Sadr] is that he publicly disavow those groups who are acting outside the law so the government can act and take them on."

Sadr's movement would not be a part of the new coalition taking shape, but its existence could pressure the firebrand cleric to soften his own stance.

Within days, Sadr may secretly order his militia, the Mehdi Army, to halt fighting

for one month, said a prominent Shiite politician and an official close to Sadr, both speaking on condition of anonymity.

In exchange for a halt in fighting, Sadr's followers want officials from the Shiite Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq to make a promise in front of Sistani that they will not sideline Sadr's movement, said a member of Sadr's group.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?ed...rticle_id=77909

IT AN'T OVER TILL THE FAT LADY SINGS Eh, there our Isalm-o-westy, Neo-relativist progessives.

Similarly, the Congress you unwittingly think you got elected, may in deed and action, be afar from the one you wanted elected.



Of course, as you forget ,or wish to forget, with this "W" Yahoo buckeroo, I'm still here, this; "pusilanimous moron and a total loser that has never done anything right in his privileged, delusional existence" who became, one of only 43 other humans, to be President of the United States, not once, but twice.

A man who is currently standing squarely, determinedly and oddly, with little to nothing to lose, for over two more years, in the way of all who need to accomplish something in these next 2 years to get elected as they wish.

Thus, as they say, the buck stops there, and, all need to deal with him in some fashion with such narrow margins of what now actually, in my opine, maybe a more moderate, less extreme fring Congress that will not follow the neo prog leftist like Pelosi and Reed on their meanders down San Fran castro street or evangalical right and war hawks of Talk radio down streets of hail mary and pass the ammo...

Sure a few lefty twisty types like "I never graduated from High School, but I know stuff, Sean, the slumper, Penn, will push impeachment, wasting time, efforts and capital needed to deal with the MANY big problems facing the new Congress. Yet If they are looking towards a successful 2008, both in the congress and White House, they must ponder carfully how the public will look upon such divison as was the case before.

All in the end, unlikely to get anywhere with such little to go on legally beyond that festering of regurgitated spew from the Blogs of half truths, untruths and wantabe truths.

Note to resident Neo-prog's, your elected Demo=euros are taking the test of accomplishment more than ever now that the Republicans are out, and, as such, have far less blame game left to play now.

Its game time girls and your the team is on the field with your players to decide either to do something or nothing by the 2008 elections or to be held accountable alone with no blame to share now in their usual venues of duck and cover.

Bush, may be, actually in more control than ever in many ways as he has no were to go but up and down his own road, followed or not.

http://www.symbolman.com/chickenhawks.html

Man oh man did that show me?

Yo! One scared Neo-Relative Progressive (SNRP).

I see the results of my posts, by your reaction .

Since I am here to help perhaps this will give guidance to our resident SNRP's?

A GUIDE TO BASHING CONSERVATIVES

1. Hitler - This is your starting point, and you should reinforce it at every opportunity. Conservatives all secretly admire Hitler, they just won't admit it. They want to turn America into a secret police state, and Bush is the man they've chosen to lead them to this nightmarish future. You'll want to have this graphic spread liberally around your blog. And remember... Bush isn't just similar to Hitler. Bush actually is Hitler!

That's right. Did you ever wonder about that fact that Bush was born right around the era when Hitler supposedly died or disappeared? They took some of Hitler's blood and cloned Bush. Ever notice how little Bush resembles his dad or his brother Jeb? I'm sure you're getting the connection. Also, be sure to refer to conservatives as "brownshirts" at every opportunity.

Weak - "I suppose you won't be satisfied until Hitler... err, I mean Bush, has taken away every last civil liberty we have."

Better - "Why don't you and the rest of your queer killing, hate mongering brownshirt friends go back to your compound and torture some more black people, rather than wasting our time with more of your hot air?"

Take that you Nazi, Neo-con, warmomgering, chickhawk, Islamophode!!!!

2. Fear Mongers - Always maintain a constant theme in your blogging that the chief reason Bush and Cheney won the 2004 election was because they intentionally kept everyone afraid. Remind the conservative that Bush was unable to ever make a campaign speech without a reference to 9/11 and the War on Terror. No matter what they say to you about the dangers of terrorism, remember to call them Fear Mongers and to accuse them of using "Scare Tactics." Tell them it all lies, the US government is behind ALL TERRORISM and they are Worthless murdering Chickhawks and their mothers are stupid and ignorant too!!!

