I know. Gryph’s visible jealousy of Bruce seems the most likely reason why he’d keeps coming back, if Bruce is even one-third as bad as Gryph obsessively claims (on Bruce’s dime).

Well, it’s good you write them here, AngryGryph… cause if you put them on YOUR blogsite, no one would ever read them.

Now, what was that about “pathetic”?

Right, Gryph is supportive of the WOT in Iraq? LOL. That’s a hoot.

Sort of like how John Kerry was “for” his fellow soldiers by calling them murderers and baby-killers.

However, it’s your comment, Bruce, that rings so true: Until we figure out how we’re going to fight this vicious enemy, we’ll likely end up in more Iraq situations.

Are we going to try to win the hearts and minds of people who want us dead? Or are we going to instill fear that an attack on the US and its interests will result in death and devastation for the attackers and their supporters.

Are we going to tie the hands of our soldiers and cops, or are we going to allow them to do their jobs?

Are we trying to sanitize war — which is ugly and meant to be ugly — or are we going to make war truly something to avoid?

The key difference between you, Sullivan, and Senator Smith, Gryph, is that Smith believes our intervention in Iraq was necessary, justified, and a portion of the global war against terrorism.

Actually both Sullivan and I are on record many times as being for the war in Iraq. We just wish it had been waged competantly by this Administration and not FUBAR’d. You continue to ignore facts in favor of your own narracistic self-righteous moralizing victim-hood.

But lets face it NDT, “truth” and “facts” have always been a problem issue for you. Especially when they get in the way of your fanaticism.

Saddam is regularly referred to by his first name to avoid confusing him with the prior ruler of Jordan, King Hussein.

The line about “fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here”…what do you think the people of Iraq think about that? They must be so happy that we have decided to use their country as a battleground.

That is going on the assumption, sean, that they enjoyed the situation under which they were previously living.

I would hope you stop Blaming America for “Hussein’s” barbarism and you are wrong to demand that America should pay for our mistakes with our soldier’s blood.

Amazing, isn’t it, how leftists like Keogh will blame the United States for everything else, but not for turning a blind eye to Saddam Hussein?

That’s because it was during the time when “engaging” and laying supine before the UN and its terrorist friends, just as they demand we do now, was being practiced.

Keogh twists my words by claiming that I believe US soldiers “should” pay for our mistakes. What I said was that US soldiers ARE paying for the fact that keogh and his fellow leftists, encouraged by billions of dollars in bribes and contracts for them, the European governments to which they pander, and the UN bureaucrats and their families whom they worship, allowed Saddam to drain Iraq dry and collapse its infrastructure and entire social order, all in an attempt to maintain his grip on power. What leftists like keogh won’t admit is that it’s not necessarily “ancient hatreds” that motivate Sunni and Shi’a warfare; it’s the far more-obvious fact that, under Saddam’s completely-Sunni government, Sunnis received virtually everything, and Shi’a were treated no better than cattle — and that the Sunnis now cowering and begging for protections were the ones who ordered the destruction of entire Shi’a villages at their masters’ commands.

I don’t know many mainstreamers who were against going to Afghanistan. But I know a lot of people who continue to be upset that we did not finish the job there before going to Iraq.

Sullivan was pro-war from the get-go. Perhaps that is why his criticisms sting so much.

And NDT, though I agree with you that America’s policy has been flawed toward Iraq since at least the 80′s, I don’t think his atrocities are America’s fault.
I would hope you stop Blaming America for “Hussein’s” barbarism and you are wrong to demand that America should pay for our mistakes with our soldier’s blood.

#18. “The United States has not paid a fraction of the blood, pain, and suffering that Iraq has, and this is made far worse by the fact that much of that price paid by the Iraqis was a result of our refusal to act against Saddam.”

And now it is a result of having acted against Hussein. (What’s with calling the guy by his first name, by the way, as if he’s the butler or your paperboy?) The line about “fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here”…what do you think the people of Iraq think about that? They must be so happy that we have decided to use their country as a battleground. And, therefore, they should love us.

However, under Saddam, millions of Iraqis were systematically imprisoned, tortured, and murdered under Saddam’s regime

Why stop with millions? If you’re going to make shit up, at least go for something cool-sounding like “kajillions.”

That is like saying hot chocolate is the “same exact” beverage as liquid horsesh*t.

The key difference between you, Sullivan, and Senator Smith, Gryph, is that Smith believes our intervention in Iraq was necessary, justified, and a portion of the global war against terrorism.

You and Sullivan, like your fellow Democrats, don’t.

Oddly enough, this President that you call “weak” has made two decisions that your “strong” Democrats opposed; putting an end to the Taliban’s rule over Afghanistan and to Saddam Hussein’s reign of terror in Iraq.

Where I disagree with Senator Smith’s statement is this:

But since that time, there have been 2,899 American casualties. There have been over 22,000 American men and women wounded. There has been an expenditure of $290 billion a figure that approaches the expenditure we have every year on an issue as important as Medicare. We have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation by my estimation.

However, under Saddam, millions of Iraqis were systematically imprisoned, tortured, and murdered under Saddam’s regime, and a country of massive oil reserves that could have provided incredible wealth for its economy to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars was drained, with the money used to provide lavish palaces and armaments for Saddam and enormous bribes for UN and European diplomats, while its infrastructure collapsed and its people starved.

The United States has not paid a fraction of the blood, pain, and suffering that Iraq has, and this is made far worse by the fact that much of that price paid by the Iraqis was a result of our refusal to act against Saddam.

And its also sad that that every day for the last two weeks Bush has been meeting with Generals, Think Tanks, State Dept Middle East experts etc. And now he “won’t be rushed” into a decision about Iraq.

It would have been nice don’t you think if he had done that prior to the war? Instead the only people he seemed to listen to were Rummy and Cheney and most of all, his own ego. Its not as if Saddam was such an serious threat that he couldn’t take the time to do that.

Senator Smith faults his own leadership, and rightly so. But the CIC bears quite a bit of the responsiblity for this fiasco. A criticism I made at the time, that has proved all too true is that he has never had control of his own Administration. He allowed the inter-agency fighting between the Pentagon, the State Dept, and the CIA to flourish without consequence. Even though it has cost him (and us) dearly by sabotaging his own goals.

Mr. Bush, as much as he likes to think of himself as “The decider” has instead proved that he has been one of the most weakest Presidents in modern times. Not even President Carter was so weak.

Thats probably why he feels the need to try and expand Presidential authority so much with the signing statements etc. He doesn’t have the strength of personal character to actually lead anyone to his point of view, or even to his front door for that matter. Instead he has to try and bully people into submission with legalisms and Police State type powers. Thats not a leader, its just the kind of person that a spoiled brat grows up to be.

And who are the overly-permissive and oblivious parents that have raised such a creature? And that are ultimately responsible for this mess? Why those that have enabled and continue to enable his behavior of course. By endlessly and blindly defending him and vicously attacking any that raise even slightly any question about his policies.

Well congrats, you got exactly the child you wanted. Problem is, he is still a child.

Like I seem to be saying often about your posts lately, Bruce.
Pathetic.

bushco has failed badly for many reasons, not the least that we’ve shown no willingness to talk to iran nor syria. diplomacy also involves listening to people; another area this administration has failed miserably.

bushco will always be remembered for picking a fight with the wrong country. this failed war is his legacy and he will forever be known as a failure because of it.

Now, two weeks after the ISG report is out, and Democrats/Media are furious that it hasn’t been implemented yet.

Apparently, “Rush to surrender” is not a problem.

Like Smith, I don’t know what the best strategy is regarding Iraq or the War on Terror. And part of what has made the war in Iraq difficult is what GP says. Americans value life, and the terrorists don’t. Not even their own.

We need to hope that the current and future administrations find a better way to fight terrorism. In the meantime, we need to find the best course for Iraq that will help us in the long run. I’m not sure if “cut and run” is the best strategy or not. But it’s time to end the schoolyard mentality that “cut and run” will necessarily help the terrorists, especially since we are not dealing with rational persons here.