How John McCain Could Seal His Victory...

[Pale Rider]

... by saying, "I will work to end the war in Iraq as soon as possible."

That would do it, because I believe the MAJORITY of why people are behind this little lop eared, racist, America church hating ultra liberal hussein, is because he's said he'll get our troops out of Iraq immediately. This occupying, nation building and war mongering is what people are sick of. We've had far too many years of it, spent far too much money it, and for fucking WHAT?

[mundame]

... by saying, "I will work to end the war in Iraq as soon as possible."

That would do it, because I believe the MAJORITY of why people are behind this little lop eared, racist, America church hating ultra liberal hussein, is because he's said he'll get our troops out of Iraq immediately. This occupying, nation building and war mongering is what people are sick of. We've had far too many years of it, spent far too much money it, and for fucking WHAT?


Sure. The newest poll says 80% of Americans are unhappy with the direction of the country! I think McCain would win if he could make the case that he'll get us out of the war.

Instead, the fool says he wants a 100-year occupation of Iraq ------------ and what he doesn't say, but what everybody realizes, is that he's willing to have a hundred years of this same war we're having now, at least during his whole administration, in order to GET to that occupation!

The occupation wouldn't be the problem: it's the forever war-war-war-war for decades and maybe a draft to manufacture the cannon fodder to GET to the occupation that people don't like.

I'd vote for McCain if he convincingly promised to get out of the war as soon as he was president, doot squat.

As it is now, I'll never vote for him. What gall! He's running for president on a platform of continuing forever what we most hate??? Darn. That really does take gall.

[theHawk]

Yes, we should end the war in Iraq. But we'd have to take out Iran before we left the Middle East.

[red states rule]

The best way he can seal the deal is to pick Michael Steele as his VP

[Gaffer]

iraq is a front in a global war. Why shut down a front when the rest of the war is still on going. It's going to be a long war, decades and decades, until the world wakes up to what islam is. Until islam is eliminated the war will go on. When the fighting is finished in iraq it will be on going in some other country. Fundimental islam needs to be erraticated. That's what we are really fighting and will take the better part of the century to defeat. McCains right in the statement it will take 100 years. But it won't just be in iraq.

[red states rule]

iraq is a front in a global war. Why shut down a front when the rest of the war is still on going. It's going to be a long war, decades and decades, until the world wakes up to what islam is. Until islam is eliminated the war will go on. When the fighting is finished in iraq it will be on going in some other country. Fundimental islam needs to be erraticated. That's what we are really fighting and will take the better part of the century to defeat. McCains right in the statement it will take 100 years. But it won't just be in iraq.

Meanwhile Hillary and Obama want to run away from Iarq, stick their head in the sand and pretend their is no threat, and offer the terrorists understand and therapy so they will no longer hate us

[Pale Rider]

I don't see China in this war. I don't see Japan in this war. I don't see much of Europe in this war. I don't see Africa in this war. Why is it America has to be the only aggressor in this war? Why is America going it alone? Maybe we need to back off to get the rest of world engaged? Ya think?

We're an occupying Army. We are nation building. Show me where it says that is our duty in our constitution. Show me where our founding fathers said that's what we should do. Where and who decided America should be the world aggressors and war mongers.

At the present rate of cost of this war, America will CERTAINLY collapse, if "decades and decades" is what you people think we need to maintain. We can't. We don't have that much money, we don't have that big of a military, we don't have people that will join the military to fight. Commanders on the ground have been warning for a few YEARS now, of severe shortages in personal, and equipment that is wearing out. I don't know what part about, "WE CAN'T MAINTAIN THIS WAR EITHER MILITARY WISE OR MONETARY WISE" you people don't understand.

Our economy is "wobbly" as recently described just now on the news, and you want to keep pumping money into Iraq? I don't get it.

[red states rule]

I don't see China in this war. I don't see Japan in this war. I don't see much of Europe in this war. I don't see Africa in this war. Why is it America has to be the only aggressor in this war? Why is America going it alone? Maybe we need to back off to get the rest of world engaged? Ya think?

