Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This could be big...HUGE

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Demi_Babe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:36 PM
Original message
This could be big...HUGE
MSNBC reporting that WE ARE LOSING AFGHANISTAN! OBL second in command on Al-Jeezra claiming to have control of over 80% of Afghanistan...developing...


This is what will happen when ypou shift forces to Iraq!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Proud2BAmurkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. Saddam was a madman
The Taliban and al qaeda in Afghanistan. "eh"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. worse than that.... we are losing Iraq!
Edited on Thu Sep-09-04 01:42 PM by NewYorkerfromMass
U.S. Conceding Rebels Control Regions of Iraq
By ERIC SCHMITT and STEVEN R. WEISMAN

WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 - As American military deaths in Iraq operations surpassed the 1,000 mark, top Pentagon officials said Tuesday that insurgents controlled important parts of central Iraq and that it was unclear when American and Iraqi forces would be able to secure those areas.....

....General Myers said the Iraqi forces would probably not be ready to confront insurgents in those areas until the end of this year.

Their comments, which came after a two-day spike in violence in Iraq led to a surge in American military deaths, represented an acknowledgment that the Americans had failed to end an increasingly sophisticated insurgency in important Sunni-dominated areas and in certain Shiite enclaves. Fighting raged on Tuesday in Sadr City, in Baghdad, as Shiite militiamen loyal to Moktada al-Sadr ended a self-declared cease-fire.

The officials' assessment also underscored the difficulty of pacifying Iraq in time for elections scheduled for January. The cities of greatest rebel control are Ramadi, Falluja, Baquba and Samarra, in the so-called Sunni triangle, west and north of Baghdad, where Saddam Hussein remains popular and many forces loyal to him have gathered strength....

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/politics/08policy.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
3. That is terrible for the U.S., but Kerry should hammer Smirk with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Thug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Could this be why Bush said he couldn't win the war on terra?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. Oh crap!
Just what our troops need. Another war to fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
6. Let's attack IRAN
Who the hell cares about Afghanistan?

Iran has weapons of mass destruction
and terrorists
and their feet smell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catshrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Yep, I-a-toll-ya-so.
sorry, couldn't resist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. Iran, that makes sense(sort of) how about...Yemen
those Yemenese are pretty shifty eyed, have a big border with SA so terrorists are just walking back and forth over the border, makes sense right???

:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
29. How about Niger while we're at it...
After all, those traitors told Wilson there was no truth to the tabloid story that they were selling yellowcake to Saddam. Off with their heads, I say! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. To my understanding ...
We've never had clear control over anything outside of Kabul ...

I'd say it's more aptly described as "tragic" than "huge". Everybody with half a brain already knows Bush can't occupy a country.

This administration's stated position is that they do the invading and God does the liberating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
michigandem2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. well..if this isn't proof that the war in Iraq
was a distraction from not capturing OBL...this guy has caused more problems than solutions and its beyond obvious..how they going to spin this one????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demi_Babe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. BINGO!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. How can we LOSE something we never HAD?
we never had more than a tentative hold on KABUL. period. that's all folks. and Kabul is less than 20% of Afghanistan, this guy's giving the US a break... (read Ted Rall for about the only American writer telling the truth about what's gone/is going down in that sad country...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tamyrlin79 Donating Member (944 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
30. WE know that...
But most of America thinks that Afghanistan is just peachy-keen with loya jirgas and flowering democracy, rather than warlords and a resurgent Taliban. The truth may come as quite a shock to most uninformed Americans. In politics, perception is almost everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #9
44. Wait! Hold on! We still control 20% of Afghanistan!
So why the gloom and doom?

We're all looking at the glass as being 4/5 empty when we should be looking at it as 1/5 full!

