So..who won the debate? Kerry vs. Bush

For me, the debate reaffirmed my strong belief that neither candidate is in any way a useful human being.
 
chcr said:
For me, the debate reaffirmed my strong belief that neither candidate is in any way a useful human being.
Click to expand...


They keep your eyes of Congress, don't they? ;)
 
chcr said:
For me, the debate reaffirmed my strong belief that neither candidate is in any way a useful human being.
Click to expand...

:rofl4:

I hear ya man, IIIII hear ya.

I'm not real happy about the choices myself.

I don't think we've had any good choice, since Reagan.
 
Oz said:
Do you think that the removal of Saddam Hussein should have been planned and conducted in a better way? If so, why do you continue to support a man who refuses to budge in his current "plans"?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not, it could not have been planned nor conducted better. Gen. Franks is a genius. Just ask Baghdad Bob. We were teh tanks seen in the window behind him saying we weren't there.

There is only one problem I see. Whenever President Bush is asked about an "exit strategy" his answer needs to be one word, subjugated with varying adjectives...COMPLETE & UTTER VICTORY.

I can't even imagine Gens Eisenhower or Patton or Montgomery being asked such an idiotic question.
 
chcr said:
For me, the debate reaffirmed my strong belief that neither candidate is in any way a useful human being.
Click to expand...

[addams family theme]
They're creepy and they're kooky,
Mysterious and spooky,
They're all together ooky,
The Kerry Family.

Their house is a museum,
Where people come to see 'em,
They really are a scream,
GW's Family.

So get a witches shawl on,
A broomstick you can crawl on,
We're gonna pay a call on,
The Clinton Family.
 
Gonz said:
I can't even imagine Gens Eisenhower or Patton or Montgomery being asked such an idiotic question.
Click to expand...

Well no, they wouldn't be Gonz........they had a plan (there is no doubt the invasion went well, but you need more than just big guns to bring peace y'know) :D
 
Gonz said:
There is only one problem I see. Whenever President Bush is asked about an "exit strategy" his answer needs to be one word, subjugated with varying adjectives...COMPLETE & UTTER VICTORY.

.
Click to expand...

Who's talking about exit strategy? They can't even find a workable occupation strategy :confused:
 
The problem was we went at it like fighting an army, but in fact we were
already fight terrorists. They don't play the same game.
 
chcr said:
For me, the debate reaffirmed my strong belief that neither candidate is in any way a useful human being.
Click to expand...


Like I said.......it was an insult to anyone with two braincells to rub together :eh:

Mind you, our lot ain't much better :shrug:
 
Oz said:
You got that......Mr Hussain is currently sat in a prison cell.

So, the plan for the next victory? Victories?
Click to expand...

It seems to me that that is to the point of what "alot" of people still aren't getting.

People want to say the Iraq didn't have ties to terrorist.
Well, we are seeing the pure proof, right now.

No I don't believe these terrorist just decided to start pouring in.
They've been there, most of them, for most of the time.
Coming, and going as they pleased, and now they don't like it that
their playground is being dismantled.
 
Oz said:
Who's talking about exit strategy? They can't even find a workable occupation strategy :confused:
Click to expand...

Strange. Since 9/11/2001 there hasn't been an attack on American soil or non-military American property.

We've got several tens of thousands of American Special Ops forces in Afghanistan. There hasn't been a word from Usama in several months. Captured or dead? You be the judge.

We've lost 1050+ American soldiers in Iraq in the last year. Tragic but the price of war. Our enemy has lost thousands to tens of thousands of fighters. Our politicians have convinced our military commanders to, much unlike previous wars, go easy around religious sites. Given a green light & a couple of days, places like Najaf & Fallujah would no longer be the thorn they currently are. I wonder if the CO's are getting tired of Rumsfeld yet...Gato?

However, given the option to fight terrorists in places like Sadr City vs places like Birmingham (Alabama or England), I'd prefer our enemy not need passports.
 
Gonz said:
You've been wrong for a whole year? You may need help for that.
Click to expand...

LMAO! why would I need help? I ain't sat in the USA :D Blair might be a bit of a wanker, but I'd still put him head and shoulders above Kerry or Bush ;)
 
Gato_Solo said:
I think the plan to remove Saddam went perfectly. Too fast, but quite well. The plan for Iraq after the war...that's another beast entirely. If we'd have known toppling Hussein was going to be that fast and easy, then we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now. The biggest problem since the end of major hostilities has been trying to get the Iraqis to do something on their own (insurgents not-with-standing). Most Iraqis don't participate in, or even like, the insurgency. They want a stable, peaceful, existence. The insurgents (mostly from outside Iraq) just want the coalition out. If they'd let us do our job of rebuilding, we could be out in 5, or 6, years, but, at the rate they keep destroying the infrastructure we're putting in, we might be there until 2100 AD. Gotta love fanaticism...
Click to expand...

They had to have known they were going to meet little or no resistance from an enemy that was fighting with 12yr old equipment.They were quite insistant that the Republican Guard were the best equipt divisions in the Iraqi military ,yet these elite units were using the same tanks that the Coalition desimated in the first Gulf War( I forget the kill ratio against their tanks but it was quite efficient).The only "wildcard" would have been the use of WMD by Saddam ,but this would have brought the fighting to an end even quicker ,because the US/Britain would have had an excuse to not hold back.The fact is their sources(Chalabi and other Iraqi expatriots) were telling them it was going to be a quick and decisive victory and the Iraqi people were going to welcome them with open arms .The failure came in not realizing they were going to need to be there for longer with an indifferent populous to win over.
 
A.B.Normal said:
They had to have known they were going to meet little or no resistance from an enemy that was fighting with 12yr old equipment.
Click to expand...

Ours isn't much more modern. It was tactics that won in both wars...not equipment. How old is the newest B-52? The stealth fighter? The F-15, F-16, Tornado, etc.? The weapons systems we use were built, and designed, in the 1970's and 1980's.

A.B.Normal said:
They were quite insistant that the Republican Guard were the best equipt divisions in the Iraqi military ,yet these elite units were using the same tanks that the Coalition desimated in the first Gulf War( I forget the kill ratio against their tanks but it was quite efficient).The only "wildcard" would have been the use of WMD by Saddam ,but this would have brought the fighting to an end even quicker ,because the US/Britain would have had an excuse to not hold back.
Click to expand...

The fact was that the Iraqi army lacked the will to fight. :shrug:

A.B.Normal said:
The fact is their sources(Chalabi and other Iraqi expatriots) were telling them it was going to be a quick and decisive victory and the Iraqi people were going to welcome them with open arms .The failure came in not realizing they were going to need to be there for longer with an indifferent populous to win over.
Click to expand...

The last sentence is the only thing you hit dead center.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top