|
Poll: Congress, Bush share low approval (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Oh, forgot one more thing. In addition to the Dems., the Iraq Study Group, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a growing number of generals, the majority American public, the majority Iraqi government, the majority of the world, and of course me, there's a growing number of Republicans that are turning the tide against Bush's Iraq plan. I've mentioned the 11 Republicans who went to Bush earlier this week to tell him their growing discontent. Here's some more quotes to consider:
No liberal-conservative divide. Interesting, ain't it, Latin?
I mean, hey, I can understand if I were Latin to think that the Dems. hate my country, the Joint Chiefs of staff hate my country, the growing number of generals hating my country, the Bush-appointed Iraq Study Group hating my country, the Iraq government especially hating my country, the rest of the world hating my country, and myself hating this country, all because we oppose Bush's current Iraq plan.
But Republicans? Bush's bread and butter who've towed the party line in lockstep? Never, never would I have fathomed that they would become traitorous like the rest of us.
Latin, why do the Republicans now hate America too? |
hate to contribute to this thrashing, but...
| quote: | | "I think we have to turn over policing responsibility for the Iraqis as rapidly as possible," he said. "Pull our troops out as rapidly as possible." |
| quote: | | "I think unless a Republican who is nominated is committed to fundamental change in Washington they will certainly lose the election," he said. |
who's this he? Newt Gingrich ?
just wanted to add to the list of people who hate america. |
|
|
| LatinLover |
INCREDIBLE! MisterOpus, are you stoned or stupid? Do you have your brains in your ass? Dont you know anything? Come on you come up with this BS of Rep talking , you know another congressional election is coming up in 08" its called "politics" and also called " trying to save their asses" dude you dont have to be a genius to understand that not many people are going to stand by bush since elections are coming up you know :rolleyes:
Right now everyone disagrees with Bush, the dems and including a big MAJORITY of the Reps :rolleyes:
You see thats why I dont take you seriously because you come out with stupid . You make me waste my time to point out to you obvious things |
|
|
| LatinLover |
By the way quit talking about the Iraq Study Group thats all you talk about. You know the purpose of that was to get an independent analysis of the situation in Iraq and some actions to consider. By no means, it was meant to do exactly what that report found.
I mean our presidents didnt even stop there he went to universities around the country talking to respected military historians on other things to reconsider when an upcoming change in strategy was adopted, primarily when Gates was appointed.
I mean WTF is wrong with you... I dont need to show anyone articles stating the obvious. Im tired of your bitching... " Americans want a change, the joint of staff also, Reps, look at the polls" quit crying already for gods sake |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
INCREDIBLE! MisterOpus, are you stoned or stupid? Do you have your brains in your ass? Dont you know anything? Come on you come up with this BS of Rep talking , you know another congressional election is coming up in 08" its called "politics" and also called " trying to save their asses" dude you dont have to be a genius to understand that not many people are going to stand by bush since elections are coming up you know :rolleyes: |
And this disproves anything I've discussed and brought up thus far, how again?
| quote: | | Right now everyone disagrees with Bush, the dems and including a big MAJORITY of the Reps :rolleyes: |
Kindly demonstrate how any of the groups I've previously mentioned are somehow in agreeance with Bush's Iraq policies. Be sure to cite sources with verifiable evidence in the same manner as I have done to support your assertions.
| quote: | | You see thats why I dont take you seriously because you come out with stupid . You make me waste my time to point out to you obvious things |
As I have mentioned here:
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...100#post7711100
I will kindly paste my same answer for you:
| quote: | Because you're relatively new here, I'll let your continual ad hominems slide for now.
But I will say that if you continue attacking with asinine ad hominem fallacies while failing to make any arguments to debate, rest assured a mod will more than likely be notified.
IOW, if you're interested in a flame war, kindly take your elsewhere. This is a political debate forum. Either engage with intellectual honesty in debate or kindly go about your way.