There, don't you feel better! :crazy:

Hmmmm...I wonder if the 20% we do control is the pipeline that George Bush, "The Carpets of Gold and Bombs" Salesman, wanted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. You know this is enemy propaganda, right?
Not that Bush is any more believable, but taking AQ's word for something is inadvisable, to say the least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. We have troops in Afghanistan and all NATO troops are limited...
to patrolling around Kabul. The rest of the country is under the control of warlords and the Taliban. When bush pulled the troops from Afghanistan to invade Iraq he, in essence, turned Afghanistan back to the same groups that held it before the initial attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmylips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. NATO's roll is to bodyguard US puppet Kaziar(?)...
An article few months back stated that Prez Kaziar(?) was being guarded by NATO troops, and he was a prisoner in his own palace. He is not able to visit outside of the small compounds of his home due to insurgent attacks. The guy is in charge of nothing....the warlords have been cornerd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Though that was not NATO's original mission, it certainly has become...
simply a holding force, keeping Kabul out of the hands of the warlords/Taliban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #20
28. But is this news?
That part isn't news. It is the AQ claims of controlling the country that would be considered news, and it is those claims I am doubting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. The Taliban and the warlords allow AQ free reign throughout the...
country as they did prior to the initial attack on Afghanistan so their claim today would be hard to disprove, imo. We do know, for a fact, that only Kabul is "safe" relatively speaking. As to whether my post was news, I didn't claim it to be, only that the facts on the ground are Afghanistan is NOT in the hands of NATO or the US with the exception of Kabul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. The Fact Remains, Sir
Mr. Karzai is little more than Mayor of Kabul. That has been the case for a long time. The exploitation phase of the operation in Afghanistan was botched in such a degree as to approach criminal negligence.

Whether the competing authority in the greater part of the countryside comprises local war lords or Taliban and al'Queda matters very little. The local war lords make appeal to precisely the same fundamentalist radicalism as the others, because that is what is popular among the young men with guns and the bitter old men who pine for better days. Taliban and al'Queda adherents can live and move at will throughout the countryside. There is available to use against them not a tenth of the force that would be required to put them down, and convince the population at large that they are not the side to fear most.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. I agree that the situation in Afghanistan is bad, but
it is anarchy, not AQ, that rules there. The AQ thugs no more command it than the Bush regime.

The AQ tapes make it sound like the US is facing the Little Bighorn there. No stock should be placed in the rantings of these lunatics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. That Is True Enough, Sir
But a couple of points remain salient in the situation.

First, anarchy benefits the fundamentalist radicals more than it does the U.S. and its puppet show. It allows them to operate freely, and the country once before turned to them in preference over anarchy.

Second, there will come a time soon enough when some small detachment or other of U.S. forces is caught out in some disadvantageous circumstance, and massacred. Further, when, and it is a question of when and not if, the greatest proportion of the population turns decisively against the U.S. presence, the situation of the garrison will be precarious indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #34
41. Good points, and I think we're arguing fine points at this juncture.
My objection was not so much in that I think that the fellow's words may prove prophetic rather than contemoraneously accurate, but rather the lack of skepticism that folks tend to show when words are uttered by enemies of Bush. I understand the temptation, and would sorely be tempted to check for an eclipse were Bush to promise that the sun would rise in the morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. he NEVER WON in Afghanistan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
12. The faster we lose, the better it will be for everyone.
I hate that losing may cause additional casualties to all sides, but the sooner everyone comes to grips with the reality that we cannot control the whole world with armed force, the better. There was never a "war" on terrorism - that has always been a euphemism for naked aggression on the part of the US. When individuals or groups commit terrorist acts against the US or our allies we should hunt them down and bring them to justice. If that occasionally requires a military operation, it should be short, direct, of a real coalition, and have no other aim than the apprehension of the criminals. The US should never be in the world conquest business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maine_raptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
13. Well, well, well
WP reports we're giving up on parts of Iraq, and MSNBC reports we're loosing control in rural areas in Afghanistan.

Yup, the Neo-Cons sure know what they are doing. Next thing you'll hear is that we need to reinforce our troops in Afghanistan via Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carla in Ca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. that is what bothers me the most
we are giving up parts of Iraq. How are they going to have elections; not that I put much stock in that anyway.
I think there will be a civil war in Iraq...too many chiefs...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
14. Don't buy Al Qaeda propaganda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MISSDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
17. Those who read the papers (the back pages)
already knew this. But the news has never been on the front page which is what most people read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zero Gravitas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
19. This is not new
Karzai has been no more than Mayor of Kabul for quite some time now. THe so-called liberal media will continue to ignore this fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPAgainstGW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
22. BRITISH AND GERMAN INTEL SAYS WE HAVE ALSO LOST IRAQ WAR!!

