StevePhelps 0 #1 April 21, 2004 The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records. It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick. It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unstable 9 #2 April 21, 2004 Ahhh, yes - It's so nice to have these things put into perspective.....=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #3 April 21, 2004 The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... QuoteIt took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. hmmmm..well its been over a year now in Iraq...and we're gonna have troops in there fighting for another year at least before that last helicopter finally leaves Saigon Baghdad. And this mad little adventure has just added fuel to the fire for a whole new batch of aspiring Osama wannabes. "Mission accomplished" my ass!! Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #4 April 21, 2004 >It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the > Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. You might want to tell that to some of the right-wingers around here. They keep claiming the war is still going on. >We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less > time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing > records. Of course, the difference there is that the records actually existed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #5 April 21, 2004 how long were we in Japan, Bill? We're still in Germany, was there no exit plan? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #6 April 21, 2004 QuoteOf course, the difference there is that the records actually existed Yeah they had to take time to clean and recreate them right?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #7 April 21, 2004 um....I'm sorry, but when my friends are still over there getting shot at, we're still at war. We may have "taken" Iraq, but until we give it back, the war is still going on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #8 April 21, 2004 QuoteIt took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!! you think Iraqe is taken??? do you think the soldiers think the same? becours USA says the war is over dosnt mean that its ended... I do think there still is war as there still is war actions down there.. each week us troops and other troops loss soldiers down there they dont loss life to trafic acsidents.. they are killed by weappons.. they are soldiers killed by other fighting for their(in their oppinion)rights down there,that is werry much war... Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StevePhelps 0 #9 April 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteIt took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!! you think Iraqe is taken??? do you think the soldiers think the same? Being ex military myself (5th SFG) I know the difference in the language I used. I said "take" not "war ended" Yes, I believe 100% of our soldiers would say we have "taken" Iraq. Now granted, there is much more to accomplish, but we have "taken" Iraq Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #10 April 21, 2004 >how long were we in Japan, Bill? We're still in Germany, was there no >exit plan? So do I hear you saying the war is now over in Iraq, and we are in the occupation phase? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #11 April 21, 2004 but what can i say i have never been in military just how i thourght they must think.. Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #12 April 21, 2004 Just saying it takes time to set things up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #13 April 21, 2004 QuoteThe Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. Well duh! That's because the Branch Davidians had scarier weapons than Saddam Hussein. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StevePhelps 0 #14 April 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. Well duh! That's because the Branch Davidians had scarier weapons than Saddam Hussein. Blues, Dave now THAT was funny! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #15 April 21, 2004 >Just saying it takes time to set things up. I agree there. But are you saying the war is over? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
damion75 0 #16 April 22, 2004 Quote>Just saying it takes time to set things up. I agree there. But are you saying the war is over? Sure the war is over - Dubbya said so in what, April last year? I know I for one believe him! After all, we are all sitting out here drinking cold cold beers round the pool and working on our sun tans while we watch the journalists rehashing Schwarzenegger movies to put on the news! Yep - we're done here.*************** Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #17 April 22, 2004 QuoteQuote>Just saying it takes time to set things up. I agree there. But are you saying the war is over? Sure the war is over - Dubbya said so in what, April last year? I know I for one believe him! When did the President say that? What did the President say?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #18 April 22, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote>Just saying it takes time to set things up. I agree there. But are you saying the war is over? Sure the war is over - Dubbya said so in what, April last year? I know I for one believe him! When did the President say that? What did the President say? The above bolded statement is a crock-'o-shit lie. I remember the President talking about a "long road ahead". Anyone else remember that? . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #19 April 22, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Just saying it takes time to set things up. I agree there. But are you saying the war is over? Sure the war is over - Dubbya said so in what, April last year? I know I for one believe him! When did the President say that? What did the President say? The above bolded statement is a crock-'o-shit lie. I remember the President talking about a "long road ahead". Anyone else remember that? Just so the revisionists don't get carried away, Bush's announcement was that there was a end "to major combat operations". Not an end to the war.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #20 April 22, 2004 > Bush's announcement was that there was a end "to major combat > operations". Not an end to the war. I thought that was clever of him. That way he can make that announcement over and over. If the truce in Fallujah falls apart, perhaps in a month or so he can make it again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #21 April 22, 2004 QuoteThat way he can make that announcement over and over. When did he make it twice? . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #22 April 22, 2004 From AP: "The U.S. military has warned that major fighting could resume if the agreement fails. (Fallujah) leaders negotiated the deal with U.S. officials, but the Americans say much hinges on whether the guerrillas comply." As far as I can tell this will be the second time that major fighting resumed, which means one more opportunity to announce the end of major combat. The more times it ends the better, right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #23 April 22, 2004 This semantic debate is part of the problem with the way Americans get things done. If you had your way, everyone would have to write an encyclopedia about what they meant by saying "good-bye". Did you say that meaning "...until tomorrow" or forever? And what was that tone you used. Or how about the fact that coffee is hot and it might burn you, nah, we're all too stupid to know that so lets sue someone and make a warning label saying hot stuff is hot and will burn you. If you step back and take a breath, you could MORE reasonably assume that an "end to major combat operations" means that we are no longer fighting a concentrated and coordinated national army. Instead, you and others chose to hear "the fighting is over, no one else will die, I promise." As for your AP quote... if I'm arguing with a friend and then it becomes a "major fight", you'd probably get it, right? Put it into context... "major fighting" could resume IN FALLUJAH. Not in all of Iraq. You can't tell me that you're going to keep arguing that Bush said the war was over.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #24 April 22, 2004 >If you had your way, everyone would have to write an encyclopedia >about what they meant by saying "good-bye". I'm good with just a dictionary, thanks. >Instead, you and others chose to hear "the fighting is over, no one >else will die, I promise." No, I heard that major combat operations were over. Apparently they were not. That's fine; he made a mistake. Everyone does. The right thing to do is to say "Hey, we made a mistake, no one could have predicted this sort of resistance, we're working on a solution." The wrong thing to do is to start with the revisionism. "Well, when we said major fighting we meant major nationwide fighting, not major fighting just in the larger cities . . ." >You can't tell me that you're going to keep arguing that Bush said >the war was over. I never said that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #25 April 22, 2004 Like I said, to me and many others, you could MORE reasonably have interpreted that his statement did not mean all fighting was done, but that our forces are no longer fighting to "take" the government of Iraq. You hear what gives you an argument. I hear what I think is a reasonable interpretation. Quote>You can't tell me that you're going to keep arguing that Bush said >the war was over. I never said that. But you're doing it.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