We're an occupying Army. We are nation building. Show me where it says that is our duty in our constitution. Show me where our founding fathers said that's what we should do. Where and who decided America should be the world aggressors and war mongers.

We are killing and capturing our enemies Pale. I know you and I are on opposite ends on this issue

If we pull out before the job is done, all we are doing is giving the terrorists and entire counytry to use a s abase of operations

They will have oil money to fianced their operatons

And anyone who sided with the US will be murdered. The liberal media will gleefully show the video and blame Bush for it - even though it wil be the Dems who surrender and signed the death warrents

By leaving Pale (with all due respect my friend) we are showing we do not have the guts tio hang in there and finish them off

Then they will come here again as they did on 9-11

[Pale Rider]

I'm voting for Ron Paul, period.

[red states rule]

I'm voting for Ron Paul, period.

That is your right Pale. I am not sure who I will vote for

Just in case, what is your last name Mr President?

[5stringJeff]

iraq is a front in a global war. Why shut down a front when the rest of the war is still on going.

Because we've won on this front. Iraq's government is in the hands of moderate, peace-loving Iraqis, who are able to fight the extremists within the country's borders. That's success in this war - moderate Muslims standing up to and fighting extremist Muslims. We've done our duty, and now it's time to move on.

[5stringJeff]

I'm voting for Ron Paul, period.

As someone who's as fed up with the war in Iraq and illegals as I am, I'd really ask you to consider voting Libertarian.

[Pale Rider]

We are killing and capturing our enemies Pale. I know you and I are on opposite ends on this issue

If we pull out before the job is done, all we are doing is giving the terrorists and entire counytry to use a s abase of operations

They will have oil money to fianced their operatons

And anyone who sided with the US will be murdered. The liberal media will gleefully show the video and blame Bush for it - even though it wil be the Dems who surrender and signed the death warrents

By leaving Pale (with all due respect my friend) we are showing we do not have the guts tio hang in there and finish them off

Then they will come here again as they did on 9-11

See that's my point. "We ARE done." We accomplished the "mission" long, LONG ago. We are an occupying force and nation building at this moment, and we should NOT be doing that. 80% of the nation is now against this occupying and nation building, and that little lop eared racist hussein is keenly aware of this, so what does he say today, he says that we should start pulling troops out of Iraq "immediately!" Not after the election, NOW! And it shouldn't take me or any other pundit or commentator to tell all you people that for that reason, he is enjoying his popularity. He's a racist? Who cares. He's a liberal? WHO CARES! He'll pull out the troops immediately... EVERYBODY CARES!

[Pale Rider]

As someone who's as fed up with the war in Iraq and illegals as I am, I'd really ask you to consider voting Libertarian.

Who was that guy you found Jeff, and started a thread on him? You should bump that to the front and put a "sticky" on it... :D

[Gaffer]

I don't see China in this war. I don't see Japan in this war. I don't see much of Europe in this war. I don't see Africa in this war. Why is it America has to be the only aggressor in this war? Why is America going it alone? Maybe we need to back off to get the rest of world engaged? Ya think?

We're an occupying Army. We are nation building. Show me where it says that is our duty in our constitution. Show me where our founding fathers said that's what we should do. Where and who decided America should be the world aggressors and war mongers.

At the present rate of cost of this war, America will CERTAINLY collapse, if "decades and decades" is what you people think we need to maintain. We can't. We don't have that much money, we don't have that big of a military, we don't have people that will join the military to fight. Commanders on the ground have been warning for a few YEARS now, of severe shortages in personal, and equipment that is wearing out. I don't know what part about, "WE CAN'T MAINTAIN THIS WAR EITHER MILITARY WISE OR MONETARY WISE" you people don't understand.

Our economy is "wobbly" as recently described just now on the news, and you want to keep pumping money into Iraq? I don't get it.

China is our enemy. At least their government is. They support our enemies in order to undermine us. And there is a lot of fighting going on in western china that you don't hear about between the government and the islamists there.