Weak - "Take your fear mongering baloney and move on to a blog that cares."

Better - "What say you and your scare tactics go frighten some small children at a day care center? The adults around here prefer to live a life of hope."

3. Stupidity - All conservatives are dumber than a box of rocks with a hole in the bottom. You already knew that... they voted for Bush! Their stupidity really knows no bounds. They are in denial about everything, they only read the Washington Times and the New York Post, and they get all their television input from Faux.

(Never refer to the network as "Fox", by the way. Always as "Faux." It even has a French touch to it, so it drives the conservatives insane.) Be sure to constantly cite studies which show that Bush supporting conservatives have a lower average IQ and are less informed about current events. It will also help to imply that they all have southern accents and drive pickup trucks with shotguns in the rear window, too.

Oh yeah make sure you use quotes from John Kery and Mat Damon and Sean Penn, saying something like on the stupid end up in Iraq. Or only those with little opportunity and not hope end up in the Military and best yet, how smart are they, there are in Afghanistan and Iraq right!

Weak - "Yeah, it figures that you'd have voted for Bush. You even spelled Cheney's name wrong."

Better - "You know, I'm a firm believer that every vote should count and be counted, but people like you really do make me favor some sort of IQ test to get into the voting booth. Maybe the Brits were right... how can so many people be so DUMB!?"

4. Jesusland - Constantly remind your readers that conservatives not only want to do away with the separation of church and state, they want a Federally mandated religious policy for all of America. The conservatives want you to have the freedom to be a Christian, and that's all. There are plans in place already to move all atheists, agnostics, Muslims and Hindus in America to special "reeducation camps" during Bush's second term. These mouth breathing bible thumpers are already replacing the teaching of evolution with creationism in schools across the Midwest, and they won't be stopping there, I can assure you.

Weak - "We're discussing politics here. Why don't you save your preaching for the Sunday tent revival?"

Better - "Well, well... you Bushies certainly seem to have your bible belts cinched up nice and tight. Where are you off to today? Going to burn down some mosques perhaps?"

5. Homophobes and Bigots - As we all know, those are the two defining characteristics of all conservatives. Be sure to reinforce this in every post you make. If they make any reference to Barak Obama, ask them how the last Klan meeting went and if they've lynched any "darkies" lately. Should they so much as mention the move to ban gay marriage, start screaming HOMOPHOBE! in bold, capital letters. Conservatives hate anyone who isn't straight and Caucasian. Don't let them forget it for a moment.

Weak - "How is it that you don't think people practicing alternative lifestyles have the right to a normal family life?"

Better - "Oh, yes... I'm sure that you are just dripping with concern for 'the children.' Maybe you can let the kids watch next time you get together for a game of 'Smear the Queer' with your brownshirt friends."

Suggested Reading - Daily KOS, Atrios, TalkLeft, MyDD and Mr. Left, gallow's way, Roadkill, FITS and D2d2.


Don't worry my child D2d2, it won't hurt but a second..

The lies: http://www.ericblumrich.com/right.html

The casualties: http://www.ericblumrich.com/1000.html

There were no lies you delusional dumb f uck. The lies lie in these assinine links you keep posting. Your links will not sway a stable mind but they WILL reenforce a weak emotional mind such as yours. But then links (the words of others) is all you have. Most emotional basket cases have no thoughts of their own and must rely on others to supply the words for them............................

http://www.ericblumrich.com/critics2.html

It seems our friend’s nattering arguments in these narrow constraints of Faux group homeomorphism’s, argue from the overwrought zealotries of restricted visions like D2d2’s examples here, in a mind meld of narrow back alley dark and gloomy alcoves of principal lucidities such as;

As we see as the main intellectual argument vented in the likes of D2d2 and his deluged, is noticeable right off in this mantle of maturity and zealotry, expressed as adolescent ill informed hatred. Pondering one to consider, who among us, is actually acting as if Nazi’s hate merchants against those they disagree with when their view is unshared politically to such extremes as theirs.

Presenting unsupported lies to vent neo-relativist progressive propaganda as below;

Here D2d2’s venting harangues of neo-relativist progressive propaganda degrades Veterans in ALL of America’s wars and lies about the nation’s care for them to boot.

