I just don't understand Bush....

Bu2Bu2 Posts: 1,693
edited March 2007 in A Moving Train
....even when he speaks perfect English, which is rare.

He asks us today for patience, and he asks for more troops, and he asks us for more money to fund his war. And then he says that it can't be won in just days or weeks, it will take months.

So the Dems come up with a way to continue funding his war, BUT they add a time limit to the war that will bring it to an end in September 2008....not MONTHS away, but over a year away.

And he still wants to veto even that??

So what is he saying? That we'll be there beyond September 2008?? What on earth does he think we can do that we haven't already done?

I just don't understand Bush.
Feels Good Inc.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Bu2 wrote:
    ....even when he speaks perfect English, which is rare.

    He asks us today for patience, and he asks for more troops, and he asks us for more money to fund his war. And then he says that it can't be won in just days or weeks, it will take months.

    So the Dems come up with a way to continue funding his war, BUT they add a time limit to the war that will bring it to an end in September 2008....not MONTHS away, but over a year away.

    And he still wants to veto even that??

    So what is he saying? That we'll be there beyond September 2008?? What on earth does he think we can do that we haven't already done?

    I just don't understand Bush.

    It's a little game they play with the media called societal conditioning.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    Bu2 wrote:
    ....even when he speaks perfect English, which is rare.

    He asks us today for patience, and he asks for more troops, and he asks us for more money to fund his war. And then he says that it can't be won in just days or weeks, it will take months.

    So the Dems come up with a way to continue funding his war, BUT they add a time limit to the war that will bring it to an end in September 2008....not MONTHS away, but over a year away.

    And he still wants to veto even that??

    So what is he saying? That we'll be there beyond September 2008?? What on earth does he think we can do that we haven't already done?

    I just don't understand Bush.

    what he is saying is that it will take some time for the iraqi forces to be capable of restoring order....

    i understand why you, and most people here don't get that b/c Bush is a mealy mouth mush bag. he is incapable of articulating reality.

    but he should veto any democratic resolution b/c to these people, achieving a european socialist society is more important to doing what's right. the one thing i admire about Bush is that he does what he think is right. i'm not sure many world leaders even know the difference.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    what he is saying is that it will take some time for the iraqi forces to be capable of restoring order....

    i understand why you, and most people here don't get that b/c Bush is a mealy mouth mush bag. he is incapable of articulating reality.

    but he should veto any democratic resolution b/c to these people, achieving a european socialist society is more important to doing what's right. the one thing i admire about Bush is that he does what he think is right. i'm not sure many world leaders even know the difference.

    He does what he allows the groomers of his well-being allow him to do.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • what he is saying is that it will take some time for the iraqi forces to be capable of restoring order....

    i understand why you, and most people here don't get that b/c Bush is a mealy mouth mush bag. he is incapable of articulating reality.

    but he should veto any democratic resolution b/c to these people, achieving a european socialist society is more important to doing what's right. the one thing i admire about Bush is that he does what he think is right. i'm not sure many world leaders even know the difference.

    What's right? No one owns being right. What seems right to you, might be very wrong to me.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Bu2Bu2 Posts: 1,693
    is not right to me at all.
    Feels Good Inc.
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    What's right? No one owns being right. What seems right to you, might be very wrong to me.

    I agree. our vision of right may be different, and i respect that. but we all have our belief in right vs. wrong. as long as we pursue our own version of "right" over self-gratification.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    there's only good and bad.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    gue_barium wrote:
    He does what he allows the groomers of his well-being allow him to do.

    Pure genius.

    Overlooked again.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • To Bush and other people that support the war effort giving a deadline even a year away would signal to the insurgents that we will be leaving soon and terrorism would win or at least be a successful deterrent (sp) to US "interests".
    "She knows there is no success like failure
    And that failure's no success at all."

    "Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."

    "Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
    A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
  • Lets hope we can just gradually try to pull out as many troops as possible, and maybe acts of terrorism will reduce, stop, or slow to a point where some form of agreement can be reached.

    That's optimistic
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Bu2Bu2 Posts: 1,693
    Lets hope we can just gradually try to pull out as many troops as possible, and maybe acts of terrorism will reduce, stop, or slow to a point where some form of agreement can be reached.

    That's optimistic

    Tho' I'm just a cock-eyed optimist.
    Feels Good Inc.
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    Bu2 wrote:
    ....even when he speaks perfect English, which is rare.

    He asks us today for patience, and he asks for more troops, and he asks us for more money to fund his war. And then he says that it can't be won in just days or weeks, it will take months.

    So the Dems come up with a way to continue funding his war, BUT they add a time limit to the war that will bring it to an end in September 2008....not MONTHS away, but over a year away.

    And he still wants to veto even that??

