Bush's latest crappy speech

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's terrible. Shut the  up about Iraq having to do with September 11th already! Bush has absolutely no good plan for Iraq. What do you expect from a chickenhawk?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/28/195710/973

[A18]

It's terrible. Shut the  up about everything already!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?

[Blue Rectangle]

Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.

He gave the speech at a red part of a red state to specially chosen people, and no questions were asked of him, and he messed up the reading of the speech, which he didn't write. He gave no plan for an exit strategy, and instead relied on mentioning 9/11 and terrorism, when he ignored the 8/06/01 memo warning of imminent attack on the US by Al Qaeda. I don't believe in hell, but may he spend an eternity there anyways.

[TX_1824]

We will see the typical response from both sides of the debate. Republicans, overall, will praise it. Democrats, overall, will criticize it. Politics as usual. Wake me up when a real debate occurs. Zzzzzz...........

[Blue Rectangle]

Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.

He gave the speech at a red part of a red state to specially chosen people...

OK, so going to a state or city populated with the opposing party makes you a big man?  Where was the 2004 RNC?  How about the 2004 DNC?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.

He gave the speech at a red part of a red state to specially chosen people...

OK, so going to a state or city populated with the opposing party makes you a big man?  Where was the 2004 RNC?  How about the 2004 DNC?

The conventions were indoors and had lots of security to get there. Kerry had a lot of outdoors campaign events.

[A18]

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

What, did even the media get sick of Bush?

[A18]

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

What, did even the media get sick of Bush?

I know you read rather neutral material like DailyKOS, but I was referring to the mainstream, liberal media.

"Bush refuses to set timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq"

Great job completely missing the point of the speech.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

What, did even the media get sick of Bush?

I know you read rather neutral material like DailyKOS, but I was referring to the mainstream, liberal media.

"Bush refuses to set timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq"

Great job completely missing the point of the speech.

Then what the  was the point of the speech?


Gallup poll from June 16th-19th.
"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war with Iraq?"
37% favor, 59% oppose.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

[A18]

Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

1. The main reason given for going to war with Iraq was WMD. Where the  are they?

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

4. Bush ignored the 8/06/01 memo, making people like this happy.

[The Duke]

Is anyone else ashamed that John Kerry is a US Senator after he blamed Iraqis for things being hard in Iraq?

On the Senate floor he siad this.  I wonder if he knows that Iraqi soldiers toook 80% of the military casualties this month.

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

That's not what General Franks told Senator Bob Grapham. He was upsetabout how plans in iraq were distracting from the war on terror in Afganistan. I suppose it'd be too much to expect a Bush apoligist like you to understand.

[A18]

Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

1. The main reason given for going to war with Iraq was WMD. Where the  are they?

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

4. Bush ignored the 8/06/01 memo, making people like this happy.

How is any of that a response to what I said?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

1. The main reason given for going to war with Iraq was WMD. Where the  are they?

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

4. Bush ignored the 8/06/01 memo, making people like this happy.

How is any of that a response to what I said?

Let me spell my argument out very clearly for you. Iraq is not useful to the war on terror.

[The Duke]

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

That's not what General Franks told Senator Bob Grapham. He was upsetabout how plans in iraq were distracting from the war on terror in Afganistan. I suppose it'd be too much to expect a Bush apoligist like you to understand.

I read Tommy Franks' book, where he says that he advised the invasion of Iraq all along after 9/11.  I also saw his endorsement of the President in the 2004 campaign.  Its a little unconvincing to say he somehow didn't like the policy he himself had crafted and the policy he has continued to advocate since leaving government service.

[A18]

I see you didn't actually watch of pay any attention to the speech. Here's part of what you missed:

Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: "This Third World War is raging" in Iraq. "The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

That's not what General Franks told Senator Bob Grapham. He was upsetabout how plans in iraq were distracting from the war on terror in Afganistan. I suppose it'd be too much to expect a Bush apoligist like you to understand.

I read Tommy Franks' book, where he says that he advised the invasion of Iraq all along after 9/11.  I also saw his endorsement of the President in the 2004 campaign.  Its a little unconvincing to say he somehow didn't like the policy he himself had crafted and the policy he has continued to advocate since leaving government service.

Of course he didn't put it in his book. He's a team player. It's in Bob Graham's book.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I see you didn't actually watch of pay any attention to the speech. Here's part of what you missed:

Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: "This Third World War is raging" in Iraq. "The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."

There are a lot more terrorists in Iraq than before we invaded. Why'd we invade, again?

[A18]

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

[opebo]

What you fail to realize about Bush's incredibly stupid speeches, jfern, is that he knows his audience.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Its a shame that Bush felt the need to drape himself in the flag because people don't want our soldiers returning home draped in flags themselves anymore.

Unfortunately, we have here another symptom of Rumsfeld's poor planning of the invasion of Iraq.  It's not the easy war the American people were led to expect.  Still, Bush is right to keep us there for now and to refuse the panicky calls for a timetable.