Japan does not have an army, they have a defense force, and their Constitution doesn't allow them to use the defense force in offensive actions. They do contribute money and non-combat troops.

I agree a nuke or two in the right place in the middle east would be the effective way to deal with things. But that is not pc. The other option is nation building, which takes decades and costs a lot of money. We can't maintain the level of occupation we have now. But by securing the area and letting them do their own securing and policing we will gradually cut back our costs.

1000 iraqi run aways and deserters. That's not too bad considering its their first real action on their own.

[Kathianne]

...

1000 iraqi run aways and deserters. That's not too bad considering its their first real action on their own.

You are not the only one thinking this!

http://www.newsweek.com/id/130347


The Basra Model

The tough stand of Iraq's army, with U.S. air support, could be America's way out. But will we give them the munitions and armor they need?
Michael Hirsh
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 6:10 PM ET Apr 3, 2008

The outcome of the Battle of Basra is still unclear. But as things stabilize in that critical city—the southern gateway to Iraq's oil wealth—Basra may well turn out to be Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's Kasserine Pass. That notorious battle, which took place in Tunisia in late February 1943, marked the first large-scale encounter between untested American troops and the battle-hardened Germans. The Americans, to put it mildly, did not do well. But they quickly fired incompetent commanders, adjusted in tactics, and never lost another major battle. In Basra the nascent Iraqi Army—also riddled with incompetence and self-doubt—actually came out looking better against Iraq's well-established militias than the American Army had 65 years earlier against the entrenched Nazis, says retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey. "At Kasserine we got our asses kicked. These people didn't," McCaffrey says.

Despite a spate of early grim assessments of Basra in the U.S. media, U.S. military observers on the ground in Iraq are more sanguine, says McCaffrey, who has long been a critic of the war. Yes, Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militia has held on to its weapons and much of its turf. But Iraqi forces appear to be largely in control of the city and its ports, and Basra is still mostly calm. Even more important, the Iraqi security forces have remained mostly intact. Rather than bolting or deserting in droves, as happened so many times in the past, only in relatively small numbers did some Iraqis desert to the other side, McCaffrey told me. That's a big step forward. "On balance it appears as if the Iraqi security forces for the first time stepped up, largely independently of the United States, and tried to establish law and order in the most important city in the country save Baghdad," says McCaffrey, who recently canvassed top U.S. military commanders in Iraq.

If McCaffrey's assessment of the Battle of Basra holds—and we won't really know for months whether it does—it suggests something even more important. With proper equipment, artillery, armor and medical evacuation (medevac) units—and the United States acting as its air force—the Iraqi Army could actually begin to develop enough competence to permit a larger drawdown of American ground forces soon...

[5stringJeff]

Who was that guy you found Jeff, and started a thread on him? You should bump that to the front and put a "sticky" on it... :D

I didn't stick it, but here's the thread for Wayne Allyn Root (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=12669).

[Pale Rider]

China is our enemy. At least their government is. They support our enemies in order to undermine us. And there is a lot of fighting going on in western china that you don't hear about between the government and the islamists there.

Japan does not have an army, they have a defense force, and their Constitution doesn't allow them to use the defense force in offensive actions. They do contribute money and non-combat troops.

I agree a nuke or two in the right place in the middle east would be the effective way to deal with things. But that is not pc. The other option is nation building, which takes decades and costs a lot of money. We can't maintain the level of occupation we have now. But by securing the area and letting them do their own securing and policing we will gradually cut back our costs.

1000 iraqi run aways and deserters. That's not too bad considering its their first real action on their own.

No matter how you slice it Gaf, our military needs a badly needed breather, not to mention this occupation and nation building is extremely unpopular, and for good reason, and VERY expensive. We need to repair and replace worn out equipment, and troops. Let either hussein or hitlery get into office, and our troops will get a rest, but all that worn out equipment will never be replaced. It'll just be let go, and they'll take it a step further and do even more gutting of the military, because we all know... "liberals HATE the military." Just when we need a LARGER military, we've already seen those greasy old hippies the clintons gut the military, and I don't think hussein would be any better. Maybe even worse judging by the level of America hating rhetoric and racism is spewed at his church.

[Gaffer]

No matter how you slice it Gaf, our military needs a badly needed breather, not to mention this occupation and nation building is extremely unpopular, and for good reason, and VERY expensive. We need to repair and replace worn out equipment, and troops. Let either hussein or hitlery get into office, and our troops will get a rest, but all that worn out equipment will never be replaced. It'll just be let go, and they'll take it a step further and do even more gutting of the military, because we all know... "liberals HATE the military." Just when we need a LARGER military, we've already seen those greasy old hippies the clintons gut the military, and I don't think hussein would be any better. Maybe even worse judging by the level of America hating rhetoric and racism is spewed at his church.

Your dead on with that Pale. They would gut the military and I would bet there would be multiple attacks on this country within two years of their taking office, and there would be no retaliation.

Granted the military needs a break. But they are not nearly as bad off as you have been led to believe.

The thing to remember is after serving your tour to can get out of the military. The ones staying in far exceed the quotas. Morale is still high and they are meeting all their new recruitment quotas as well. If the military was so broken they would not be getting those numbers. Deployment sucks, but its part of the job and they accept that.

Equipment that wears out gets replaced. That's a fact. That's where the war costs come in, replacing damaged and worn out equipment. Things get refitted and improved. Look at the B-52. They are still in use today. A refitted and improved version.

[red states rule]

See that's my point. "We ARE done." We accomplished the "mission" long, LONG ago. We are an occupying force and nation building at this moment, and we should NOT be doing that. 80% of the nation is now against this occupying and nation building, and that little lop eared racist hussein is keenly aware of this, so what does he say today, he says that we should start pulling troops out of Iraq "immediately!" Not after the election, NOW! And it shouldn't take me or any other pundit or commentator to tell all you people that for that reason, he is enjoying his popularity. He's a racist? Who cares. He's a liberal? WHO CARES! He'll pull out the troops immediately... EVERYBODY CARES!

Well PAle, we will never agree on this - but I think we are doing what is needed in Iraq. If we were not there, we may have had more attacks here in the US

I voted for Pres Bush a scond time for 2 reasons

4 more years of tax cuts

4 more years of dead terrorists

[Pale Rider]

Your dead on with that Pale. They would gut the military and I would bet there would be multiple attacks on this country within two years of their taking office, and there would be no retaliation.

Granted the military needs a break. But they are not nearly as bad off as you have been led to believe.
Actually I'm just going by what I've heard from Commanders over and over... "we're stretched real thin and equipment is wearing out."


The thing to remember is after serving your tour to can get out of the military. The ones staying in far exceed the quotas. Morale is still high and they are meeting all their new recruitment quotas as well. If the military was so broken they would not be getting those numbers. Deployment sucks, but its part of the job and they accept that.
That's not what I hear.... http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0930270020070709


Equipment that wears out gets replaced. That's a fact. That's where the war costs come in, replacing damaged and worn out equipment. Things get refitted and improved. Look at the B-52. They are still in use today. A refitted and improved version.
That's not what I hear either...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/04/AR2006120401347.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-25-old-equipment_x.htm

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002772.html

Our military recruitment numbers are in the toilet, and our equipment hasn't been this shot and worn out since the end of the Viet Nam war. Experts and Commanders on the ground have been warning that we can NOT keep up this pace indefinitely, but nobody seems to be listening, especially bush. But that doesn't surprise me. He doesn't give a damn about what any of American people say, like his VP, "Dick," who when asked about how they felt about the majority of Americans being sick of this occupying and nation building, his reply was, "so."

Our dollar is sinking, our nation is being invaded, our jobs are going over seas, and our politicians spend money like there is no end to it, and you guys still believe what we need to do is occupy and nation build ANOTHER COUNTRY?

What about America?