The TRUTH!!

VHA is not unique in facing rapid growth in its medical expenditures. Overall health care expen-
ditures have risen notably faster than the rest of the economy. The Centers for Medicare and Med-
icaid Services (CMS) estimates that from 1980 to 2004, U.S. per capita health care spending grew
at an average annual rate of 7.5 percent, while per capita gross domestic product (GDP) grew at
5.0 percent per year over that same period (see www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData).
Furthermore, CMS currently projects that per capita national health expenditures will rise at an
annual rate of about 6 percent over the next 10 years, compared with a rate of about 4 percent per
year for per capita GDP

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=7398&type=1

Here More Lies, ridicule and degradations of veterans

Here Still, in obvious immature adolescence again, they still cry over losing to this guy they call a stupid moron TWICE?

Here Again, more Child like behavior using Hate and Islam-o-westy Hate filled zealotry as a measure of intellectual righteousness

Hee Lastly using, not rational argument, but childish harangues of immaturity in such terms like IDIOT SONS AND A S S HOLES; leaving one to ponder who this really applies to, eh D2d2 *_^

QUOTE

I imagine one of the reasons people hold to their hate so doggedly is because they have nothing else and know, once that hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with nothing but reality and themselves. -TRADER

D2d2’s Zoomorphism of Hate explained:

TUM DII DAI DII, TUM CHUA DAI CHUA!



THA T
IS
ALL!

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011407D.shtml

QUOTE

The Communalist mindset, An echo, asking a shadow to dance, in a soundless room and a perpetual fog of ambiguity, always assuming substance, but clearly lacking any.-TRADER

LEAD, FOLLOW or GET THE F*CK OUT OF THE WAY!!!





Bush challenges Iraq strategy skeptics

"TO OPPOSE EVERYTHING WHILE PROPOSING NOTHING IS IRRESPONSIBLE," Bush said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070113/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_4



What are the consequences of retreating in defeat from Iraq?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070113/ap_on_...t_if_it_fails_1

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070112/...ngresspresident

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070112/...smcomfortsenemy

Shock and Oil:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle2152438.ece

Kind of like debating with a deaf dumb mute. Anyway, your example doesnt really support your assertions about this being "Bush's War For Profit". The value of the companies shares of stock have been cut by 2/3rds since 2001 and they operated at a loss of $722 million in 2005. MARK

Also in this section
Hippies mark 40th anniversary of San Francisco's Summer of Love
Who will succeed George W Bush?
New York lawyer 'took brothel' from the 'King of all Pimps'
Abducted boy home at last, but why did he not escape?
Bush faces mutiny over extra troops for Iraq


Tis, all of Arabia, Venezuela and others too, so intent by of a whole world’s selfish attentiveness, not for oil, but, bellows yawned in shammed angst, like the world’s selfish attentiveness to belay the angst of Rwanda and nay Dalfour or elsewhere, not for oil, oh so poor.

Who among ALL nations can stand tall without guilt for this attentiveness or inattentiveness of self-addiction, not for oil, only the poor, unknown to oil and the addicts of oil's attentiveness?

$12,000,000 per hour:

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?op...pper&Itemid=182

4.1% of GDP spent on the military in 2005. In 1949 -

1949 4.8
1950 5.0
1951 7.4
1952 13.2
1953 14.2
1954 13.1
1955 10.8
1956 10.0
1957 10.1
1958 10.2
1959 10.0
1960 9.3
1961 9.4
1962 9.2
1963 8.9
1964 8.5
1965 7.4
1966 7.7
1967 8.8
1968 9.4
1969 8.7
1970 8.1
1971 7.3
1972 6.7
1973 5.8
1974 5.5
1975 5.5
1976 5.2
1977 4.9
1978 4.7
1979 4.6
1980 4.9
1981 5.1
1982 5.7
1983 6.1
1984 5.9
1985 6.1
1986 6.2
1987 6.1
1988 5.8
1989 5.6
1990 5.2
1991 4.6
1992 4.8
1993 4.4
1994 4.0

https://cia.gov/cia//publications/factbook/geos/us.html

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-r...-size.php#ref-1

How much did the September 11 terrorist attack cost America?



