Iraq: Who Has the Right Plan?

They use everything as a political tool and that is a huge reason our system is totally broke.
Our system is not totaly broke its still the best in the world even with the problems we do have.

Our system is not totaly broke its still the best in the world even with the problems we do have.

I believe stringly the our system is broke. Whether it is better than anyone else's is irrelevant to me. Our two party system is not representitive of our populus and that is the idea that our government is supposed to be built on. Therefore to me it is broken.

Our two party system is not representitive of our populus and that is the idea that our government is supposed to be built on. Therefore to me it is broken.

How is it not?
Or are you suggesting that we make a third party called "those that don't give a shit" party?

I always find it funny how the left bash Fox, Rush and the other news sources but they defend CNN, ABC, CBS, and the other news which lean sto the left. The one thing about Rush and the other talk shows is that they tell you up front that they lean to the right. The other news sources hide behind the "I'm a reporter and just report the news" then add their left leaning stance on the subject. I myself listen to all kinds of news form Fox, NPR, national news and many other sources. The left on the other hand calls Rush, Hanaty, and other right leaning names as they cannot stand them but then they preach free speech.

I would normally have a lot to say about this, but almost all of it would be Dem bashing, and I'm trying to cut down on that! :D

The more I hear what Biden has to say overall, the more I like him.

That's because his speech was stolen from a Captain and Tenille song.

The difference is that I have a report that tells me that 7 of 16 are going well. You simply have your skepticism to disbelieve that. Skepticism is usually very affected by emotion. I am simply pointing out that you say you "find it hard to believe" yet you gave no resaon why and I suspect it is because you don't really have any concrete reasons.

And where did I say it was going great? Good old fashioned misdirection with that comment if you ask me. Don't have a good argument, then just project an opinion into someone else's argument to weaken it I guess.


Look, I have no problems saying that I was against this war from the start. So yes, my outlook on what the Bush administration tells me is "progress" is a bit jaundiced. Especially when you consider that the "progress" they speak of comes with the price of blood spilled by American troops who never should have been responsible for Iraq's "progress" to begin with.

This never should have been our fight. Iraq posed NO threat to us whatsoever. Overthrowing Saddam upset the balance of power in the middle east. And instead of the misguided hope of making Iran and Syria shake in their boots at the strength and might of American military superiority in that region, they are licking their chops at the prospects of a weakened Iraq and all of their oil reserves.

No matter how they define "progress" -- it was still a dreadful foreign policy decision, it destroyed our credibility in the world, it has emboldened al Queda, increased their recruitment levels, spread our defenses way too thin, and cost the lives of over 3000 Americans and wounded nearly 30,000 more.

So, I stand by my statement. No matter the outcome, the "progress" has come at too high a price.

Beems,

I too was against the war starting, but that has nothing to do with what we need to do from here. I know you will probably reply with "well they were so wrong about the war, why should I trust them now?" To that I would reply (a) Petraeus is not "they" and (b) I don't quite follow the logic "They were wrong then, so they must always be wrong."

i was going to start a new thread from an idea that beems gave me, but i might as well put it here. how would people around here feel if John Kerry, or Al Gore, had lead us into Iraq? somehow, i think the feelings would be alittle different

i was going to start a new thread from an idea that beems gave me, but i might as well put it here. how would people around here feel if John Kerry, or Al Gore, had lead us into Iraq? somehow, i think the feelings would be alittle different

You're so right. The sentiment would have been Liberals are trying to prove they're warhawks by invading Iraq, when they're not. George Bush would have done things differently if he were in office.

But you know, hindsight is always 20/20.

i was going to start a new thread from an idea that beems gave me, but i might as well put it here. how would people around here feel if John Kerry, or Al Gore, had lead us into Iraq? somehow, i think the feelings would be alittle different

Republicans have always supported Democratic Presidents in times of war. Even when Clinton went into Bosnia, his strongest supporters were the hated neo-cons. Wilson, FDR, and Truman also had the support of Republicans in fighting their wars. The opposition of the Democrats to a President during wartime has been more common. They oppossed Lincoln in fighting slavery. They oppossed Johnson and Nixon in figting communism in Southeast Asia, and they have oppossed Bush in trying to bring Democracy to Iraq. So, yes things would have been much different.