------------------------------
Beltway and Texas Republicans
Against Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc.
------------------------------

"Insider’s News”, Vol 1 - Kerry-Edwards Campaign Doing Well
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x748458
“Insider’s News” Vol 1.1 - Great Anti-Bush Sites
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x756409
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. Considering I don't see how we can win
I think they might be right. I mean what are we going to do, kill everyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AspenRose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
23. "Mission Accomplished!"
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wadestock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
31. I'd say BEHEMOTH.....
Rumsfeld and Cheney et al are still enamored over how well the "military operations" went. They haven't a clue how to fight terrorists in the long haul.

This deal in Afghanistan has been off the radar screen for the most part because of preoccupation with Iraq (convenient). I remember taking note of things at least 2 years ago when the Al Qaeda had "reconstituted" along the border..... but what's going on at this point is infinitely worse.

This administration is significantly worse than the Nixon administration and the Iraq War aka global war on terror is significantly worse than Vietnam. Will it take another 4 years of hell to get the point through enough Americans to realize how F'd up the whole thing is?

But of course by then we'll be over 10 Trillion in debt, interest on the debt will be about 25 cents on each dollar....and middle class assets will have shrunk to about 25K on average.

Quite frankly, we may not have a second chance if W gets in.

Tell everyone you know to vote Kerry.
Don't be embarrassed....shout it out wherever you go....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
swag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
33. Link to MSNBC report
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953550/

. . .

In recent months, southern and eastern Afghanistan have been wracked by fierce resistance to U.S. military forces, and there have been frequent attacks on Afghan election workers preparing for an Oct. 9 presidential vote.

U.S. military officials in Afghanistan could not be reached for comment on the new videotape, but American commanders insist they have Taliban remnants and al-Qaida on the defensive.

No Afghan provincial government is considered in jeopardy, and Afghan and U.S. forces largely controlled the country.

In excerpts broadcast by Al-Jazeera, al-Zawahri said: "The Americans are huddled in their trenches, refusing to come out to confront the holy warriors despite the holy warriors' provoking them by shelling, shooting and cutting the routes around them, and their defense concentrates on strikes from the air which wastes America's money in kicking up dust."

. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mumon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
35. Wow. Can't wait to blog that baby...
Bush LIED, Afghanistan was lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cheshire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
37. All the post here prove that this whole thing was screwed from day one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
38. Yeah, but up next Drudge reports
Afghanistan no longer exists! Who cares about reality when you are permantly living in 1984.

And the American people like it. At least the trains run on time. Or something. IT's so much easier being told what to believe.

Let's sum up: (for the very very slow)

America, you can't handle the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. I don't find this ...
so surprising. So little seeps through the media about Afghanistan, it makes it apparent (or should) that it isn't going 'well'. It's just another * failure to sweep under the rug. * has been hinting about his next war - Iran - for a long time - but it's just now bubbling up to the top and getting media play. He's so dysfunctional that he builds failures, where normal people build on their successes.


Bottom line - when he said 'the war on terra' was unwinnable - he came closer to speaking the truth than he ever has in his entire misbegotten life.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
39. Not only may we be losing Afghanistan.
Large portions of Iraq are totally controlled by the insurgents.

Key Sunni cities elude Iraqi government control

By The Associated Press



ABDUL KHADER SADI / AP
An insurgent patrols yesterday in Fallujah, Iraq, where the "Mujahedeen Shura Council," led by a militant Sunni cleric, has been the city's undisputed ruler since May. The mujahedeen run the courts and reportedly have executed suspected spies.

E-mail this article
Print this article
Search archive
Most read articles
Most e-mailed articles


Related stories
Violent Iraqi deaths measured in thousands
Killing of al-Sadr driver done in mercy, court told


FALLUJAH, Iraq — The interim Iraqi government has not gained control over key Sunni Muslim cities such as Fallujah, Ramadi and Samarra, U.S. officials say, despite hopes that the formal end of the U.S. occupation June 28 would help stabilize the country.
The acknowledgement came as U.S. jets pounded insurgent positions in Fallujah yesterday for a second straight day, raising plumes of smoke but leaving no extensive damage or signs of weakening the Sunni militants who have expanded their control of the city about 30 miles west of Baghdad.

Warplanes continued the assault today, firing missiles on a building used by an al-Qaida-linked militant group, the U.S. military said. At least eight people, four of them children, were killed and 16 wounded, doctors and residents said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002030886_iraq09.html


Militants firmly in control of Fallujah


AP 2004-09-09 02:19:16







FALLUJAH, IRAQ -- U.S. jets pounded insurgent positions in Fallujah for a second straight day yesterday but left no signs of weakening Sunni militants. After the attacks, bands of fighters, many wearing loose black pyjama-like pants and T-shirts, lounged outside abandoned buildings facing the American lines.

