Reply With Quote
really jochhhecejajaam?
I think saying immediate would make it even more unclear and twistable
whats immediate?
a day?
as soon as possible?
One more thing regarding this twisted joke of a poll.
The first example they give as an indication that the American people want to cut and run in Iraq is; "wanting to pull the troops out of Iraq as soon as possible". That's ridiculous. I too want the troops home from Iraq as soon as possible but I'm certainly not with the "cut and run" crowd.
If they wanted a clear picture of how many Americans want to cut & run in Iraq (clue, they didn't) they could have worded the poll;
Do you support an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.
Yes
No
But that would have made it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to twist and that would not have served their purpose.
really jochhhecejajaam?
I think saying immediate would make it even more unclear and twistable
whats immediate?
a day?
as soon as possible?
If I told you to get out of my face immediately would that be unclear to you?
Most people wouldn't have a problem understanding what an immediate withdrawal from Iraq meant.
A more accurate poll regarding "cut and run".
Iraq
Views are divided on setting a timetable for U.S. troops to leave Iraq, though overall Americans want troops to stay and finish the job.
On the key issue of setting a timetable, 44 percent think it does more harm than good because it tells the enemy when it can take over, while 38 percent say it does more good because it makes Iraq get prepared to stand on its own.
A majority says they want U.S. troops to “stay in Iraq and finish the job” (55 percent) rather than “come home now” (38 percent). These results are essentially unchanged from last fall: 55 percent “finish the job” and 36 percent “come home” (November 2005).
Fully 83 percent of Republicans want troops to stay and finish the job; 62 percent of Democrats feel the opposite and want troops to come home now.
Majorities of Republicans (54 percent) and Democrats (61 percent) agree that the Republican position on Iraq can be characterized as “stay and pay.” There is more disagreement on how the Democratic position is being characterized, as most Republicans (70 percent) think it can be called “cut and run,” but most Democrats (68 percent) dispute that label.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201573,00.html
Blah, Joch is trying to say that those who want a timetable to withdrawal aren't with the 'cut and run' crowd that want an immidiate withdrawal, but thats simply not true. The administration favors no set time-table and the Neocon pundits like Insannity and O'Lilley make it clear everday what group the 'time-table people' are a part of.
Yes dan, that's exactly what I'm saying, thanks for asking.
I would do so as soon as possible
As long as, "as soon as possible" means immediately then you would be okay.
Dan and I are at an impasse. Never the twain shall meet. We have irreconciliable differences, we are at odds, diametrically opposed and that without remedy.
Other than that we see eye to eye on the poll.
Regarding President Bush and polls - I heard part of his interview (I think it was with Larry King) and he was asked about his legacy. This is what President Bush replied:
When history looks back on my Presidency, I would rather be judged right than popular.
That doesn't sound like he cares too much about the polls.
or his legacy
I support cutting, but not running. I guess that makes me a moderate.
So we are saying, let sit a timetable so everyone knows when we get out
Dodge. Now that really makes sense, doesn't it. Like Not!
Sit timetables, in no way should we sit a time table. Our time table should
be when we win or stabilize the area.
Think about a little something. The war in Europe started in 1939, we entered
in 1942 or thereabouts, we are still there.
The war in the Pacific started about the same time, and we are still
in Japan.
The war in Korea started in 1950, we are still there.
The war in the Balkans started in the 90's and we are still there.
For goodness sake, how come we have to have a time table for Iraq
and not for all the other places? Other than it sounds so good.
Get used to the fact we are in the ME for the rest of your lifetime and
most definitely mine and more than likely your kids. Unless, we lose then
we will be occupied for the same time period. Oh, maybe, they will
sit a time table.
I say we leave the troops there forever. Will that satisfy your bloodlust, Xray?
It's not bloodlust. I told you my reasons for not sitting a time table.
Are you saying we leave on a certain date, win, lose or draw? That really
makes sense, doesn't it?
you don't make sense, Xray!!
Why, you don't understand the language? Or is it you just don't like what
I say.
But no difference, I only express my opinion. So whatever rings you bell.
It is only a forum and a place to express mine or your opinion. No one has
to agree with it.
So if we don't win in Iraq, we will be occupied by a ME country? What kind of paranoid, delusional stuff runs through that feeble brain of yours?
Why, you don't understand the language? Or is it you just don't like what
I say.
But no difference, I only express my opinion. So whatever rings you bell.
It is only a forum and a place to express mine or your opinion. No one has
to agree with it.
I don't understand your language.
What would anyone expect him to say? Especially in the take-no -prisoners pressure cooker that is the Larry King interview.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