Added in Edit: You might want to review our Mod's 7 simple rules thread:
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...7&forumid=66&s=
Take notice of rule #2, if you will. |
Now, back on topic, could you please answer the following for me?:
| quote: | Given the fact that hardly any predictions made by this Administration and its supporters have come to fruition about this war in Iraq, why the do you think you have an ounce of credibility to make any predictions about the situation in the future? Given your support to the group that's been wrong on almost all accounts with this war, what on earth should compel anyone to start believing your predictions now?
And lastly, again I wonder, do you think it's okay for Bush to call for a timetable of withdrawal against Clinton back in 1999? |
Stop dodging, show some intellectual honesty for once in your life here and answer that question, please. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
By the way quit talking about the Iraq Study Group thats all you talk about. You know the purpose of that was to get an independent analysis of the situation in Iraq and some actions to consider. By no means, it was meant to do exactly what that report found. |
So an independent analysis of the situation and recommendations by that bipartisan analysis were therefore rendered moot because, uhh, they were never meant to do exactly what they were supposed to do?
Are you really trying to make a coherent argument here?
| quote: | | I mean our presidents didnt even stop there he went to universities around the country talking to respected military historians on other things to reconsider when an upcoming change in strategy was adopted, primarily when Gates was appointed. |
Yes, I'm well aware of what the President did. He was told by his commanders on the ground that an increase or surge would not work. He was told by the Iraq Study Group that a surge would not be the answer, and that a phased withdrawal combined with increased diplomacy was the better answer. He was told by his Joint Chiefs of Staff that a surge was not the way to go.
So he fired those commanders on the ground (funny, I thought he always listened to his commanders on the ground?), and went headhunting for folks who'd agree with Fred Kagan's AEI neocon surge idea that was passed down to him.
I'm fully aware of this timeline. What is your point?
| quote: | | I mean WTF is wrong with you... I dont need to show anyone articles stating the obvious. Im tired of your bitching... " Americans want a change, the joint of staff also, Reps, look at the polls" quit crying already for gods sake |
Well I'm sorry you seem to be having difficulty supporting your point. Perhaps you never really have a worthwhile point to support in the first place? Failure to back up your argument with anything substantive tends to leave one believing your point was a bit vacuous in the first place.
It's a basic concept in debate 101 - support your argument. Yet you've done horribly with that on every post you've had at present. You have only yourself to blame for your ineptitude and lack of preparation. |
|
|
| LatinLover |
Who the is predicting? :rolleyes:
lol I'll I have said is that I support my commander in chief for victory in Iraq :rolleyes:
As I have said I dont need to point out or provide articles for obious like you do. Ofcourse everyone knows that Reps have criticized bush, I dont need to go out and point obvious like you do. Ofcourse Americans are not happy of the war, I dont need to go out and point that out with polls. Its ing common sense!
Dont think Im dodging your questions. Is that no offense I ing feel stupid reading the you write and the articles you show off. Show that to someone that has arrived to this country for first time so he can keep up with obvious feelings about our current administration.
This is the problem here that you dont seemed to understand and real analysis. America now cannot only act towards the world on for its own benefit. Its must not only act on whats good for America but also for the people of the X nation they are dealing with...
For example, in Latin America and in the ME America has been basically acting upon its own interest while the leaders of the X nation they are dealing with are giving 3 s about their people. That is where the Anti American sentiment comes... because the people there are not stupid and ask themselves... wtf should we have some respect for America when America is negotiating with our leader for their own benefit and dont give 3 s about us.
So you see that is why the US now if putting their moral first and their own interest for second. a perfect example is when they dealt with N. Korea we werent going to make the mistake like clinton did to provide them with money, so they can halt their nuke prog, and where did the money go? did it go to the people? :rolleyes: no but to their military
That is one of the things this Admin has learned. That same is happening with Iran. If Iran wants to engage in constructive negotiations for the better of Iraq. Come on you must be stupid if you think that Iran wont start conversations about their nuke prog when we send a diplomat to sit down with them.