Elsewhere in this city of 300,000, fighters patrolled the streets in new American pickups. One resident, 33-year-old Abu Rihab, said they were part of a 16-vehicle fleet commandeered between Jordan and Baghdad.

The Fallujah Brigade, which the Americans organized in May to maintain security after the marines lifted a three-week siege, has disappeared, along with virtually all signs of Iraqi state authority.

Members of the Iraqi National Guard, which was supposed to back up the Fallujah Brigade, fled the city after one of their commanders was executed by insurgents for allegedly spying for the Americans. Local police operate under the tacit control of the militants.


http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2004/09/09/620996.html


Samara and Ramadi are also still controlled by Sunni insurgents, though today U.S> trooops entered Samara and reinstated its own mayor in control of the city, but every time they take back one city, another falls, and then when they leave a city they have gotten under control again, the insurgents come back nad take it over again.


This week the Pentagon admitted that the insurgents are in control of large portions of Iraq:

Kerry position in sharper focus


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial


Sen. John Kerry, speaking Wednesday in Cincinnati, aimed his strongest slams yet at President Bush's "wrong choices" on Iraq. At Union Terminal, where Bush in October 2002 asked for Congress' OK to strike Saddam Hussein if necessary, Kerry said he would have done almost everything differently than the president. The senator's speech sharpens the differences between the candidates on foreign policy and domestic programs.

It was a relief to move past mudslinging over Vietnam-era military service and hear some substantive argument.

ELECTION 2004

• Photo gallery
• Speech transcript
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• Iraq war costs us at home, Kerry says in new tactic
• Protester headlocked, ousted after outburst during speech
• Cheney's 'un-American' 9/11 rhetoric divides us, Edwards charges
• Ex-Bengal to be Bush chairman
• Ohio polls show Bush bounce
• EDITORIAL: Kerry position in sharper focus


Kerry faulted the president for a "go-it-alone" policy in Iraq that has cost U.S. taxpayers $200 billion. Secretary of State Colin Powell, meeting last month with the Enquirer editorial board, denied the go-it-alone charge, downplaying the refusal of France, Germany and Russia to join a U.S.-led coalition. Kerry said nothing about Britain, Australia and other allies who are in Iraq with us, but he repeatedly hit on the $200 billion cost, as if to imply a major test of any coalition lies in cost-sharing.

Bush has admitted he "miscalculated" in Iraq. "His miscalculation," says Kerry, "was going to war without planning carefully and without the allies we should have had. As a result, America has paid nearly 90 percent of the bill in Iraq. Contrast that with the Gulf War, where our allies paid 95 percent of the costs."

Kerry claims he could rebuild America's frayed international alliances even now. He says he would have allowed more time for inspectors, secured better equipment for troops, listened to senior military advisers and leaders in Congress, and never would have gone to war without a plan to win the peace. That peace clearly has not yet been won. The Pentagon acknowledged this week that insurgents still control large regions of Iraq.

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/09/09/editorial_ed1a.html

It would be funny to think of the Republican statements about Kerry not having a stance on Iraq, but everything Kerry said would occur in Iraq has occured. He firmly stated we could win the military war, but during the aftermath, we would be dealing with any number of insurgent groups who would keep us from gaining any control in the country and this would keep us bogged down in Iraq for years unless we could get international support in the form of REAL international support: That is to say sountreis that would take on a larger share of the military actions and bear a large share of the financial burdent for the war.

In fact, Kerry has been spt on about everything that would occur as a result of the Bush Administrations policies, bothe domestically and internationally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
42. You mean to suggest, we are not safer?!!!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingshakabobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
43. Our kids are in a toe to toe battle over there....
and it makes me sick. Bush fucked up and didn't send enough troops.
He didn't listen to the generals and didn't send enough troops. After all, he is a master tactician. Fucking asshole. He didn't follow the "Powell" doctrine and send overwhelming force.
Now our kids are fighting for their lives in street fights they shouldn't be in. Our people should never be "pinned down".

Kerry needs to beat him over the head with this issue until he bleeds from his ears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 02:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC