TheJiggler

By this logic we MUST blame 9/11 on Bush. There were no foreign attacks under Clinton, hence Clinton made us MUCH safer than Bush? Right?

I know what the diplomats in Baghdad are doing. A whole lot of nothing. They really can't its to dangerous. The new bunker embassy we just built is a joke. The place is so locked down FSO can't really do very much.

Yes, but if you look at the electoral map Zogby's own numbers show: Obama 273 McCain 146 Too close to call 119

How about this . . . O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .

I have to agree with you on that one. Not everyone is benefiting. But there is a huge amount of waste and a general belief the private sector can get stuff done faster and cheaper than the public sector. What it amounts to is corporate wellfare. Drive from Dulles to DC and you'll see your tax dollars at work. Wall to wall corporate towers, soaking up tax $$s, while people sit in filth a few miles down the road at Ralph Reed.

You might be surprised at how easy it is to get funding for random R&D projects that might, someday, if the stars align be deployed to Iraq.

Well said. But not well thought out or true. I believe it to be true. Sitting, as I am now, at a government contractor that hopes to cash in on the war, I totally agree that if not the reason for the war, the military industrial complex is the main beneficiary. The US has a long history of Americans hearing the call and defending the country when its actually threatened. That we have to pay Blackwater and mercenaries so much money stands as evidence that they are the main beneficiaries, not the US public.

By your own definition you can't know the consequences of your actions. SO WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU INVADE THE DAMN PLACE!!!! There is so much cognitive dissonance with you conservatives: US == always good! US kills thousands of people Those people would have killed themselves QED Because the consequences of innaction far transcend the consequences of international apathy. Nonsense! We would be safer, richer and fewer people would have died had we not gone to Iraq. Those holding defense contractor or oil stocks would be a little poorer, but the rest of us would be better off.

By your own definition you can't know the consequences of your actions. SO WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU INVADE THE DAMN PLACE!!!! There is so much cognitive dissonance with you conservatives: US == always good! US kills thousands of people Those people would have killed themselves QED

I see you have located the weapons of mass destruction!!

As long as he was aiming my way, he'd be sure to hit someone else.

Reconstruction was always on the minds of those constructing the war-plan (though not as much as it should have been). Bullshit! The extent of planning was pretty hoping the Iraq would say "yay, The amerikan smart bombs and smart bullets and smart soldiers (not at all smart btw) only killed military targets with no collatoral damage! Woohoo, now lets vote and get on with our lives" More hyperbole. Please. It really helps to bring intelligence to this discussion. Akhalteke, please don't dismis this attitude quite so easily. I think you fail to understand that us "Libs" really believe the above. We really believe that there are only three explanations when it comes to the Bush administration and Iraq: 1) Utter incompetence 2) Pure Evil 3) Both Perhaps we're just cynical, stupid or nieve. But I'd really love it if you could give us evidence of this so called plan. I simply don't see it. Give me evidence and I'll look at it with an open mind. Lacking that I must fallback to number 3 above.

Come back with something that requires actual critical thought and I might continue with this discourse. The world is not black and white. The only absolute is that war sucks ass, but is at times necessary. Fair enough. From my perspective everything points to an incompetent cabal of politicians (not generals), that were so arrogant and sure of themselves that they couldn't conceive of anything but a quick defeat and an early exit. They brought the term "regime change" into the lexicon as if it was something akin to an oil change (no pun intended). Drive in, 15 minutes later the regime is changed and you drive out. Yer good for a few months until the next unfortunate dictator goes after your father. I see absolutely no evidence of planning? Literally from day one that US tanks rolled on the streets of Baghdad, we failed to act on any sort of rational plan? Are you really trying to tell me that the best minds of the current administration undertook the requisite research and decided it would be a good idea to disband they Iraqi army and let them keep their weapons?

I See. So the plan was to spend billions (or maybe trillions) of dollars, kill thousnads of US troops, sink the US economy, destroy the repulican party, evaporate all the goodwill towards the US after 9/11 and give Russia license to invade other countires. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!

[quote=akhalteke Reconstruction was always on the minds of those constructing the war-plan (though not as much as it should have been). Why would we have planned for reconstruction when: "my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators. . . . I think it will go relatively quickly, . . . (in) weeks rather than months" - Dick Cheney "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months." - Rumsfeld "The Iraqi people understand what this crisis is about. Like the people of France in the 1940s, they view us as their hoped-for liberator." - Wolfowitz It was clear from the beginning that we wouldn't have to do any re-construction?

I keep hearing this in the media. If that were the real motive for Russia, wouldn't they have just blown it up and blamed "South Ossetian Seppratists"? (This is serious question BTW. Unlike most people here I'll admit when I'm ignorant!)

Exactly the same way you do today. Today if you prefer to keep your medical records private, you can choose not to use an insurance company today. This option is still avalible to you in a publicly funded system. Simply opt out. Nobody is suggesting that you will be made to go to public health care facilities. You must simply pay your part for insurace that covers you.

Really? Please share your informed sources. Economists other than Krugman will do just fine. How about Ben Stein

This was entirely rhetorical--and you know it. Obama's suggestion was a simpleton's answer addressed to simpletons. Finding more oil to decrease dependence of foreign supply is a good idea. So is nuclear. .... Fairweather, are you trolling or do you not pay attention to the news or think about your posts at all? Clearly, McCain is for MORE and LONGER involvement in Iraq than is Obama. He has been consistent about that since day one. Just as clearly, all the experts agree that oil is bought and sold on an international market so that if we are able to produce a little bit more oil domestically ten years from now it will go into the world market and fail to produce a large gain for American consumers. There have been a lot of them quoted in the news lately, and they've been pretty consistent on this point though a few have said that there might be some psychological beneficial affect on the present market -- an affect I have not heard anybody to suggest will be either large or lasting. By contrast, conservation measures that will reduce market demand and will cause a drop in prices RIGHT NOW that not only help consumers today but, if maintained, will help reduce our long-term problems. Drop what you are doing and run outside right now to check your tire pressure, OK? The earth will thank you for it. And Trickle Down Economics? Are you for real? Why is it that the economy suffered and the Federal deficit went up after both the Reagan tax cuts and the Bush tax cuts? Why is it that, by all measures, the gap between rich and poor in this country has grown tremendously over the last 25 years? Now back to healthcare: try answering any of my arguments in the other thread. Why do you hate America?

I can't believe you would slander McCain. McCain didn't lose 3 planes it was 5! And he didn't do poorly in school. Why he was 894 of 899 graduate of there US Naval Academy. 5 PEOPLE DID WORSE!

was repulsed by the gratuitous bolting of the perfect hand crack.

Thank god he is sober now. Can you imagine what country he'd invade after few too many glasses of white zinfindel? "huh huh, 'Turkey'! Whyzit called that? Turkies belong in America on Thanks givn'. Let's shawk ans awe 'em!". Whooze nixt? I never liked the sound of U-are-gay"

Funny. I bet if they just put that toll on now, there would be no need for a new bridge in the first place.