To expand on my earlier comment... Since the Iraqis got their oil infrastructure up and running, they should be using those profits to pay for the reconstruction and also our further infrastructure construction.
That was supposed to be part of the original plan when we went into Iraq, but I don't see it happening.
we were also gonna be greeted as liberators. can't always get what you want.
We were greeted as liberators.
by size 10 loafers.
You have either a short or selective memory.by size 10 loafers.
I spent two hours on the morning of April 9, 2003 watching CNN coverage of Iraqis and U.S. Marines in Firdos Square tearing down a statue of Saddam Hussein, which was then desecrated, spat upon, smacked with shoes, and ridden like a donkey through the streets of Baghdad. As Howard Fineman wrote in Newsweek, affirming what no one then doubted, it was George W. Bush “who toppled that statue.” Where were you?
Doesn’t anyone remember this? Are the biases of liberals so personally crippling that they purge their own memory banks?
Of course, shame on President Bush and his administration for not constantly reminding us of this. Certainly, the press certainly hasn’t bothered.
During that time period, when Iraqis weren’t talking of forging gold statues to George W. Bush, they were running around the streets literally praising God for him. Here, too, I could give example after example, but I will stick with another from the popular press, this from the London Telegraph, May 21, 2003:
That is just one anecdote from the press of the time. Has everyone forgotten about the images they saw on their television sets? To say we were not greeted as liberators is patently and maliciously false.
Now, all that said, I will concede George W. Bush did eventually become unpopular in much of Iraq, as did our presence there, especially in the 2005-6 timeframe. No question. The situation deteriorated. But that’s a different argument with a different genesis. The fact is that we were indeed greeted as liberators and to suggest otherwise is patently dishonest.
Why did things deteriorate? I think that the assumptions that led to much of what went wrong were good American instincts: the desire not to have too heavy of a footprint and the desire to empower Iraqis.
I think everyone involved in the planning of a post-invasion Iraq as well as all of us on the sidelines, completely miscalculated the impact of 30 years of violent, brutal repression on the Iraqi people and their willingness, in President Bush's phrase, ' to stand up' for themselves, to take authority, to take risks.
My guess is that history will say the forces we liberated by invading Iraq were so powerful and so uncontrollable that virtually nothing the United States might have done, except to impose its own repressive state with half a million troops, which might have had to last ten years or more, nothing we could have done would have effectively prevented the disintegration that eventually occurred. In addition, there was a potent enemy, with complicit nation-states, in the region, willing to pour its resources into Iraq to further destabilize the country.
But, on the topic of whether or not we were greeted as liberators, we have another exhibit in the Hall of Hatred erected to George W. Bush. The left has become so anti-Bush that it can’t make simple distinctions between fact and fiction. Not only that, this bit of fiction became a talking point of the Democrat’s presidential nominee and no one in media challenged it. Which, in itself, is another sad statement on the bankruptcy of our national media...which actually reported the fact we were greeted as liberators even as they now ignore their own words.
I appologize.
Although I think the article is double counting some of those individual bailout plans, you were right. The number is much higher than what I thought.
You're a ing liar.
http://texasdaily.net/Commentary.html
It's amazing the lengths Yoni goes to, editing and cobbling together other people's work in an attempt to make himself look smart.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 12-17-2008 at 03:08 PM. Reason: z or s? I forget.
yoni, you've been chumpdumped. lolz
I appologize.
Although I think the article is double counting some of those individual bailout plans, you were right. The number is much higher than what I thought.
No prob. I agree that they are adding in all the individual bailouts, even those not already passed. With all the numbers flying around, especially in blogs, it's hard to know what is actually being spent.
EDIT> Bottom line: WAAAYYY too much money spent on Iraq
lol the bailout costed more
Not the first one . . . and probably not the last
Funny...I don't feel the least bit different.
What's funny is that SpunkDumpster, who I've had on ignore for close to a year, will expend the energy to prove I plagiarized something when I've readily admitted and never denied that fact I do that in damn near every post. That I stole the information doesn't change the validity of the content.
Fact remains, we were greeted as liberators.
Laugh at that...and, remember, y'all have fun. That's what it's all about.
We all know you're a thief.
It's the way you steal.
Really, it's more work to edit someone else's to make it look like you wrote it than to merely post a link. It's ing hilarious that you are that insecure that you are still trying to foll people into thinking you can come up with these ideas and write like that on your own.
pfff... you're a ing joke
D'okie dokie. I guess the joke's on you then.
heh. yoni's on manumaniac. gay.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone get so pwned on the internets. Great stuff.
The Iraq war has been run like Bush was playing a game of Risk. We just took our 20 armies and invaded Iraq, and lost a good chunk of them doing it. No thought was was used in planning on how it would actually end.
^^^It's not over yet.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