That is why the US has disregarded in bringing Iran to the table :rolleyes: I mean If you want the US to go suck dick to them to stop sending terrorist to harm our troops and with the condition not to pressure them with their nuke prog... hey lets chose your party |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| My point: The US will only negotiate with those leaders that demonstrate support for the war on terrorism and to those that will bring atleast some good to their people |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
Who the is predicting? :rolleyes:
lol I'll I have said is that I support my commander in chief for victory in Iraq :rolleyes:
As I have said I dont need to point out or provide articles for obious like you do. Ofcourse everyone knows that Reps have criticized bush, I dont need to go out and point obvious like you do. Ofcourse Americans are not happy of the war, I dont need to go out and point that out with polls. Its ing common sense!
Dont think Im dodging your questions. Is that no offense I ing feel stupid reading the you write and the articles you show off. Show that to someone that has arrived to this country for first time so he can keep up with obvious feelings about our current administration.
This is the problem here that you dont seemed to understand and real analysis. America now cannot only act towards the world on for its own benefit. Its must not only act on whats good for America but also for the people of the X nation they are dealing with...
For example, in Latin America and in the ME America has been basically acting upon its own interest while the leaders of the X nation they are dealing with are giving 3 s about their people. That is where the Anti American sentiment comes... because the people there are not stupid and ask themselves... wtf should we have some respect for America when America is negotiating with our leader for their own benefit and dont give 3 s about us.
So you see that is why the US now if putting their moral first and their own interest for second. a perfect example is when they dealt with N. Korea we werent going to make the mistake like clinton did to provide them with money, so they can halt their nuke prog, and where did the money go? did it go to the people? :rolleyes: no but to their military
That is one of the things this Admin has learned. That same is happening with Iran. If Iran wants to engage in constructive negotiations for the better of Iraq. Come on you must be stupid if you think that Iran wont start conversations about their nuke prog when we send a diplomat to sit down with them.
That is why the US has disregarded in bringing Iran to the table :rolleyes: I mean If you want the US to go suck dick to them to stop sending terrorist to harm our troops and with the condition not to pressure them with their nuke prog... hey lets chose your party |
I'm really having a difficult time following what you're saying. You're swaying a bit off topic with other examples that we could clearly create other threads for such as N. Korea, Iran, etc.
But if you have no interest in supporting your points that you made directly to me with evidence, and if you refuse to answer my direct questions to you, then why are you here in the debate forum to begin with?
As I've mentioned previously, if you have no desire to debate with intellectual honesty, there are plenty of other threads to entertain. This is not one of them, sir.
I will attempt to address a couple of points, however:
| quote: | | Dont think Im dodging your questions. Is that no offense I ing feel stupid reading the you write and the articles you show off. Show that to someone that has arrived to this country for first time so he can keep up with obvious feelings about our current administration. |
So the points I made with evidence to support them which directly counter your unsupported assertions are merely me "showing off" rather than actually addressing you?
Hmm, strange.
| quote: | | This is the problem here that you dont seemed to understand and real analysis. America now cannot only act towards the world on for its own benefit. Its must not only act on whats good for America but also for the people of the X nation they are dealing with... |
Did it ever occur to you that our phased withdrawal, our increase in diplomatic efforts with Iraq's neighbors, our attention moving towards training Iraqi troops and directing our tactics towards al Qaeda operations in Iraq (what the Dems. and the Iraq Study Group proposed) might actually be addressing the "X nation" you described?
| quote: | | That is why the US has disregarded in bringing Iran to the table I mean If you want the US to go suck dick to them to stop sending terrorist to harm our troops and with the condition not to pressure them with their nuke prog... hey lets chose your party |
You realize the primary group harming our troops by a very large margin do not come from Iran, right? Iran sending in terrorists doesn't hold a candle to the Sunni insurgency along with al Qaeda operations. Surely you're aware of that?
