Reality begins to creep in

[billvon 3,110]

For a long time the adminstration has stuck to its original war propaganda about glorious democracy in the Middle East, stability and prosperity for the people of Iraq, and the merging of the war in Iraq with the war on terror. Many of the people here (me included) who suggested that maybe things aren't going so great have been ridiculed. "Why don't you post about the new power plant they opened? Things are going great in Iraq! Not like wha the liberal media wants you to believe."

Turns out things _are_ going badly, and the administration is finally starting to see the light. (Or is finally admitting it, which comes to about the same thing.) They're starting to admit that they aren't going to achieve all the goals they've been touting for years, and the goals they do achieve are going to have to be far more modest. This is good news; they will achieve far more by dealing with reality than by pretending that serious problems don't exist. I'm just sorry so many of our troops (and so many Iraqis) had to die before we started seeing the real picture.

Pro-Bushies, start your engines!

------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved in Iraq
Administration Is Shedding 'Unreality' That Dominated Invasion, Official Says

The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

--------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300853.html

[justinb138 0]

Quote

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

That's not happening here, how could anyone honestly think it would happen there?

[AlexCrowley 0]

It's like the difference between 'finding WMDS' and finding 'evidence of a WMD program'.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Mike111 0]

lol im a pro-bushie, and therefore disagree.

Its very easy for people in hindsight to say "well its not going great". They can probably see that. But what use is it?

We are there now, so i would think it would be better to think of solutions rather than say the obvious + do the troops really need all the bickering going on at home, as if there job isnt stressful enough.

+ now they have to be more modest about their hopes, did you expect to achieve a lot or did you always think there would only be modets gains?

The problem is now, the media have so much damn access that they report everything, so every casulaty is reported making it seem like a lot. There is no easy way to say this but in comparison with other campagins the Americans have done very well with little losses- 60,000 lost FIRST DAY of the Somme on the UK, in a smile battle aread, never mind 2,000 in IRAQ - = country.

BY modern wars, it is helluva a lot, by older ones, it isn;t

I mean. all the lives that have been lost are veyr upsetting and indded VERY VERY VERY trajic. but a lot more were lost elsewhere - vietmnam - 60,000.

That is not meant to piss anyone off. it is just the fatcs. Please do not assume im trolling or stirring up shit. + this is not an attack AT ALL, if it comes across as one then im very sorry

Just giving me 0.02
Thanks

[waltappel 1]

You forgot to use the [gloat]...[/gloat] markup tags

Walt

[billvon 3,110]

>They can probably see that. But what use is it?

Once you admit you have a problem you can fix it.

>so i would think it would be better to think of solutions rather than
>say the obvious . . .

Well:

1. If the right could stop attacking people for saying the obvious there would be a lot more energy available to solve the problem

2. Sometimes you have to make the right decisions UP FRONT. If you get a woman drunk, have sex with her, wait until she's eight months pregnant, then say "I can't afford a baby! Why won't anyone help me with a solution right now?" you're not going to get many good answers. The best time to fix that problem was eight months ago. Your options are pretty limited after you get her pregnant and then wait eight months (or invade, kill tens of thousands, then wait two years.)

>do the troops really need all the bickering going on at home, as if
>there job isnt stressful enough.

If bickering at home will get them home sooner, then they need it desperately. Business as usual sure isn't doing the job.

>did you expect to achieve a lot or did you always think there
>would only be modets gains?

I always thought we would have severe and intractable problems if we occupied Iraq. I was drowned out by the people saying we would be welcomed as liberators and it wouldn't be an occupation; it would be a liberation. But none of that really matters now; it's water under the bridge.

[Alias 0]

Great! Now the goal can be reality based and the US can start bringing our troops out of there and stop "re-enlisting" them as seen fit.

btw...some of us really did see this coming and have consistently shared that opinion here.

Bout time!

Carpe Diem

[Mike111 0]

War is alwasy an emotional topic, and i do disagree. but ill remove it cos i dont; wanna cause any trouble.

I fully respect your oppinion and your frustrations,

Ignoring the fact that i do fully respect you and your oppinion would be unfair.

I hope no offence was taken, but there was no intention of any. i do hope you see that.

Anyway, point taken.
Thanks

[Darius11 12]

It was WMDs then it was getting rid of Sadam, then it was saving the people of Iraq and making a democracy.
I wonder if the Bush lovers will ever be able to admit they were wrong. They believed there beloved president who lied to them, maybe he didn’t lie but stupidly is not a good excuse for someone who is running the country.
I know you, my self and a bunch of others on here are not surprised at all.


Let the excuses and the re-translation of there own words begin.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Mike111 0]

i dunnno if you read what i wrote, and obviosely this is a very personal topic with many people , and quite rightly so.

I dunno if youre referring specifically to what iw rote, but i did write was fair in both tone and language.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO OFFEND ANYONE, and honestryly i don;t think i did. IT wasn;t a post with an attack on anyone or any values . It was polite, but just giving a conflicting oppinion to what yourself and others heard.

You might hate bush, as do many other people, probably the majority of the US do, but it is still important to respetc the supporters of him - i aint' even American - point being we have no influence on the campaign of what he does so you can;t really blame us (and if you are having a subtle go at me well im in england so have no infleucen whatsoever on the USA elections).

Geez, i know things can get hot in here, but we can still discuss calmy.

Sorry if ive taken yopur post the wrong way.

Please don't hammer me for it, i meant no harm.

If i was wrong in posting what i did, then ill gladly apologise for that. Im not arrogant and will readily admit when i am wrong.