Counting the value of lives lost as well as property damage and lost production of goods and services, losses already exceed $100 billion. Including the loss in stock market wealth -- the market's own estimate arising from expectations of lower corporate profits and higher discount rates for economic volatility – the price tag approaches $2 trillion.


Among the big-ticket items:

The loss of four civilian aircraft valued at $385 million.

The destruction of major buildings in the World Trade Center with a replacement cost of from $3 billion to $4.5 billion.

Damage to a portion of the Pentagon: up to $1 billion.

Cleanup costs: $1.3 billion.

Property and infrastructure damage: $10 billion to $13 billion.

Federal emergency funds (heightened airport security, sky marshals, government takeover of airport security, retrofitting aircraft with anti-terrorist devices, cost of operations in Afghanistan): $40 billion.

Direct job losses amounted to 83,000, with $17 billion in lost wages.

The amount of damaged or unrecoverable property hit $21.8 billion.

Losses to the city of New York (lost jobs, lost taxes, damage to infrastructure, cleaning): $95 billion.

Losses to the insurance industry: $40 billion.

Loss of air traffic revenue: $10 billion.

Fall of global markets: incalculable.

One of the clearest monthly measures of our economic performance is payroll employment, and recent news is grim. In October, private payroll employment fell by 439,000 jobs--the largest one-month decline in more than fifteen years--and the unemployment rate jumped from 4.9% to 5.4%.

So far, I've focused on the short run, and, admittedly, what we can see looks pretty rocky. But let me turn now to the longer run, where the picture is a good deal more positive. Why? Because there are several important sources of stimulus that should make economic activity rebound.

First, the Fed has cut short-term interest rates ten times since January. The federal funds rate now stands at 2%, compared to 6-1/2% back then. The second source of stimulus is fiscal policy, which is coming in three programs: the major tax reduction in June, including the recent tax rebates, the emergency spending bill enacted just after the attacks, and the fiscal stimulus bill currently in the Congress. These fiscal programs add up to a major amount of stimulus--perhaps around $160 billion in fiscal year 2002. Third, energy prices have declined this year. The price of imported oil has fallen by nearly half since last November, and the price of natural gas has fallen even more dramatically. These price declines give firms and households more purchasing power, and they should help stimulate demand. Fourth, the "overhang" of capital equipment and software, as well as inventories, that I mentioned earlier is one that will correct itself with time. At some point, the stocks of these assets will get to low enough levels that firms will need to start spending on them again. The cost in international markets and internationa trade, tourism and the like, is not readily accountable, but could sum in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economic.../el2001-35.html
http://www.iags.org/costof911.html

Sept. 11 Cost NYC Up To $95 Billion

Officials Warn Economic Rebound May Take Years

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/...ain520844.shtml








TUM DII DAI DII, TUM CHUA DAI CHUA! ฝรง



THA T
IS
ALL!

Trader, you must think we're so dumb and so completely suckered by Bush's lies that we don't know that the hijackers of 9/11 were from the US "ally" Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and not Saddam Hussein who, evil dictator that he was, at least was a hedge against a far greater danger, Iran.

One deplorable situation, the cost of the 9/11 attacks, is no excuse for the existence of another deplorable situation, the insane cost of the lost and pointless Iraq war.

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/faireno...latimes738.html

First of all, the percent of the GDP spent on war is a false statistic. You must include 90% of the interest on the national debt, all veterans pensions, the hidden or 'black' budgets, etc. The fact that it might have been higher once before is like telling an HIV patient that his T-cell count went down, but he's still going to die soon because his count is still way too high.

Since the #s are for comparison between years, your points are irrelevant. And our military expenditures used to be 37.8%. It went down to 3% and recently increased to 4%. We are not going to die soon.
MARK