And though this is a bit off subject:
| quote: | | So you see that is why the US now if putting their moral first and their own interest for second. a perfect example is when they dealt with N. Korea we werent going to make the mistake like clinton did to provide them with money, so they can halt their nuke prog, and where did the money go? did it go to the people? no but to their military |
Yes, your continual blaming of Dems. and Clinton on everything that this Administration has stirred up is duly noted. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| I am curious, Latin. Since you apparently don't support your rhetoric and notions with any evidence (at least none that you've presented so far), what helps you formulate your opinions and philosophy? What do you utilize substantively that helps support your notions? |
|
|
| venomX |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
I am curious, Latin. Since you apparently don't support your rhetoric and notions with any evidence (at least none that you've presented so far), what helps you formulate your opinions and philosophy? What do you utilize substantively that helps support your notions? |
I think he might be trying to pull a Steven Colbert on us? Or is he really this narrow minded? I'm not sure anymore. He's a bit too much Bill O'Reilly-is to be real. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by venomX
I think he might be trying to pull a Steven Colbert on us? Or is he really this narrow minded? I'm not sure anymore. He's a bit too much Bill O'Reilly-is to be real. |
or 14 years old with one of those 30%ers as a parent |
|
|
| LatinLover |
Im not blaming on anyone. I mean.. dont get me wrong I like Clinton IMO he is one of the best thinkers out there. But come on his foreign policy during his admin wasnt good :rolleyes: I just gave you an example of that.
That is why you have him writing his own bio and history. If you understand history you would know what I mean. Thats why you have him promoting healthy foods and in public schools, helping the people infected with HIV in other nations. I mean there is nothing wrong with that. Clinton could have done more during his admin. I had high hopes when Clinton went to office. Dude this guy had it all to be the next big president... he represented the American dream. A man that didnt come from a rich family, he worked his ass off to be where he is at. A man that could connect with every single American out there, A GREAT speaker. I thought that this man was going to be of the greatest presidents. but you know how that turned out.... With all honesty if I were to chose who to be for one day... it would be Clinton
Moving on... Okay we are training Iraqi forces... and we are going after Al Qaeda. I mean lets face it Bin Laden is hiding somewhere in Pakistan, this country gives Pakistan like Billions of dollars to go after them and other terrorist organizations. I do criticize that move because come on... Pakistan hasnt done . I mean Anti-American sentiment is alive is Pakistan, is so pure its not even funny. IDK If you remember when we got attacked on 9/11.. they where one of the first nations that started celebrating. But come on... we give them money and they dont let us enter their country because the PM is afraid that American presence in his country can cause chaos :rolleyes:
Its a special period thats happening in the ME. Because now the US knows who are their friends in the ME and who are their rivals. 5-10 yrs ago we didnt know that. Now that many ME have to step up to the plate to battler terrorism in the ME and those that support and want a stable ME for their survival is crystal clear. And hell we know those who arent doing just that and doing the opposite and just promote that Anti American sentiment and destabilizing the region.
Moving on to another topic... As I mentioned above the US most act on its moral. On what America truly stands... What the US did with N Korea was terrific... if you dont end your nuke prog we are going to up your economy more that it already is. We didnt accept their terms and w.e have you... it was like if you dont do this will go ahead and with your economy. That is the message that I THINK Bush is trying to get out there to the world. Not address the X nation leader but the people of the X nation. Its very complex and its going to take time to get that message out there because for many years America has done the opposite. They must win the trust of the people
IMO this is a key of the diplomacy that the US is trying to get out there.
The main message IMO the US is trying to get out there is: The US is not the problem to your problems, but its your leader the problem to all your problems. So for that matter, as I mentioned the US must act towards the world not as a cop, but to what truly stands for... what im saying is in terms to intl diplomacy nothing to do with Iraq... thats another subject. |
|
|
|
|