Thankyou,

Mike

[billvon 3,110]

>I hope no offence was taken, but there was no intention of any. i do
>hope you see that.

No offense was taken, and there's no need to remove your post. Your post was well thought out and did not involve any attacks. I got a little upset when we were talking about reporting on US troops because I know some families who have lost loved ones, and it's a very personal issue for them. But it's unfair to use that in an online argument (since you don't know me or my situation) so I've deleted that part of my reply.

[Mike111 0]

Thankyou for your reply.
I must admit, i don't even know you but still hold a lot of respect for you because you seem very fair.

Im glad you didn't take offence, cos that really wasn't my intention
But glad it is resolved
Take care,

Mike

[Everon 0]

He did lie, and he wasn't the only one. Immediately after 9/11, Rumsfeld ordered intel to gather everything they could on Iraq. They never thought about the consequences. Experienced military strategists insist that this could take 10 years or more, and who's to say it will ever be completed? Maybe this problem, even acknowledged, can never be "fixed."

By the way, there are no soldiers to spare at this date, and Bush is already talking "force" against Iran. If fighting Iraq would be like fighting me, then fighting Iran will be like fighting Muhammed Ali. What a dangerous moron this guy is.

[Darius11 12]

It was not pointed at you and I was not mad or offended.
Trust me there are many on here that will do there best to hit below the belt, I didn't see you as one of them.

My frustration was not pointed at you. It is pointed to the people who were on here before we started the war. Who were arguing how we would be welcomed and the war would be over within a year and every thing would be peachy. The people who wanted the war and thought it was a good idea. My frustration was pointed to the people who believed that Iraq was a danger to the US and no matter what the world said they were so sure of there president and unable to open there eyes. It just sucks when people think there right and lose there common-since. We have so many dead people now, so many lives changed forever and for what? I wonder if the people who supported this war hadn’t how many lives would have been saved.
How much money would have been saved and could have been put to finding OBL or helping the many issues we have right here at home.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[AlexCrowley 0]

Quote

By the way, there are no soldiers to spare at this date, and Bush is already talking "force" against Iran. If fighting Iraq would be like fighting me, then fighting Iran will be like fighting Muhammed Ali. What a dangerous moron this guy is.

Good grief, grow up hippy! take a look at the map, they're right next door!

Some people just can't think think things through.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Everon 0]

And much more powerful than Iraq!

[Gawain 0]

Ahh the Washington Post, a model of balance along the lines of the NY Times and LA Times.

I can't wait to get over there and see what's really happening. I'll take the words of veterans that have been there over the shrill of the press any day of the week.

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!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Would somebody wake me up when the lefties figure out we aren't fighting Iraqis anymore and this is a new war and a different enemy?

Thank-you. Stick a tampon in it and carry-on.

[billvon 3,110]

>Would somebody wake me up when the lefties figure out we aren't
>fighting Iraqis anymore and this is a new war and a different enemy?

Cool! Is this the latest rationale? "We won that war and now we're fighting a NEW war!" How many wars did we win in Vietnam?

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

>Would somebody wake me up when the lefties figure out we aren't
>fighting Iraqis anymore and this is a new war and a different enemy?

Cool! Is this the latest rationale? "We won that war and now we're fighting a NEW war!" How many wars did we win in Vietnam?

Uh... I don't mean to interrupt here, but could someone please make sure the French get blamed for something in this new war? Anything? Please?

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[Everon 0]

So we "aren't fighting the Iraqis anymore?" What's the NEW reason for which we're there?

[billvon 3,110]

>What's the NEW reason for which we're there?

Perhaps the bullet-sponge theory? Or perhaps we misplaced some of our WMD's again.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Well, I know this is really hard to understand and I know how much the lefties like to attack anyone who disagrees with this little Bushbashfest but..

PSSSSTTTT....we went to war in March 2003 against a guy named Saddam Hussein. We defeated him and the Iraqi Army. What we are fighting now is insurgents funded in large part by Iran, Syria and perhaps China. Now I understand thats hard to get little lefty brains around because it goes against the well developed ability to blame Bush for all the worlds ills like they seen to want to do by forgetting things like PDD 24. So go ahead. Perhaps a few well placed high-fives will help.

[Botellines 0]

Quote

What we are fighting now is insurgents funded in large part by Iran, Syria and perhaps China.

China?, What the fuck do they have to do with this?

Dude, Terrorism is not funded by any of those government. At most, they can turn a blind eye on their actions. Terrorism is mostly funded by legal people that support their cause. When i say legal i mean people that do bussiness with you and me and are not searched by international law.

In first place they don´t need that much money to do a terrorist action, and secondly, no government will ever want nowadays to be compromised by being caught supporting terrorist actions. The only possible exception is the U.S.A with the Contra and the IRA.

I know there is a big distrust from the U.S towards China due to economical reasons, but i think that If Iran could give a severe beating to the U.S troops, with China you would get MAD. But somehow i think you guys have more to loose.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Well, I know this is really hard to understand and I know how much the lefties like to attack anyone who disagrees with this little Bushbashfest but..

PSSSSTTTT....we went to war in March 2003 against a guy named Saddam Hussein. We defeated him and the Iraqi Army. What we are fighting now is insurgents funded in large part by Iran, Syria and perhaps China. Now I understand thats hard to get little lefty brains around because it goes against the well developed ability to blame Bush for all the worlds ills like they seen to want to do by forgetting things like PDD 24. So go ahead. Perhaps a few well placed high-fives will help.

And like NOBODY predicted that this would end in a quagmire.

Do you really believe the tripe you just wrote?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.