    So what is he saying? That we'll be there beyond September 2008?? What on earth does he think we can do that we haven't already done?

    I just don't understand Bush.


    maybe this will help you understand his timeline

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12319798/
    Construction cranes loom above the site of the new U.S. Embassy being built in Baghdad. The embassy will sit on 104 acres, six times larger than the United Nations compound in New York and two-thirds the acreage of Washington’s National Mall.

    BAGHDAD, Iraq - The fortress-like compound rising beside the Tigris River here will be the largest of its kind in the world, the size of Vatican City, with the population of a small town, its own defense force, self-contained power and water, and a precarious perch at the heart of Iraq’s turbulent future.

    The new U.S. Embassy also seems as cloaked in secrecy as the ministate in Rome.

    “We can’t talk about it. Security reasons,” Roberta Rossi, a spokeswoman at the current embassy, said when asked for information about the project.



    http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040323-enduring-bases.htm
    14 `enduring bases' set in Iraq
    Long-term military presence planned

    From the ashes of abandoned Iraqi army bases, U.S. military engineers are overseeing the building of an enhanced system of American bases designed to last for years.

    Last year, as troops poured over the Kuwait border to invade Iraq, the U.S. military set up at least 120 forward operating bases. Then came hundreds of expeditionary and temporary bases that were to last between six months and a year for tactical operations while providing soldiers with such comforts as e-mail and Internet access.

    Now U.S. engineers are focusing on constructing 14 "enduring bases," long-term encampments for the thousands of American troops expected to serve in Iraq for at least two years. The bases also would be key outposts for Bush administration policy advisers.


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1490063,00.html
    US military to build four giant new bases in Iraq

    http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2005/03/enduring_bases_iraq.html
    Digging In
    If the U.S. government doesn't plan to occupy Iraq for any longer than necessary, why is it spending billions of dollars to build "enduring" bases?

    Take, for example, Camp Victory North, a sprawling base near Baghdad International Airport, which the U.S. military seized just before the ouster of Saddam Hussein in April 2003. Over the past year, KBR contractors have built a small American city where about 14,000 troops are living, many hunkered down inside sturdy, wooden, air-conditioned bungalows called SEA (for Southeast Asia) huts, replicas of those used by troops in Vietnam. There's a Burger King, a gym, the country's biggest PX—and, of course, a separate compound for KBR workers, who handle both construction and logistical support. Although Camp Victory North remains a work in progress today, when complete, the complex will be twice the size of Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo—currently one of the largest overseas posts built since the Vietnam War....

    Retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East from 1997 to 2000, recently predicted that American involvement in Iraq would last at least 10 more years. Retired Army Lt. General Jay Garner, the former interim administrator of reconstruction efforts in Iraq, told reporters in February 2004 that a U.S. military presence in Iraq should last "the next few decades." Even that, some analysts warn, could be an underestimate. "Half a century ago if anyone tried to convince you that we’d still have troops in Korea and Japan, you’d think they were crazy," says Pike, the military analyst. Suspicions also run deep both inside Pentagon circles and among analysts that the Department of Defense is pouring billions of dollars into the facilities in pursuit of a different agenda entirely: to turn Iraq into a permanent base of operations in the Middle East....

    Does the Department of Defense have a bigger agenda in Iraq? Brig. General Robert Pollman, chief engineer of base construction in Iraq, caused a stir—and forced his superiors to engage in damage control—when he told the Chicago Tribune last spring that the bases could be a "swap" for bases in Saudi Arabia.
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • Kabong...nice collection articles.

    A perfect example of actions speak louder than words.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Kabong...nice collection articles.

    A perfect example of actions speak louder than words.


    Very good, indeed.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    what he is saying is that it will take some time for the iraqi forces to be capable of restoring order....

    i understand why you, and most people here don't get that b/c Bush is a mealy mouth mush bag. he is incapable of articulating reality.

    but he should veto any democratic resolution b/c to these people, achieving a european socialist society is more important to doing what's right. the one thing i admire about Bush is that he does what he think is right. i'm not sure many world leaders even know the difference.

    There is a dfine line between doing what you think is right and never being able to admit your wrong. I believe Bush falls into the never being able to admit your wrong catagory.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • lucylespianlucylespian Posts: 2,403
    gue_barium wrote:
    there's only good and bad.

    I din't think there is any such thing as good and bad, pretty much everything is contextual (OK, before anyone else says, paedophilia is always bad, but not many other things)

    Water, good if dying of thirst, bad if drowning
    Politicians, bad when talking and breathing, good if hungry aliens are calling asking for food
    Computers, good for web chat, bad for turning nice normal people into mad eyed psychos
    Music is not a competetion.
Sign In or Register to comment.