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Former_C...chief_0118.html

Clarke has got to be one of the most skilled PR people Ive encountered. He was probably the one person in the government most capeable of preventing 9/11 and he failed. And at the same time has masterfully deflected the blame elsewhere.
CSPAN has been running a speech of his at the Center for American Progress.
First, he argued that being bogged down in Iraq prevents us from doing the work that needs to be done to combat terrorism. Then, he lays out his plan for combating terrorism and describes a plan that appears to be identical to what we were doing BEFORE 9/11. Limiting the use of Military to missile strikes as a last resort. Relying upon the countries involved to combat the terrorists on their territory. Using diplomacy to convince them to do so.
??????? Soooo we cant conduct diplomacy or fire missiles on terrorists training camps because we are bogged down in Iraq???Nonsense. We have plenty of idle aircraft to bomb terrorists training camps all day.
And then finally he does give ONE concrete example of what he would do to combat terrorism. Send troops into Somalia????LOLOLOL!!!!!!. That was before the Islamic courts were run out of Somalia with only Ethiopians and one C130 Spectre gun ship. The man is a joke. Wants to fire missiles at Afghanistan and Iraq so we can be free to invade freakin Somalia??? Two days after he made the speech there was no need to invade Somalia. And this is the important work we are prevented from doing because we are bogged down in Iraq. No wonder we were so easily attacked on 9/11. We had this idiot in charge. MARK

You know, guys, calling the President of the United States of America a "liar"...even twice, in a public forum is remarkable. In the rest of the world the person who did that would be be-headed...after being castrated.
Isn't it nice that we have a Christian as President?

Just a thought.....
Bean

If Bush the liar in chief and Gestapo Gonzales get their way and are allowed to keep on trashing the law and the Constitution, you could get arrested and detained forever without legal representation just for wearing your hat backwards.

Bush is ignorant white trash scum and continues to be detested, insulted and ridiculed worldwide by more people and for a longer period of time than any other President in US history. That's not just remarkable, it's an embarrasment and a disaster that this totally evil and incompetent US President has been inflicted on this great country and on this planet.

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fior...positeland.html

8 years of Clinton, possibly the most internationaly popular President ever, and we were repaid with 9/11. Not a single attack since then with the most hated President. Id rather have the hate. MARK

And if we had some ham, we could have ham and eggs if we had the eggs.

http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=10361

????? You dont need the intelligence agencies to determine if you need more troops. The need is plain to see on the streets of Iraq.




Nonsense!



MARK

Some rats know when to get off a sinking ship.

http://www.thinkprogress.org/2007/01/22/wa...raq-resolution/

Bush's escalation plan is like putting more icebergs in front of the Titanic.

There may indeed be both sinking ships and rats. MARK

There is an old commercial about oil-filters where a mechanic said "pay me now...or pay me later".

I think any rational American understands that the "butcher's bill" we are paying now, though tragic, is nothing to what will be paid should we retreat like cowards.

Any rational ideas on how to stop or at least curtail terrorism, or at least to have it impact our "shields" rather than our bread-basket would be much appreciated....most of all by our military who act as our shields.

Please, write or go see a military officer close to you and hand him the ideas. Or, write them here and I will gladly forward them.

Otherwise, quit being silly.
Bean

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/47067/

oh...and don't give me another "twit-link" from your mommie.
Bean

Service Members Rally Against War In Iraq: Video

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012307B.shtml

"...I don't think we've ever had a cohrerent strategy in Iraq...There is no plan...There is no strategy. This is a ping pong game with American lives." Sen. Hagel

http://alternet.org/blogs/video/47169/

Thats nice. And what plan have the Dems proposed for victory? Surly D2 you would like to see the US victorious in Iraq. Wouldn't you??

The recommendations of the Iraq Study group, which were ignored by Bush in his arrogant stupidity, are the most reasonable. The chaos that has resulted from the Bush crime family's greed and incompetence has left us with few if any other options.

"It is over. What we have to face now are the consequence of the folly of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice in launching an unnecessary and unprovoked war, the folly of the neocon snake oil salesmen who bamboozled the media into believing in this insane crusade to bring democracy to Baghdad in the belly of Bradley fighting vehicles and the folly of the Democratic establishment in handing Bush a blank check for war out of political fear of being called unpatriotic." Pat Buchanan

http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10354

"They were over here because we were over there."

http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10391

Y A W N!

ODDLY, WE ARE STILL THERE! ANY IDEA WHY? CAN YOU PREDICT WHEN WE WILL LEAVE AND LATER, THE LIKELY COST IN TREASURE ECONOMY AND LIVES NOT ONLY TO THE USA, THE REGION AND THE WORLD, LATER WHEN AND IF WE LEAVE WITHOUT A STABLE GOVERNMENT?

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/#47271

http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/47366/